I’m back at home again trying my best to squeeze some brains out of my time (at the same time trying not to wring it too tight it ends up withered like a little prune) - Just to try and put a mental bookmark to some of the thoughts I need to process, as well as some key texts that I need to go through later on.  

Its quite crucial to start off with the right foot, that every initiative of all research done in this ministry isn’t for intellectual debate; but to propel the cause of love, nor it is any of our interests or intention to further create any animosity or differences of opinion between the unchurched and those that consider themselves being part of one. Prayerfully I believe that I might not discover more answers in defence of an institution, but rather the starting point of reconciliation between people within the body of Christ, or for some cases, Christ himself.

Institutionalized Insanity or Liberal Legacy?

Its not an easy task to really approve of what warrants a person to distant from establishments created by men under the name of God. It is even harder for one to recognize leadership under the appointment of God through men without having the slightest doubt that there is a slight hint of possibility we might find ourselves trapped in a misled position where  Psalm 125:3 (sometimes misunderstood & out of context) describes it, “The scepter of the wicked will not remain over the land allotted to the righteous, for then the righteous might use their hands to do evil”.

Having said that, I believe that in spite all that can go wrong, there is a higher chance of things going right just by adhering to what people call “general rules”. It doesn’t really take divine intervention (or even rocket science) to prove that there are more harm done in people applying more exceptional rules to themselves without first carefully weighing the consequences that involves the interests of others at large. In understanding that, I believe that serves some guidelines in our response towards the perceptions of an institution, and also the consideration of being part of one. So mainly some questions worth asking might be somewhat like.. “Are my footsteps worth following?” “In the cause I am standing for, does it help advance the kingdom of God, am I laying down a foundation of spiritual paralysis, or am I actively participating in the cause of a better future for the next generation?”

The fluctuating “perfection” in the church

In any case we are not prepared for such a scope of grandiose considerations; maybe its safer that we draw back to things in a much more relational manner. Consider 2 persons falling madly in love for each other- The more one finds their own partner ideal and perfect for one, the more the daunting tension one feels about their own worth. “Am I good enough for him/her?” “How can someone so awesome actually love…a worm like me?” Its these tensions and the occasional delays of those assurances that keeps the passion fueled through time. Everything about the beloved seems to have struck the lover with momentary blindness of every possibly flaw (however much that we rationalize and realize that it is merely an illusion that will be dispelled through time).

The whole idea of the above Illustration, is that the cliche that “nobody/church is perfect” often places more emphasis on the “body” or “church” rather than the word “perfect”. And “perfect”, is always relative unless it is aligned with “Truth” as the benchmark.

If perfect is described as 2 pieces of a puzzle combined, then one would be “needs”, the other “fulfillment”.

We’re not loving as we should be.

Now here’s when it becomes the tricky part. Having embracing that God is perfect and Man is not; it is our issue with perfection that often drives us to disillusionment. When “needs” and “fulfillment” seem to feel unfitting with each other, skepticism seems to slowly unveil towards the “ugliness” that we fail to see from start. But is it a valid reason for us to give up, or is it the best opportunity to take this relationship to a different level of maturity? 

I believe that the first step in discovering the answer is to discover the God centered God we all find in Romans 9:14-16

It very easy to take a loved one for granted once we developed the confidence that we are somehow, lovable(or at least, there’s no reason that I am not to be loved by one who is presumably, perfect anyway).  If aligned to the Truth, at the end of it all, we live in a God centered God with a God centered love rather than a man centered God with a man centered love. We are only disappointed when we have at least the faintest conceit that we are somewhat deserving of love from another; and even worst, that God’s love exists for man- and consequently, the church existing to prove God’s man-centered love.

With that in mind; I do think everything stands to be shaken.

Texts: Rom2:4, Rom.9, Col.1:17 Col 3:14

Text posts are hard to come by these days. Now that new tasks are at hand, I am suppose to be in a way, more vigorous in documenting more thoughts to contribute to further research projects revolving around the apathetic notions that manifest within our dealings with faith.

1. There’s always this boldness that accompanies those that find themselves least concerned about what others think of them. One the other hand, everybody steps up into a different level of mastery in detail when there is the fear of a certain failure or disappointment. I have come to believe that the way one moves around both extremes of this spectrum is a dynamic process rather than a constant hold on a certain position at all times. Therefore what are the catalysts that causes a person to shift? is it possible that the perception of one’s worth of another, the capacity for one to empathize and recognize another individual’s worth as somewhat equal if not more valuable than others, makes one care more? 

2. As much as alot of people claim that their belief systems are governed by what is deemed logical and cold hard facts, most people, if not all, are more humanely governed by a dynamic sway between skepticism and blindness. To be extremely skeptic towards a certain idea, is to also to give yourself a certain blindness towards the flaws of your current belief system. The truth is, people have to believe in something at a certain time. Believing in nothing, is a believe system by itself. Why is this important? I believe its because there’s always something that everybody clinches on to, and its not logic that holds an idea as much as our stubbornness to admit to one that there might be certain flaws even in the things we believe in.

3. Apathy exists by default. there is no way you can add unto it, as much as you can’t add darkness unto light. If fact, nobody wants to believe in anything unless they think they have to. The snap decision of putting a porkchop that came from a specific pig in your mouth is rarely preconceived with immense fact-finding or rationalized before hand- so is the subsequent thousands of meals that follow the rest of your life. It just happens when the time you need to think about it, comes. Same goes to faith; we’re not apathetic by logic, we’re that only because most don’t think they need it.

arh, 3 points to expand.