Metamorphosis

Again, I ask you, Dear Reader: when is a "level" of maturity achieved? Is this even possible? To complete a "level" of maturity? As beings, is it not true that we constantly grow? How then is it conceivable to reach any "level" whatever it may be?

"Levels" have thus been devised my mankind to measure itself and the world it perceives. Disagree? How many things can you, Dear Reader, name with its stages? Even the alphabet is leveled; we have the first letter, and the last letter.

If it had been given a conscience, would a caterpillar know it was changing inside its cocoon? With out ever having seen itself before, would it know?

Like a fish has no notion of being wet, so a desert has no notion of being dry. And yet, a tadpole will know both worlds, seeing as it starts in water and ends on land.

Metamorphosis: a change of the form or nature of a thing or person into a completely different one, by natural or supernatural means.

I'm a very passive person--to a point. I would much rather mediate a conflict with peace and honesty than I would argue my views and insist on my accuracy of fact. That said, I will speak up when I know I am right. I try not to do this all the time; no one likes a know-it-all.

I will speak up, and I will (quietly) firmly hold to my position. I believe a conflict is never "won" by the loudest combatant, and so I will give my views, but then allow others to give theirs. I don't like arguing opinions.

There is a Right, and there is a Wrong. This is not my opinion, it is fact. Just as there is light and there is dark, so there is a Right and a Wrong. We may put different things under these headings, but they remain opposites.

If we believe that there is no such thing as Right and Wrong, we fall prey to the worst kind of laziness called un-accountability, which allows us to do everything we want, whenever we want, without regard to any type of moderation. Moderation is key: I love sugar. I love candy. If I were able to eat candy all day long, and as much of it as I wanted, would it make me a better being? No, but I would have some nasty cavities to fill. Too much of a Good thing is always Bad. Therefore, there must be a Right and a Wrong way to enjoy the Good things of life.

If everything is left to opinion, Dear Reader, we allow others to mistreat us, insisting that the actions are a result of "his opinion" or "his upbringing", when in reality, "his" actions are Wrong. The idea that any one "opinion" is not more important than others' allows us all to develop great capacity for apathy. What is the point of arguing if, according to opinions, we're both Right? That said, why should we allow ourselves to be doormats for the sake of a personal view of humanity?

If humanity is inherently good, why don't we always do Good? Why do we know there is a Right and a Wrong? What is it about human law that separates us from animals? We may have instincts, true, but we can also act against our "instincts". What then? Do we blame the society and environment? If we blame the surroundings for causing our choices, we are not helping the problem, but furthering it! If I do not have the Power of Choice, Dear Reader, I am not human, but an animal with nothing more than instincts it cannot disobey. Such a view surely does not encourage civility, but dehumanization.

If all the creatures of Earth have evolved, and the highest form of evolution is Man, and Man's thoughts are not nearly his own but a random collocation of atoms, what makes Man greater than Beasts? What allows Man to act against his "instinct"? And further, what claim has Man over any basis of Fact, Truth, or Authority? If he is merely random, could he not also have developed improperly? What merit has he to say that we all came from one simple life form and not from another? What gives him authority to talk on Right and Wrong? Nothing. His words are meaningless strings of phonetic sounds, intended for intelligence, but ending in stupidity.

I ask again: when is a level of maturity reached? When have we changed? Do we know when we're changing?

Like all beautiful butterflies, we must first change from worms.

Preservation of Innocence

Okay, so I obviously didn't come back after dinner. Hopefully, I've given you plenty of time to digest the first part of this thought, Dear Reader. Thus, I return with the promised factors of "Rules and their Influence" and "Actions vs. Reactions".

RULES AND THEIR INFLUENCE:

Reading in the book of Romans of the Bible, Paul says:

"Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. Therefore no one will be declared righteous in his sight by observing the law; rather, through the law we became conscious of sin (Rom. 3:19-20, NIV)."

Previously in this book, Paul was both justifying God's sovereignty and his right to punish. It strikes me as interesting, Dear Reader, that Paul doesn't consider the "law" as a burden, necessarily, but as a measuring stick by which one discovers good vs. evil.

Object Image:

Okay, growing up in my family, there are lots of things that were just expected of us--doing the dishes, asking permission to stay at a girlfriend's house for the night, calling when out later than expected--these were things I was used to. When I entered junior high and high school, suddenly these "expectations" became "rules", so named by my peers who insisted that they were "free" to go to a friend's house for the night without asking, or they didn't have to call because their moms just "didn't care". My peers came to pity me for the vast amount of "rules" under which I was allegedly suffocating. The thing is, I didn't see these as "rules" until I realized that very few of my peers shared the same upbringing. Thus, it was because of these boundaries that I became conscious of "Right" and "Wrong" in my house.

So, logically, "rules" have two effects: a positive effect and a negative effect. If, with our imaginary village (let's call it 'Stickville'), everyone grows up with the same rules, Right and Wrong in Stickville will be very clear. Anyone who disobeys rules like "Do not murder" will obviously be rejecting the law, and thus be guilty of a crime. This shows that the law was created to remind people of the potential 'evil/Wrong'. If, in Stickville, everyone grows up under each individual family's personal interpretation of the rules, Right and Wrong will be undefined. They will still be known, but they will be undefined. For the sake of argument, let us say that in order for our Stickville to retain its innocence, all residents must abide by the exact same law, and the exact same interpretation of said law.

Sorry, Dear Reader, but I'm tired. I didn't think this thought would take me so long...I'll have to finish it later.

Good night!

More Reflections

Hello, friends and family!

I didn't realize how much of a following I had generated with my blogs until you all said something. Here I was thinking I was writing to a wall (what a concept, as my blog has 'posts'...), and all the time I was really reaching people. What an honor.

So, I'm still adjusting, whatever that means. And I'm trying not to scare my parents silly. Honestly. The unfortunate part is that it's becoming a full-time engagement.

Why is it that questions scare? Is it just that they face the unknown in asking, or is it more that the pressure is on to answer correctly? If I question the meaning of life, does that imply that I want to end my own, or can it be assumed that I'm purely curious?

I don't question everything, just somethings. I'm content with not knowing. There's a quote from John Stam on his second lecture to our class in Costa Rica that comes to my mind now:

   "Maturity is being able to live with varying degrees of security. Immaturity comes from wanting to be totally sure of everything."

Do I agree? Well, in some way, the man has a point. Besides, how will I ever know truth if I don't question what I hear? I said 'truth' with a lowercase 't' because I meant it as a 'relevant truth'. How will I ever know?

One of the things that I've struggled with the most (and seriously, friends, I will probably use this same term for about thirty other things I have struggled with) is the concept of right and wrong. I believe that there is a definite Right in some things, as well as there is a definite Wrong. However, there will also be cases where a rigid judgment will not suffice. Then, of course, as a young individual with a spirit, I want to find the Right because I believe it is a good, sturdy, and moral thing to do. So I study. What I find in my studies confuses me, so I will come to question both my studies, and my previously conceived notions. What I gain from this (besides Experience) is Knowledge. Allow me to expound on my views of Knowledge: Adam and Eve wanted Knowledge. What happened to them? They died.

So now, it begs the question: Is Knowledge good? Is Knowledge Right? If, as a Christian, I can believe the Bible when it said that Eve wanted to be like God, so she ate from the Tree, and gave some to Adam, causing them both to sin, it can be clearly implied that Knowledge is Wrong. However, especially in the New Testament, the entire purpose of Jesus' sermons was Understanding. Are the two different, or virtually the same?

On a random aside: This is why I love language. Words mean things. I want to mean something when I open my mouth, or when I put my pen to paper, or when I type out a post for my blog. If I did not change something by writing, I wouldn't do it. If I could not help direct another person's thoughts down a different path by opening my mouth, I wouldn't speak. I choose every word carefully, hoping that you, Dear Reader, will gain a better view of what my message is trying to convey.

These ARE really random.

Have a nice day!