PDA

View Full Version : Hope for screwed up people



Nateskate
11-05-2006, 11:20 PM
I generally never post the same things in all the places I share my thoughts. Generally, I don't share much here on Absolute Write, because it's not one of my Blogs. It's kind of like a cool bus station with busses going all over the place. You just don't set up a booth.

All the same, I shared this on one of my Blog's and just felt this might help someone here- no I don't know who. Hope it helps some one.

Nate

**** had a wise insight in her comments on the Pleasure and Pressure Blog, and it inspired me to write a new post. There are forces within us that compel us to do things, either good or bad. We can have clarity, knowing why we're doing such and such, and still have difficulty changing our thinking and our actions.
Example: You might find someone who strives perpetually to attain some degree of feeling good about themselves. They're hard working, driven people. They always take on more they can handle and can't ever seem to rest. And they may not need someone to point out why. "I know why...My dad told me I wouldn't amount to anything...I could never please him. He used to insult me and embarrass me...I know I'm screwed up. It's like I'm always reaching for something I can never obtain..."
Well, they have clues. 1) That voice inside them came from the voice of their father. 2) No matter what they do they can't feel they have done good enough. 3) They may even intuit, "This isn't about pleasing my boss or myself, but wanting my father's approval.
I've met alot of really insightful screwed up people. They know they're screwed up, don't want to be screwed up, and may have taken steps to stop being screwed up; but they're still screwed up.
I hate futility, don't believe in futility. So then why do people bang their heads against the walls, eventually giving up because they feel they're a runaway train that can't stop the momentum?
Obviouly, some people give up at this point and stop trying and medicate themselves or drop out. Neither is satisfying.
I don't have the arm strength to go into great detail, but I spent years trying to figure out answers to these questions. When we're young, those memories don't just come in like books in a library. They actually have the power to imprint and become the foundations we build our lives on. They impact our beliefs and attitudes about life, others and ourselves.
On some levels the answer to the puzzles, "Why do we do this and why do we think this way?" almost always come from two primary emotions, anger and fear. We fear we can never measure up and we're angry at those people/events, we blame for making us feel this way; even if only on a subconscious level. This amounts to beliefs that are so ingrained, "I'll never amount to something...I can never measure up...I'm an accident waiting to happen..." And some people go into every relationship and every situation including school and work, mentally set up to fail and self-destruct.
Emotional healing doesn't come when we convince our minds of an answer- "Yes I should love myself...yes, I don't want to be bound to the past...I know it's the voice of my mother/my father/events that happened/people that hurt me..."
At some point we need to be convinced we are not a "Victim", not that we were never victimized- but in that we have power to take back control, change our thinking, our beliefs, our outlook, the very foundation of who we are. If we can't come to believe we have control, and keep thinking, "My mom/dad/the fire that took my friend/the things my coach did to me..." are what ruined my life, we end in a futility loop. Because we can't change the past, or other people (unless they make a choice to change). We can't un-mug ourselves.
But we can at a very deep level change how we view the past, the filters that blind us to the truth- we can succeed, be happy, have great relationships.
If you look at successful people at anything, mostly it comes down to how they see things and what they do. So if you can change a person's point of view and show them what to do, if they have the motivation, their whole lives can turn around.
Whew...obviously it's an important subject I've given much thought to. Hope it helps someone. Still, I can't go through the whole process in a thread. This was just meant to show that screwed up people- perhaps half of all people are somewhat screwed up- can have hope.

Unique
11-06-2006, 12:16 AM
You have blogs?

I wanna see. Where? Aw, c'mon. Just a peek. ;)

Robin Bayne
11-06-2006, 12:57 AM
Me too.

Nateskate
11-06-2006, 03:48 AM
I was pasting something from this one intellectuals site, and then everything vanished. These theologians were saying that Christianity was about "Detachment" using clever debates which redefined every scripture they quoted, essentially arguing that God doesn't care about creation and that values, love, faith, are all meaningless. Generally these arguments can get rather winded. But here is a sample I posted on this one issue.


It seems to me that there would be a benefit to express the counter-argument to the philosophical view of detachment.

The art of defining words is a rather unique process. Black becomes white and white becomes black with a simple alteration. Love is hate, kindness is killing. The term Babel as in Tower of Babel meant confusion. Specifically it meant confusion of words, so that one wasn't hearing what the other was saying.

Now, we think of this as Spanish vs English, Egyptian vs Babylonian. We think of misunderstanding as a matter of philology. When in fact, all it takes for misunderstanding is for two people to look at the same words and apply two different meanings. If my "Stop" means your "Go", we will have problems. There is a value in having a Universal "Yes" and a Universal "No", or no laws could exist.

In the context of the arguments made for detachment, my contention is that Christ is being redefined, God is redefined, love is redefined, grace is redefined. And so, the question is whether Christ, or God, or the Bible ever refers to "Detachment" as defined here. And clearly, the answer is "no".

In 1 Corinthians 13: which is a continuation of 1 Corinthians 1, 2, 3, 12; Paul was addressing the fruitlessness of philosophical debates, and reduced the whole matter to one word- Love- and not in any detachment form.

Paul was saying that Love acts, love makes choices, love thinks of the needs of the other- starting with God, and moving toward man. And so, in chapter 14 when Paul addresses behavior in the church, he assigns the needs of others as being the basis for operation- not self-serving.

John said, "God is love". John showed affection, leaning on Christ's bosom at the last supper. And went on in the letter of 1 John as to say that love that does not express itself in action on behalf of others is not love at all.

James confirmed that this was in fact the "Royal Law". And so, detachment becomes an act of selfishness, not virtue.

In John 17: 3- Jesus said that the greatest virtue is to "Know God and Jesus Christ" - but in the Biblical sense of knowing- two becoming one. - not in the sex mating sense- but the bonding of two souls.

When the disciples asked Jesus how they ought to pray- or approach God- Jesus didn't say, "Empty your heads and enter the vast nothingness, and by this you bond with God's purpose"

He said "Abba" as in the most tender of Jewish expressions of the intimate word "Daddy". Not this formal stuffy, speaking at a podium "Our Father". Over time such words may lose their potency, but as expressed by Jesus it was a powerful statement- God is approachable. And he then said, "Hallowed be they name.- "It is a name to be revered"

Jesus implied prayer should be purposeful and directed; "Thy kingdom come; thy WILL be done"- God is very clear in expressing the dynamics of what that WILL is. It is not detachment, but fellowship, intimacy, helping others, communion/communication/adoration.

Nothingness is the furthest from what God wants according to the teachings recorded of Jesus, and the teachings of Paul. In Matthew 25- the servant that did nothing with what he was given was rebuked severely. The maidens that did nothing to prepare to meet with the groom were severely rebuked.

When it is quoted: "I live, and yet I do not; Christ lives in me..." The context of this statement is rather clear. I have like Frodo, taken up the burden of the Ring; not for my sake- I am not doing this for me- I am doing this for the Shire and all whom I love.

In a like manner, Paul went to prison for his faith, to share about the love of God. Christ went to the cross.

The definition of LOVE as expressed in the scriptures is rather active. "For God so loved the world that he GAVE his only begotten son..." The act of love was expressed by the act of giving. And Jesus said, "There is NO GREATER LOVE, than that a man should lay down his life for another..."

Christianity as expressed by the Gospel writers and Apostles, was indeed the act of involvement- sacrificial involvement.

In only one way is detachment affirmed. And that is to detach from the values, attitudes and priorites of this world- but not in the sense of having no values, attitudes or priorities- rather to substitute our own for Gods, "Nevertheless, THEY WILL be done..." In the context this was spoken, Jesus was in great distress because "Thy Will" required doing something contrary to the desires of the human mind.

N Marion

Unique
11-06-2006, 04:16 AM
I was pasting something from this one intellectuals site, and then everything vanished. These theologians were saying that Christianity was about "Detachment" using clever debates which redefined every scripture they quoted, essentially arguing that God doesn't care about creation and that values, love, faith, are all meaningless.


Theologians, Nate? Of which religion?

Serpents.
Wolves in Sheep's clothing.

Be careful, Nate. Please.

Nateskate
11-06-2006, 04:58 AM
Theologians, Nate? Of which religion?

Serpents.
Wolves in Sheep's clothing.

Be careful, Nate. Please.

Thanks for the warning. Actually, I'm not in any "Christian" places. And for the most part, in non-Christian communities I behave like a guest in someone else's house. I'm not there to argue or insult or look for debates with people.

Most places I've shared in are world communities with people from all over with many views. In this particular case, this was someone who was not telling about their religion and it's tenants; it was primarily someone saying flatly, "This is what Jesus was saying, what Christianity teaches, who God is." emphatically. If you could see my other posts, which are many in this community of academics and business leaders (I'm neither an academic or a business leader- just a guest), they are altogether civil. We talk about "Love" "World Peace", values. But in this place, I think I've shared the most of my Christian views, because that is often the topic.

Here is a link to one particular community where I've been sharing. It is not a Christian site, and if you look at my posts on love and the nature of God, they are not combative or confrontational in the least. If I told you how I wound up here, you'd laugh, because I didn't go looking for this place. http://www.newciv.org/nl/newslog.php/_v484

I can share my thoughts on life. You'll see I'm into art/photos/poetry. Some Christians might think I'm nuts for being here on this website, or when they see bits of my storyline. That's because there are some that expect every fantasy that a spiritually-minded person would write would be Narnia revisited, or another "This Present Darkness."

They wouldn't know that I humbly pray all the time for God to show me whether this story would honor or dishonor him; and I do believe in spiritual authority and have shared my story ideas, which are very unique, with the most spiritually minded people I've known. Not one has told me I shouldn't be doing this.

I'm not saying this for you at all, because I know you are familiar with my spiritual views. But since I am throwing this link out there for all to view, some might see "The Seer Breaking the Spell" photo, and think I've wigged out.

That is really me in the Seer suit, not a digital creation. It took a bit of digital editing though.

Some will think it looks "demonic". But I will explain something of how I look at things. Spiritual truth is often conveyed in metaphors, "The kingdom of heaven is LIKE..." It is not a mustard seed, it is like a mustard seed. Jesus said he was a "door", and that is obviously a metaphor that he is an entry way- means to get to.

In the one post, you will see the Seer goes to "Toween"- which is portrayed as a "non-realm". But metaphorically it is representative of that sacred place in prayer between God and us, where we work out our problems. So, the Seer (Which Prophets were first called) can't break the most powerful spells of the invisible enemy without prayer. Why does the Seer become invisible- it represents that our prayer is a sacred place where God communes with us, where our feet are on earth, but our hearts are touching heaven.