Forgettable Influence

An annoying thing I've spotted is that the times you are most likely to deeply influence someone are also ones that you are likely to forget.

I'm talking about the times that you give a piece of advice, teach someone something that you know, demonstrate something. The person you do this for, or in front of, feels that this is a huge revelation and they remember that moment for years. But if they speak to you about it years later, talking about "the time that you taught me..." whatever, you have no recollection of that moment, because for you it was a fairly ordinary one.

I've had this happen to me, and I've done it to others too.

I think the reason this happens is because the forgetful (or ordinary) moments are the ones most likely to have that big impact in the first place. If you are consciously trying to impart some deep wisdom, people pick up on the fact that you are trying. They know that it's coming from your head, not your heart. But if you say something succinct or take an extreme action with actually thinking about it too hard, then a person listening to or watching you will realize that this is something you genuinely believe, that it shapes your behaviour. That enables the feeling of big impact they get. They realize that this isn't just some pretty words, it's something you can live your life by.

Social Media and Intimacy

Talking with people face-to-face is a rarity today. As more of our friendships and relationships are maintained online, there are understandable questions about whether being "friends" means what it used to mean only a generation ago.

One of the interesting phenomenon that our culture became aware of quite quickly in social media was the apparent contradiction that a person with hundreds of "friends" online could feel extremely lonely. This has generally been explained by saying that our friendships on the internet are more superficial, or shallower, and that a person who only invests themselves in online friendships will miss the depth of those found in real life.

Discussion With A Seeker

The following is the outline of some major points covered in a discussion I have been having with a friend who is seeking to test the idea of Christianity. In some ways our minds work in a similar way, and so I was happy to spend time to think through any questions. The actual discussion happened across many hours on more than one day, but I remember the following 3 questions because in my opinion they were highlights or central points.

Christianity is just one religion out of many in the world, and there is so much within it to think about before I would feel I could commit myself to it.

There isn't enough time in anyone's life to sample or even evaluate every single human religion or faith. Even in Christianity, there is too much to assess within a single lifetime, evident by the fact that committed Christians never stop exploring and learning more about what they believe. Therefore it makes sense to direct your focus to a single question: Was Jesus really raised from the dead after His crucifixion?

Gift or Passion?

This is a bit of a chicken and egg question... If I'm gifted at something, how has that become the case?

Was I born gifted in an area, my natural talent lead me to be skilled, my skill enabled me to enjoy putting my gift into practice and my enjoyment makes me passionate about this?

Or, was I born with no more or less skill than anyone else. Instead of being born with a natural gift, maybe I was born or given early in life a passion for an area. That passion would have fueled my interest, my interest would have lead to learning and practicing, my skill level would have increased, and I could be perceived by others or myself as gifted in that area.

My Theology-Worship Cycle

My belief in God doesn't seem to change, but my reactions to the belief do. I think that I go through cycles of actively being in relationship with Him and then learning and thinking about Him, one after the other.

I think that both part of this cycle are good and healthy, but I wish that I found it easier to do both at the same time.

For several days I can be aware that God is within me and present because of my relationship with Him through Jesus. I will enjoy talking with Him, listening for guidance in tasks, and find it easy to focus during times of worship.

Music, Memory and Marketing

When you sing a song, you are combining the sound of a melody with the meaning of words. The words by themselves, without a tune, would just be a quote. This shows that our minds are born tuned to remember things associated with a musical tune, because we all remember far more song lyrics than we do other quotes.

This is a powerful combination, and many parts of culture have already used this to their advantage. You have been influenced by the songs you know.

By songs, I'm not even beginning by thinking of the pop music industry. No, the time that this was recently brought to my attention was when watching scenes of celebration for the royal family on television.

Cities vs. Towns

Jenny and I weren't able to do a house hunt prior to marriage until we had done a town hunt. We both graduated from our universities at the same time, and had the option to pick any place in UK to start married life. Out of the two locations we narrowed our choices down to, a distinct difference was that one felt like a town and the other felt like a city.

Evangelism - Part 2

The following is adapted from the second half of a talk I gave at WYnet Summer Camp 2011. The theme for the week was Discipleship, and I spoke towards the end of the event about mission-ship, or evangelism.

In the first half of the talk, I spoke about What evangelism is, the Context of bad news that makes the Good News worth listening to, and the Distractions of issues secondary to Jesus' death and resurrection.

I introduced the talk by saying that I knew they (the teens) had, or could get, advice on how to be "nice people" very easily, and therefore I wanted to cut straight to stuff about evangelism that could be applied in their school and college lives.

Who

A possbile next question for the simple act of evanglism is "Who do we evangelise to- friends or strangers?" Well, considering the example of Jesus, the answer appears to be "both." He gave lots of time and attention to explaining God to his closest friends, the disciples, but He also healed and preached to thousands of other people in first century Israel.

Religious Duality

Duality is where a person behaves differently around different people. I've gotten the impression that most of us notice ourselves using it while growing up- you learn to behave differently around your teachers than you do around your friends, for example. It can appear common sense in some situations, but in others it may cause us to question whether we are being genuine.

Of all the relationships a person can have, perhaps the most far detached categories are people and God. We relate to people every day, and can choose to relate to God as well, but should we behave differently around the creator of the universe because we cannot see or touch Him?

I am not referring to whether we should respect God or not. That is a question for beliefs and relationship, not for duality. I am instead asking whether we should be behaving very differently to God during our conversations with Him compared to when talking with friends on the street.

Pre-Bible Christianity

Within any debate in Christianity, there is a lot of history. I often feel like I have little background knowledge of an issue that concerns my faith.

I think this is why I love the idea of what Pre-Bible Christianity must have been like. By this, I don't mean I dislike the Bible! I'm referring to the small period in history where the apostles such as Saint Peter and Saint Paul had begun to spread the Gospel by word of mouth, but the letters that would form the New Testament had not yet been written down or collected together. All that believers in the middle-east towns knew about Jesus was what they could remember from conversation.

Seeking God, Doubting Church

I haven't doubted the existence of God for a long time. The creator of the universe has been too big and too apparent in my life for that to happen. I believe God exists, and that I am in relationship with Him, but I have doubted the western church.

All of the churches that I have gone to in the U.K. have the same format: First, the congregation sings some songs. Then, someone preaches a sermon. The songs and sermon format has been a universal experience for me across both traditional and charismatic churches, but I have found myself wondering if the songs and sermon are at all related to a relationship with the creator of the universe.

Do you remember how big Cars are?

There could be a scale of human inventions, sorted by size and simplicity. Where on this scale will you find the most common vehicle in the western world?

The Small, The Big...

On the small end of the mechanical scale, we have examples like wrist watches, light bulbs, and pens.

These are simple enough that we can use them every day without effort, and also small enough to be replaced without much care if one stops working. If a pen that I was writing with ran dry, it would be more likely that I would reach for a new pen, and less likely that I would burst into tears.

On the large end of the mechanical scale, we have machines which construct skyscrapers, dig tunnels through the earth, and look good in James Bond movies.

2 Reasons to Trust Authors

There are lots of non-fiction books by religious and spiritual people. They often contain views and explanations about life. They often disagree. How do you sort through the masses of material for something worth some of your time?

If you trust the writings of a person, you must trust the authority of that person. I have found that when I look for books to add to my One-day-I-will-read-this list, I am more likely to decide that I trust an author if the following 2 reasons are true.

Fake Fun

It seems that people can claim they have experienced fun in one of two ways- past and present.

The people who say they are having fun in the present are aware that they are enjoying their current experience. It sounds simple, but a surprising amount of "fun" things don't fit into this category!

The people who say they have Had Fun- past tense- have sometimes decided that "fun" is the acceptable label for whatever torment they just went through. I think that this post-trauma-override thing is a bit of self-deceipt mixed in with a knowledge of culturally accepted "fun" activities.

The Time of Truth

Compare a tree and a house. The tree begins as a single small item, and the house begins as many small items. Both, over time, grow larger. The one tree expands into many branches. But the many bricks become one house. These are two images of the ways that I imagine a person can seek to understand the universe we live in.

A man could say that we currently have lots of bits of knowledge, but we do not understand enough. He would say that we need to add more knowledge, and when we have enough knowledge, we will be able to bring it all together to build one big picture that explains life. This is like a man building a house. He starts with some materials, like bricks and cement, but he is not happy with what he starts with, and needs to find more. This might be described as the way of philosophy and science.

Another man could say that we have enough knowledge about the origins of the world, and from that, we understand enough. He could say that all truth can be worked out from the foundation. The foundation gives us the simple picture that life fits into. This is like the tree. The seed that the tree came from contained all the information the tree would need. If you understand the seed, you would have no problem understanding the tree. This might be described as the way of religion and history.

Know, Really!

You know a lot of stuff, don't you? In your head, I mean. You do a lot of stuff with your hands, too. You've got quite a lot of skills if you think about it. But would you admit, with me, that what we have in our head often contradicts what we are doing with our bodies?

Many times a day, I say "I know," when a friend or family member tells me something, but within moments I act as if I didn't know anything at all. "Careful! That oven tray is hot," my wife might call to me in the kitchen, and I reply "I know," as I reach for it with bare hands...

Small mistakes resulting in burnt fingers, and other consequences, happen every day, and it's not something to be too bothered about, is it? But 'being human' never limited us to only making small mistakes. Big ones happen too...

My Own Lie

I have mentioned in another post that I believe in Free Will. I mentioned that I believe the purpose of our free will is to make a choice to either accept or reject God within this lifetime, and that everything else is secondary. But I will now mention what I believe to be the most powerful and yet possibly ignored power of this freedom we have been given.

I'll point out an instance from the Bible which backs up this belief, but first I'll introduce it with a scene from Terry Pratchett's Discworld novel "Mort", where the skeletal Death has just hired his young apprentice, and taken him out for a curry in the middle of a busy city...

The other diners didn't take much notice, even when Death leaned back and lit a rather fine pipe. Someone with smoke curling out of their eye sockets takes some ignoring, but everyone managed it.
"Is it magic?" said Mort.
"What do you think?" said Death, "Am I really here, boy?"
"Yes," said Mort slowly. "I... I've watched people. They look at you but they don't see you, I think. You do something to their minds."
Death shook his head.
"They do it all themselves," he said. "There's no magic. People can't see me, they simply won't allow themselves to do it. Until it's time, of course. Wizards can see me, and cats. But you're average human... No, never." He blew a smoke ring at the sky, and added, "Strange, but true."

Philosophy and Circles

A common criticism I see online is that someones worldview, or philosophy for life, is circular. It is considered a negative point when someones opinion of how things work backs itself up against any questions.

An example of a circular argument that would annoy an atheist might go something like:
"There is a God, who is beyond our understanding."
"Can you prove that?"
"Not conclusively, no, because he is beyond our understanding."

It is obvious that a circular argument can be annoying, but I do not think this refutes it. Other than circular, there is only one other form that a worldview can be, and I do not think it is necesserily superior. The other form is incomplete.

I Believe Science

I trust science, but I don't trust scientists. I believe in all verified findings, but not necesserily the conclusions drawn from them.

If a man holds a rock in your face and says "This rock keeps albino polar bears away, because the rock is here and albino polar bears are not," would you believe him? He has drawn a cause-effect relationship, after all.

Yes, it's a silly and extreme example. But in real life, the possibile conclusions that can be made from a new finding are often very similarly, but subtly, woven into the discovery, as if the fact and opinion are both a single fact.

Faith and Evidence

Any article or video on the web that mentions anything about religion usually has a predictably long thread of comments by users expressing their own opinions. Apparently, people have plenty of views on the subject (which personally, I hardly find surprising!)

One of the ideas that often makes its way onto these mile-long threads goes something along the lines of "Your belief is based on faith, and faith means ignoring any evidence on the subject, hence you, sir, are an idiot."

I disagree with this. I consider faith to be something that, in my experience, usually complements the known evidence. I have found it distinctly rare for a persons faith to go in the opposite direction of available evidence.

Imagine a scale running from top to bottom. At the top of the scale is "I believe this is true", at the bottom is "I believe this is false", and in the middle is "I don't know". People will be born, for most topics, with nothing on that scale. The default position for believing any topical item will be the neutral- the middle- "I don't know".