three: pain and suffering

Okay, this might be pretty rough since I am currently sitting in the Hong Kong Central Library without my rubric and assignment sheet (Doh! Leave it to me to be a complete idiot like that).

I think the lecture that struck me the most in this unit was the one that started with YK's hamsters...

Influence #1: Stuff in Class: YK's Hamsters and Gossip Girl
After twenty or so minutes of examining a hamster's life and it's habitation, we examined a hamster's values. What does a hamster value in life? (It was probably obvious where this was leading but at the time I was still thinking... "uhhhh... hamsters = ir-rel-le-vannnnttt!" But clearly, I did not give this little illustration the benefit of the doubt!) A hamster values food, sex and exercise, however, although a hamster may share some of the same essential values as us, a hamster will "never learn to appreciate art the way humans do." This really opened my eyes and made me see suffering in a new light. So many times I've heard the excuse "well, maybe God's doing something that we don't understand, we just have to trust Him." And sure, this answer may suffice for most people, but I couldn't help but roll my eyes. It didn't make sense to me that people just LET God toy with their lives, so to speak. How can you so blindly believe everything?! I know that whatever God's going to do, he's not going to put me through "more than I can bear," but at the same time, it simply was not enough to hear "well, whatever, just trust God." I wanted to know WHY, I wanted to know what The Big G's "AWESOME" plan was. Why people could say, "Sure, God, why don't You throw me into a pool full of sharks so they can bite all my limbs off and I can live this terrible and immobile life then tell everyone how happy I am and You can take all the glory. No big, would LOVE to help you out there!" Nothing about the way he put us through our pain really made any sense, I just had to force myself to believe that one day it’ll be a good thing FOR US. But hearing that "maybe our definition of "good" is not the same as God's" and that where the misunderstanding starts, REALLY shifted my attention. I realized, "HEY, you know, it's really NOT about me and the pain that I’m going through my not become good FOR ME, God may use it for the good of someone else. It’s not about my pain. It's NOT about how many people die. It's about the outcome.” I mean, okay, in class, we briefly discuss the expense of the mass amounts of human lives and how much amounts to "the debt payment" for Jesus' "bad weekend." But you know, God gives lives, and he's given so many more lives than the amount of people who have died in the holocaust or the genocide... I think he has the right to take it away from us. God is helping humanity, he's shaking people up and announcing, "YO, there's a God up here, who, by the way, GAVE YOU YOUR LIFE and LOVES you. No matter how much pain you're going through, how much damage you've done or have experienced, I can take that away and love you no matter what. I can restore your soul and make you whole again." The way I used to think, the whole “God’s messing up MY life for HIS purposes that seem totally POINTLESS” mentality was so selfish, I needed someone to wake me up and say, “Dude, it’s not about you.”

http://www.sidereel.com/Gossip_Girl/_watchlinkviewer/26313#
(skip ahead to 37 minutes... Why won't blognet let me post up videos from youtube??)

We talked about how a God of judgment can't be a God of love. Well, as a child of very disciplinary parents, I know that love is the opposite of letting your child slide through any form or shape of "character building opportunities." How can a Christian believe that love comes without pain (especially from a parent) when the Bible EXPLICITLY says, "he who spares his rod, hates his child." Love comes with pain. In fact, love without pain is not pain at all because we must CARE for something so much that it causes pain. C.S. Lewis makes a really good point when he says that a man cannot say that he loves his son but does not care what he turns out to be like. If the winning father of all on Manhattan (and France!) dares to talk sense into princess Blair the way he does in this episode, then surely, this is proof that a man who loves his child will care about the outcome of their child. Undoubtably, the child may not like the way its done, they won't like the pangs of guilt that come with love, but nevertheless, it's love and you need tough love to really grow.

Influence #2: Munyurangabo and the genocide in Rwanda
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gsef0vOGK-g
(Again, sorry, my lack of tech-saaviness has resulted to more work for my reader)

The single most influencial event of my life was my trip to Africa. That was when life turned around completely for me. My life pre-summer-of-04 was a mess. I guess you could say I felt quite a bit of pain and went through a quite a bit of suffering. But I didn't go through suffering like THESE people went through suffering. The year I went mark the tenth anniversary, post genocide, and everyone thought back to the terrors of 1994. 98% of the people we met had little to no family left, no parents, and if they had siblings, they had to care for their siblings. And seriously, it was as high as 98% because we worked with a preschool and a lot of little kids so there were many people under the age of 10. On average, the chances of you meeting someone who didn't have either of their parents was... oh, basically 100% or close to it anyway. Even though this one nation went through SO much distruction and such a great loss, the people we met there were SO HAPPY. Almost whereever we went, people were smiling. They weren't in denial, but instead, these people just chose to live their lives so affectionately. Yes, the genocide was horrific and the number of people who were brutally slaughtered for the color of their skin and the size of their nose is honestly unimaginable, but this nation had to be broken to be put back together again. The reform that this country has been doing has actually brought so much peace back into the land and has brought a sort of unity amongst the people there. The reason why I chose this film as an illustration is more because of the ending of this film than what the trailer portrays. This film mirrors the reconciliation between the two tribes and the fight and the confrontation of their histories that they had to overcome to get to the point of reconciliation. Okay, don't get me wrong, the film isn't saying that they NEEDED the genocide to come together, but they say that it's possible. Honestly, though, I find that it may have had to be necessary. After the German colony, the Tutsi's may have continued to rule over the Hutu's, creating a gap of superiority between them... I mean, not that the genocide is a good thing or anything, but it DID create a more equal level between the two nations and now they must depend on one another.

Influence #3: The things in my life

"There is no education like adversity."
--Benjamin Disraeli

"All misfortune is but a stepping stone to fortune."
--Henry David Thoreau


"Fractures well cured make us more strong."
--Ralph Waldo Emerson

I'm a strong believer in pain making us stronger. I'm not going to lie, I've gone through some pretty crappy eras of my life. I mean, I guess everyone does, but... You know Peyton from One Tree Hill? Basically, I'm like her. Sometimes I feel like all the crappy stuff happens to me to keep the show interesting (Hm, I hope I at least get the guy in the end like she does... haha!). And by crappy... I don't mean I broke a nail or got a C on my report card (However, I have had a few of thoseeee...) I'm talking about... well, other stuff. Stuff that I could probably email you about but not publish on the world wide web for random stumblers to read. Essentially, there were four major events in my life that WERE painful and DID make me go through some suffering (so really this should be influence #3, 4, 5 and 6) and all of them taught me some things about life and dealing with pain. Trust me, in my life, I've thought a lot about pain and suffering, I've experienced it in different ways and sometimes the same ways many times. As I grow older, I find that my perspective on pain and suffering has changed immensely-- thus changing the way I deal with pain and suffering. I've reacted to it in every way imaginable-- from unstoppable whaling (it's true, ask my brother), to silent death stares and pouting resilience. From suicidal tendencies to brushing the dirt off my shoulders, from hiding in my bed for 48 hours straight to praying and trusting (more like begging) God to bring me through it all. Although I do recall asking God why something like "this" or "that" would happen to me and blaming God for allowing all the crap in my life happen, I can't say that I feel the same way about the pain that happens to me in my life now. In retrospect, I'm actually glad that God put me through all that pain. They stretched my level of "pain" and made me realize that so little can still bring so much joy. Through all my pain, I've learned to really cherish life even though it seems ordinary... So that's how I deal with pain. In our second lecture about pain and suffering, we discussed the "Personal Aspect" of it all. In my notes and under the subheading "Ressurection and Suffering," I have a point that says, "the glory of Heaven is even MORE wonderful BECAUSE of suffering that existed on Earth." Likewise, the same applies even within our single lifespan on Earth. The good things are even greater because we know how much better it is in comparison with the bad things. I've learned this and that's why I might not see life the same way as others. (Not... to sound pompous and self righteous or anything... I just... started early with the whole sould seraching thing...)

In conclusion, I believe that pain ALWAYS happens for a reason, even though we can't see it. God knows the world better than we do, he knows more than we do and values things that we don't even understand yet, and often times, pain is absolutely necessary to bring joy.

two.

Pascal may be right about our passions, emotions and pride hindering the perception of truth. We just recently finished readings/studying Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice in AP English; some of the themes that we came up with were marriage, pride and prejudices, and appearance versus reality. Through her characters, Austen emphasizes the idea that appearances may not mean reality. When we first encounter Mr. Darcy, everyone in the country agrees that he is rude, arrogant and insufferably disagreeable, but as the story continues, we meet people who have known Darcy his entire life and they vouch for his character. Elizabeth Bennet, whom Darcy loves ardently despite the difference of her inferior society, dismisses him as a proud, unendurable man the first time she meets him at the ball. Towards the end of the book, Elizabeth realizes her judgments were completely off-based and incorrect but was completely blind to his sincerity because of her first impression, because of her passions, her bias, and her emotions.

It’s true that we create our own truths but this is only possible because truth is entirely relative. Two cars collide. Which crashed into which first? Who’s fault was it? The by-stander on the right says the blue car hit the red car first, but the by-stander on the left says the red car hit the blue car first. Who’s right? Which of the possibilities are more justified? The answer, really, is that they are equally justified. Certainly, there is only ONE ultimate truth, but unless we ARE God, unless we are omnipotent, we’ll never know what the truth is. So the truth for me, may not be the same for you. God may be true to me, but Allah may be true for you, or maybe you believe that there is no God. We as humans cannot determine the absolute truth and that is why we create our own.

What makes truth: Obviously there are some things that are black or white, yes or no. For example: Little Sammy cheated on a test, he either did or he didn’t right? The teacher saw him; he has exactly the same answers as his classmate, what else could be the truth? Essentially, Little Sammy either did or didn’t cheat on the test, that’s a yes or no situation. But unfortunately, life just doesn’t work that way. How can we justify our “truths” when it comes to more abstract situations then? Evidence. Evidence can come in forms of experience, of text, of social history. I mean, who are you to say that I didn’t experience what I experienced? Who am I to say that the miracles in your life never happened? Okay, so in the end, we’re not going to be able to agree on the absolute truth. We might never find out what the absolute truth is, but as long as we have a valid reason, then our truth is valid… right? Truth is abstract concepts like religion might never be accurate! Maybe they are! But we’ll never know… ah, how much faith is need in determining truth. The chances of us being right about anything are slim, but either way, we have to decide for ourselves what truth is. There’s no use in running, it’s inevitable.

One.

Both Articles that were read in class focused on different aspects of Christianity. Tim Keller believes that "a faith without some doubts is like a human body without antibodies in it." He explains that if a Christian is too "indifferent" to ask themselves questions about what he/she believes than when time comes to face a difficult time in his/her life occurs or when a smart skeptic plagues him/her with frustrating questions, they find themselves defenseless and then too easily yielded to the other side. Doubt, however, is like "an alternate set of beliefs," therefore it would be unfair to only challenge your religion and not your doubts. "The only way to doubt Christianity rightly and fairly," states Keller, "is to discern the alternate belief under each of your doubts and then to ask yourself what reasons you have for believing it." I think he says it the best when he says, "It would be inconsistent to require more justification for Christian belief than you do for your own, but that is frequently what happens. In fairness, you must doubt your doubts. My thesis is that if you come to recognize the beliefs on which your doubts about Christianity are based, and if you seek as much proof for those beliefs as you seek from Christians for theirs-- you will discover that your doubts are not as solid as they first appeared."

Paul Little talks about the importance of knowing WHY we believe. How can we convince others when we are not convinced ourselves? He brings up two points that we should avoid; the first is an "anti-intellectual attitude" and the second is a naive reliance on our own answers. If we do either, the results could be spiritually tragic for both Christians and non-Christians. Non-Christians conclude from out lack of answers and intellectual apathy that their honest questions have no answers, this only REAFFIRMS their reason to not believe. As Christians, we begin to wonder whether or not we have have the truth. Is what we believe real? Or is it just a convenience?

What both of these have in common though is their encouragement for us to search deeper in our faith, to not tolerate with incompetence. To penetrate our beliefs, to solidify it, we must challenge it. No pain, no gain as they say.

If a an extremely logical, reasonable, and devout Muslim man walks up to me and explains Islam without any inconsistencies, irrationalities, or any ambiguities, I would listen intently and think carefully, whether I would believe him or not is beyond me. I must commend Muslims for the strength of their faith, and for their discipline, but honestly, many concepts about Islam doesn't appeal to me (as in I disagree). The thing about Christianity that stands out to me more than other religions though, is how it abounds in grace and love, and I personally know that if I had to earn my eternity and peace, I would never secceed because I am not worthy of it, whether God is or is not in the question.