A Witty Title.

Um, unless I missed something, I don't think any Christian was questioning whether or not you should love God more than your wife. It is so entrenched in the faith that you love God before all else. Similarly, given the metaphors of marriage in the bible, your partner is next in line.

I would, however, quibble with this: "I'm just saying it's God, wife, family, then everyone else." Surely it should be "God, partner, everyone else", skipping family. Two reasons. One: "Love your neighbour as you love yourself." Two: We are all brothers and sisters in Christ, therefore all family. Just a thought.
 

I wonder, where does "self" fall in that hierarchy, to the common Christian? Pride is so often misinterpreted as being inherently bad, when really it's only an excess that creates a problem. I have some corncern for the religion in general, in that there does seem to be a bit of a dichotomy between "you are beautiful becase God mad you and loves you (etc)" and "you are inherently guilty and sinful and must constantly ask forgiveness (etc)". I'm interested to hear your views on the matter (though when I say that, I mean personal views, not just quotations from the bible or whatever).
 

Just to clarify fox. You only need to ask for forgiveness once.
Catholic's believe you need to keep asking. Christians believe that once you have asked. God has given and the death of Jesus pays for all the sins you have done and will ever do.
After that, you are just thanking God for forgiving all your sins.
The difference may not seem important but it actually is.
 

Point noted. I was under the impression that christians were still supposed to ask forgiveness again when they know they've sinned, so I do apologise. I do lose track of my extractions sometimes, not having had the biblical educations most of you have ^_^; I still think that a tendency to alternatingly elevate and belittle its followers is a valid observation of the Christian faith, though, and I'm still interested in opinions.
 

Yeah, I guess the part I was trying to focus on was the fact that once we are forgiven in Christ we are declared righteous by God (Romans 3 stuff). Christs death has paid the price for all the sins we have done and would ever do.
It's like in Magic (I cant believe I am saying this), our sins go on the stack, then Jesus death counters them, so when it resolves we are still righteous. Even if we have forgotten to repent of that specific sin, or didnt even realise it was a sin.
I cant believe I used magic cards to illustrate my point.
 

Stoobie, you are such a geek.
 

LL -- A fair point. Family are not specifically in the bible, so I guess its reasonable to say they dont have a specific place above others. Comment withdrawn

Fox -- Yeah, I must agree... Its something that I have woundered myself. Are christians more prone to depression than others? I dont have any answers, though.

As stu said, the constant asking for forgiveness is not. but there is a constant feeling of inadaquacy. Im still a failure, a sinner. I think the dicotomy is broken by a realisation that in spite of what you are, in spite of how much and how often you fail, god loves you for you.

I know that sounds really corney and indoctrinated, but its also something I feel with my heart.

I dunno, can someone else add more?

Naranater.. Hmm.. Yeah I think I agree.. Self should be on the list. I think.

Stoobie. Gadgit's right. You're a geek.
 

I still think that the place of the 'self' is after the partner and even after the family all of which should definately come after God (for me as a Christian that is). I have seen so many children left behind by people who are too self focussed (and I know that I am particularly biased about this)I think that if we are more focussed on our partner and they are on you then it is more likely to work (even though that sounds like we are critical only of our partner not on improving ourselves- I dont mean that. What I am saying is that it is more important to serve your partner than it is to serve yourself- that is what I believe marriage should be like (and yes I say this as a single person)
 

Fox's dichotomy captured something I've often wondered about - but not yet managed to articulate so clearly.

When I look at humanity as a whole and the state of the world generally, I feel as if I can totally accept the idea of inherent guilt and sinfulness. How else could we have screwed up so bad?

Yet I worry (as others have suggested above) about the impact of such a belief on individual self-esteem.

But I'm also comforted and inspired by stories of the achievements of flawed 'heroes' such as Moses and Peter ...

And I also appreciated Stoobie's comments about the distinction between thanking for vs. asking for forgiveness.
 

Stoobie: I beg to differ. Have you ever been to a church service that didn't involve asking for forgiveness for sins committed? And this is an affirmation of our faith, a recognition of where we have gone wrong, a request that God also cover this sin, and a promise to try not to do the same thing again.

On the other hand, Fox, it's isn't about belittling. It's about encouraging people to be the best that they can be by a certain standard. If we cannot recognise our mistakes, how can we learn from them? While instances of depression are usually higher amongst christians, this has more to do with the church than with the faith: while the faith is telling you to love God, love others as you love yourself, the church isn constantly telling you that you aren't good enough. Indeed, in the anglican church these days, if you aren't going into ministry, if you live with someone before marrying them (or even go out with someone), if you don't believe that stem cell research, abortion and women are innately sinful then you aren't a 'real' christian. But that is the church, not the faith. Hey, look, Nan said the same thing. (Love ya, dude!)

The thing is that God doesn't want us to feel inadequate. Okay, we are sinful and we aren't all powerful or omniscient or completely pure like He is. But He loves us. Each of us. No matter how small we feel, no matter how sinful we are, he loves every one of us in a personal way. We may fail, but we aren't failures as long as we keep trying. It's an important distinction to make and I can't believe that I am the one making it, over the many other christians here.

As for self, it is on par with partner and everyone else. We are called upon to love others "as" we love ourselves. Not more, not less, but the same. There is, thus, an underlying assumption that we will be taking care of ourselves, that we will not be committing sins against ourselves. Every individual is equally important to God, so he requires that we take care of ourselves, just as we take care of others: "Love your neighbour as you love yourself". Which we should do just as he loves us: "Love one another, as I have loved you." It is just as important to God that we take care of ourselves as that we take care of others.

While it is possible to be too self-focused (whether thinking too highly or too badly of yourself), you can't take care of others unless you atke care of yourself. To use Nan's gold coin analogy (though personally I like my cup analogy better ;)), you can only give away as many as you have. If you don't take care of yourself, you end up having nothing left to give.

Nan: yeps, Tudors were early 1500's to early 1600's. *Thinks* Possibly starting earlier than that: I can't remember when Henry VII came to power.
 

LL, I agree that we are affirming our faith and recognising we have gone wrong, repenting and asking for strength. Just that in doing this we do it as already forgiven people (unless for the first time).

Sorry for keeping disagreeing with you LL but one other thing you said I want to comment on. When you said 'God doesnt want us to feel inadequate'. I'm not sure what you meant by that, but I thoroughly think that God wants people to understand that they cannot obtain salvation without him. In that way I think we are supposed to feel inadequate. Without Christ.
In the living out of our lives I am sure God wants us to feel adequate, just not in salvation matters.
 

Ll - Good point about extractions being more of an issue than the core faith here. Certainly, Catholicism and other extreme interpretations of the bible have taken to putting their members down much more aggressively and constantly. OTOH, though, the idea of inherent guilt is still a core part of the faith, unless I've been very much misled. No doubt it's more problematic in some extractions than in others, but it seems that many Christians, regardless of denomination, have a habit of putting themselves down overmuch and lacking self-esteem.

Self-esteem, I suppose, being the core of what I'm talking about. I feel that, for the sake of yourself and those you care about - not to mention any faith with which you are associated - you need to be able to be proud of yourself. There's no shame in being beholden unto a greater being, if that's what you believe, but the point where people use religion as an excuse for failure (or rather, as a reasonto believe that they will fail before they try) is depressing. Obviously this is not what the Christian viewpoint is supposed to be, but it seems that more and more people slip into feeling that way.

(This is not a comment on anybody I know personally, BTW.)

I think Ll's placement of self on an equal level beneath God is the healthiest way a Christian can think of things. Obviously part of christianity - part of just being a good person, more to the point - is sometimes giving of yourself for the sake of others. But constantly giving is not necessarily a good thing, even for the sake of those closest to you - and if you don't consider yourself as important as them, you're probably just going to cause problems for them.

Hypothetical situation - Joe loves Mary and places her above himself in terms of importance. Mary does the same for Joe. Joe and Mary each wind up competing to sacrifice themselves for the other, and are constantly feeling guilty (if they /do/ get what they want, because they feel they should have made the sacrifice) or just unhappy (if they don't get what they want, because the other person - who is more important than them - is feeling guilty). Therefore, Joe and Mary are constantly miserable unless they have absolutely no desires or opinions on things. And god forbid they should bring /children/ into this situation!

I'm just saying, I guess, that compromise and equality are the only healthy choice in this kind of circumstance. At least IMO (well, obviously :p). Self-sacrifice is noble and admirable, but /always/ placing yourself below others is simply harmful.

Incidentally, I think Lynley made a good point mentioning the flawed heroes. Speaking in narrative terms, I think most people prefer flawed heroes to flawless, certainl in modern times. Does this have anything to do with self-esteem, I wonder? And will Naranater write an essay about it if we give him half a chance? ;p
 

Yeah, Im also happy with

God

Self / Wife

Others


Although I think it might be more complex than that. On some things, self has to be very important, where as at other times, we need to be able/willing to put others before ourselves.

So in summary, Its more complex than this a simple scale perhaps...
 

I think that it is a hard balancing act. On one hand, you have your inherrent sin (which would make you have bad self-esteem), and on the other you would have the fact that the creator of the world loved you so much that he sent his one and only son to die the death you deserve so that you would live (which, I would hope, would give you good self-esteem). I would think, that the one you focus on would give out a certain vibe to people around you.
 

Sooo, I'm natural born scum, & others have Suffered (with a capital S) because of me. Oh yeah, & I'm the object of 'undeserved' love.
Yeah, real positive.

(Sorry, I think I've just been a little bit bitchy)
 

Well thats a pretty accurate description of me. I wouldent know about you, but I can assume so, since in my opinion its a pretty accurate description of everyone.

Welcome to the species.

Sorry, that as flippant.

Seriously though. We all are. Everyone is a bad person. This is why I say that christianity is quite a depressing religion. But then, form experience, it seems to be right on the money on this one.

I think of myself as a reasonably moral person. I try harder than many to do the right thing. I know people who are FAR worse at this kind of thing, who dont work for self improvement, who odnt care if they hurt others.

And you know what. I still describe myself pretty much as you just did.


All that said Grumbler. You an amazing person. In spite of this (to use the jargon) "sinfull nature" you are you. Someone whos aware of the issues facing this world. Someone who makes the effort to not be too sinfull. Who trys to be a good person. And you know what. It shows. If it didnt, I doubt I would count you as the friend that I do.

Wow.. This has gone in about 7 different directions.. and since I'm at work.. id better do some... Ill talk to you about this more later.
 

stoobie: You've hit exactly what I was trying to express in the first place. It's certainly a tricky thing to look at.

chindogu: Hon, you need to make sure your religon-based statements are not phrased as facts. As far as I'm concerned, you must be talking about a different humanity to the one I know - humans are flawed, sure, but they aren't /bad/. There are a bunch of truly bad individuals, yes, but it's my belief that overall, humans have a tendency toward being good people. And frankly, Matt, if you still describe yourself as what Steve expressed, you're being too harsh on yourself. Geez, what is so bad about accepting that you're a good person? I tell you, sir, that if I believed an omnipotent being had sacrificed its only child for me, I would damn well not dare to suggest that I was undeserving. That just insults /everybody/ involved O_o;
 

The bible tells us that humans were created good,but have been tainted by sin.

From all that I have seen in my life, humanity has always. Always! been A being desiring good, but predisposed towards evil.

Im not calling everyone a child mollestor or the like, but how about these words.

Selfish. Greedy. Unconsiderate.

I could go on.

I personally feel that compared to the average person, I AM a good person. (Honestly, that worrries me, but thats a topic for another time)

But thats a relative comparison. The difference between our two points of view is where the boundary line is drawn. I set my boundary line at perfection. A perfection which I can never reach, but which Christ fufilled.

Consequently I see all humanity as failures, at various levels I'm guessing you set your boundary a little lower.


Being undeserving of this sacrifice is part of the amazingness of this.

Forgive me as I quote the bible.
"But God proves his love for us in that while we were still sinners Christ died for us" Romans 5:8

We did nothig to earn or be worthy of what god did for us, but he loved us enough that he did it anyway.

Justice -- Getting what you deserve
Mercy -- Not getting what you deserve
Grace -- Getting wat you dont deserve.

Were talking about grace here.

Sorry.. this has gone all religious.. I think I've said enough for now.
 

Chindogu: The bible tells us that humans were created good,but have been tainted by sin.
From all that I have seen in my life, humanity has always. Always! been A being desiring good, but predisposed towards evil.

Well, you already know how I feel about the bible's "inherently sinful" ideas, so I'm not bothering to refute that (simply a difference of faith). However, as far as your experience goes, I think you're being overly - tragically, even - pessimistic. I'm not going to say that people aren't flawed, but I also think they are predisposed toward goodness, even though this has been skewed by a long and enduring line of fuck-ups on the way.

Seeing all people as failures? Fuck... no wonder you have self-esteem issues. But why does a person /need/ to be perfect anyway? I mean, "because the bible says so" aside, I don't see the necessity in any real way. As far as I'm concerned, being a good person is enough - perfection is a pointless ideal, not to mention impossible. Why spend your life reaching for a goal you can never achieve, rather than just trying to live each day in a way you can be proud of? I'm not saying you shouldn't have aspirations, but why put yourself in a situation where you'll never be happy with what you are? Why is this kind of self-induced suffering necessary to a faith which is based, at its core, on an all-powerful being that loves you and wants you to be happy?

Sometimes I really don't get why people take up religion so willingly. Sure, it means you don't have to be concerned with inevitability and the afterlife and whatever, but at what cost?

Chindogu: Forgive me as I quote the bible.
"But God proves his love for us in that while we were still sinners Christ died for us" Romans 5:8

Sure. But at what point does it say you're not worth the sacrifice? Either you are worth Jesus dying, or God is a damn fool who wasted his time. If I were part of your religion, I'd go with the former.
 

It was a sacrifice. God loved us, therefore His only Son died - died a horrible painful death - so we didn't have to die, suffered complete seperation from God so that we would not have to, and He did it willingly, because it was God's will. Generally, with any sacrifice, it isn't a matter of whether or not the recipient of said sacrifice deserves it or not, it is the end that matters. It is the nature of sacrifice that it is about giving, not receiving.

And Fox is right, God considered us worth the sacrifice. But it isn't about whether or not we were worth the sacrifice but whether or not we are worthy of His esteem. And, since He is God of love, of hope, of mercy and of justice equally,and we are seriously not natively (read naturally or biologically) concerned with any of those things, we are not worthy of His love. We cannot earn it.

But He gives it anyway.

It's not that we as individuals are necessarily "failures" but that we are not perfect, and certainly not perfectly good. We don't always do the right thing. We can't always avoid hurting people sometimes, saying the wrong or cruel thing, misinterpreting what others say or do. We can't live up to the high standard God has set for us. We can, however, try and that is all He asks. It is people (especially the church) which requires otherwise.
 

Just to clarify, my last post involved a little thing called Sarcasm. I don't think of my self as 'Scum'. I was trying to illistrate how both the 'born sinful' AND the 'God loves us anyway' could be depressing, particularly in combo.
 

I think Matt was aware of that, Steve. I think he was trying to create impact by taking your sarcastic statement seriously.

Things have gotten a tad quiet on the blog front all of a sudden...
 

Well, on the issue, this is what the apostle Paul had to say:
Romans 7:14-25 "We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God's law; but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death?
Thanks be to God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!
So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God's law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin."
Hope that is helpful.
 

Stoobie: I'm not entirely clear on what you are trying to express. I get what Paul is saying, I just don't know what you are trying to say through him. Could I please have some clarification?

For those unclear about what Paul is expressing, here is my interpretation of the passage: Paul admits to sinful behaviour despite his longing to obey God. He then repudiates that which is sinful within him, saying that he himself is not sinful (as he as been made pure through the sacrifice of Christ, is in the world and not of the world), it is the inate sinful nature within him (that which we all possess) which sins.

So it is only motives that matter. A nice little lawful loophole for those who can't take responsibility for their own actions before God.
 

I ahev to say, while I'm not nearly anough into the bible to be sure that it's accurate, I certainly /like/ Ll's interpretation of that - it seems appropriate. Especially wince she made that latter note, which is an important thing to remember IMO ^^;