A Philosophy of Suffering: Two Ways

The Buddha told us that if we want to be free of suffering, we need to free ourselves of all desire and choose the extinction of our personal self, so that we might avoid being reborn.

But Jesus told us that we must embrace suffering, for by doing so we share in his cross, by which he redeemed the world, and by that offering we shall be reborn to eternal life.

"Whoever wishes to be my disciple, let him deny himself, pick up his cross daily, and follow me. For whoever tries to save his own life shall lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake shall save it." (Luke, ch. 9)

To reject suffering seems like a rejection of life itself, and just removing your desires is a lack of appreciation of everything that humanity has learned to value. While it is true that we can always want more than we have, we can also learn to be content with less. The world makes many false promises, and tries to tempt us into pursuing mirages and phantoms of our imagination. But if we stop and take stock of what a human being truly needs, we can see that our situation is probably reasonably tolerable.

Of course we will always have to work for the food and water, clothing and shelter that sustain us from day to day. We no longer live in the Garden of Eden. But wait, beyond those essentials, and our normal routine social interactions of education and exchange, what more should we really need? You can say that we need some spiritual endeavors, to help us to find meaning and purpose for living, and maybe point us toward a brighter future. And I will easily grant that necessity.

But the spiritual dimension of humanity is precisely the point I'm reaching for. Life has more than enough suffering to make us doubt whether the meaning of life is worth its dogged pursuit. And yet, we have to admit that there are plenty of joys and pleasures to keep us interested. And the essential togetherness of family allows us to experience the values of sharing, compassion, affection and love, and gives us a sense of meaning  and belonging. It is the spiritual seeking for how to live a good life that teaches us how to maximize our appreciation of society.

And it is also the spiritual perspective that tells us that our societies can become too worldly and complicated. We feel the urge to get away, and strip down our ordinary expectations, to find out how self-reliant we can be. And in doing so, we discover that the simplicity of having few wants is not the same as poverty. Several great religions still proudly hold their hermits up as fine examples of spirituality. Many of them have demonstrated that we don't really need as much as we think we do, to live a meaningful life. And while we may look at them and think they are poor, they don't actually feel impoverished. The way they live is their own choice.

Poverty is the lack of access to what you experience as a necessity for your being, or the belief that you should have, or deserve more. That is what causes suffering, and as such it motivates us to seek to acquire what we therefore desire. As you can see, some desires are totally correct, and others can be inordinate, or just wrong.

No matter where or when we live, we will always need to, figuratively speaking, chop wood and draw water, fix the roof and plant a garden, mend our clothes and feed the cat. Even a hermit may do this much. But we don't need to expend our extra time to produce more than enough, other than for sharing with our friends, neighbors and visitors. Seeking commerce, for profit and accumulating wealth, can lead us into sin. Rather, our leisure time might be better spent in some recreational fellowship, or in prayer, study and worship. We could agree to collaborate on some grand collective project, such as building a cathedral, but that would be a special case.

In modern life and culture, we have allowed ourselves to become accustomed to a variety of quite complex amenities, which we can no longer produce individually. We have become dependent on certain social benefits and luxuries, for which we must pay by laboring for money. No more are we expected to be self-sufficient, but only proficient at some kind of work. But always we feel the pressure of society to aspire for more and better commodities, requiring us to work harder for longer hours. This immediately translates into a desire to please our spouses, who are usually the ones who bring those social pressures to bear. And we are made to feel guilty if we cannot provide for even the most lavish and inordinate desires. These, of course, have all been suggested by a society which itself desires to wring the most productivity and taxes from every citizen. It is a circular and unceasing endeavor to keep up with the achievements of our neighbors, always propelled by the pride and ambitions we have been educated to serve.

Stated thus plainly, we can see how we have been coopted into the service of built-up expectations to which we did not give our considered assent. It is as if we are all offering our labor as a sacrifice to some minor deities - and, in fact, that is precisely what we are doing. Those minor gods are Caesar and Mammon, the government and the banks. Whether we are poor or wealthy, both of these always want an ever greater share of the money that we work for. And they both claim that they shall serve us in our times of need, but neither have proven to be good stewards of our contributions. Indeed, these are false gods, and we serve them at our peril. Caesar can suddenly change into Moloch, demanding that  we sacrifice our children in war, and Mammon can shift with the weather, becoming the wanton, seductive goddess of fertility, who then reveals her impotence to guarantee the harvest.

And finally we begin to realize that our ever increasing desires have led us to ruin. We have found naught but suffering at the end of our road. And it is a wide, well paved, and busy highway that leads to this fool's perdition. If only we had chosen to seek a spiritual path, consciously denying those false desires that society proposes in its avarice to seduce us! We could have, on occasion, mortified our weaknesses when we saw that we had strayed from the path of voluntary simplicity. It is a sad lament that cries over opportunities lost, that could have been better used to seek the true God, and a right relationship with Him. But we always have the opportunity to repent. We can recognize how foolish we have been, and turn away from concupiscient seeking after wealth, and dedicate the rest of our lives to sharing. We have tried too hard to avoid denying our desires, but forgotten what we truly need - the freedom to choose which God we shall serve.

And yet, the atheist can find only despair when he realizes how he has been duped and betrayed by society and its gods. By eschewing the search for a real God, one can only discover that life is without any meaning or purpose. Even the assertion that we can choose whatever meaning that we want to pursue rings hollow, if we dare to ask why any choice might be more true than a surrender to despair. That is why the Buddha decided to try to break the cycle of reincarnation. He figured that the next life was not worth living.

Rather than giving in to despair, Jesus proclaims the value of life, not by denying suffering, but by affirming that life can be full of joy, peace and blessings. By forgiving us for wandering after the foolishness of believing in false gods, he frees us to seek a reconciliation with the Father, who does actually provide us with the basic needs of our everyday lives. When we reorder our desires and expectations, and seek to reform our relationships with each other, we find that life can be abundant in the things that really matter.

Of course, we do continue to experience some instances, and a background level, of suffering. Life continues to be difficult. But we can remember how much Christ gave for us, how he sacrificed everything and carried the crushing burden of guilt for all of our sins to the cross, so that we could be forgiven and set free. By such comparison we can see that we hardly face such a high magnitude of suffering. And then we still have the option to dedicate what we do experience, as well as our voluntary self-discipline, to sharing in his redeeming sacrifice. When we do that, He gives us an extraordinary meaning for living, even in the midst of suffering. We are building the Kingdom of God on Earth, and beyond  that, He promises that we shall share eternal life with Him in Heaven.

Think about Communion, the Eucharist ...

This is a clarification and extension of the previous essay that I published concerning the Eucharist. I am discussing my own faith, and trying to bridge an old dispute which has divided the Church on account of political intransigence.

How do we regard Christ's body & blood?
1. sacrifice - He gave Himself for us.
2. communion - We meet & share w/ Him.
3. viaticum - He shares his Life with us.
4. eucharist - We have the Good Gift.

Whenever the faithful share Communion, or the Eucharist, as we come together to worship, we must assent, and not disagree. It is the actual true flesh & blood of Christ, as He is now, in Heaven, transformed into Spirit. We do not see it, in the same way that his disciples did not recognize Him after the resurrection, until He chose to reveal himself. The "gardener" was Jesus, and the "bread" is Jesus. On the road to Emmaus, they didn't recognize Him, until He broke bread with them. As He said, "If you do not chew on my flesh, and gulp my blood, you have no life in you." This is not bloody meat, or cannibalism, which was strictly forbidden by Moses' Law, but the spiritual, eternal, actual body of the Risen Lord God, which He is NOW sharing with us, BECAUSE it has his life in it. This is real spiritual food which gives us true life. How can this mean anything else?

How could Jesus say this to his disciples at the Last Supper, before He died and rose again? The Eucharist is an eternal act of grace, performed once, in time and beyond time and for all time. Being God, Jesus could make this eternal sacrifice and infuse/combine the visible bread with his spiritual flesh, so that all who have faith in Him, whether they understand or not, so long as they give assent, may eat his body and drink his blood. He knew, at the time, that the disciples had no idea what He was saying, but they would give their assent to whatever He said because "you have the words of eternal life." Their faith satisfied all of his conditions.

Only Jesus knew that, by this eternal action, He was putting his own body and blood and soul and divinity into this holy sacrament of the Eucharist in Truth, reality and substance for the faithful to receive, but that was enough. He would leave the mystery for the Church to figure out later. We, the faithful, cannot ever know whether the "accidents" of bread and wine, which we continue to perceive after the fact, remain or have been somehow peculiarly  transformed in "substance" beyond our ability to sense. But by faith we assent, and assume that "whatever Jesus said" has in Truth been accomplished forever.

In the same way, the faith of any believer passes as satisfying to Jesus, so long as they do not actively deny his words and refuse to accept the sacrifice that He gave for us. Those who say that the Most Holy Eucharist is only a sign, a figure of speech, or a symbol, stand on the same ground as Jesus' hearers who left off from following Him, because his discourse at Capernaum offended their own sense of propriety. Indeed, He gave us his flesh and blood, to eat and drink, as He promised, and as He commanded us to continue. "Do this in memory of Me."

And if the Catholics, Orthodox, Coptics, Lutherans or whichever assembly, want to properly perform the ritual blessing of the elements, done by an ordained minister proclaiming the actual presence of the body and blood of Christ, as Jesus did, then that host and the sanctified wine have been transformed by Jesus' eternal act, for our benefit. We should partake of it, with a contrite heart having confessed our sins to the Lord, and in all due reverence and gratitude for his mercy. It has become a sacrament, and an effective means of His grace. Any who deny this have chosen dissent and disagreement over community and brotherhood.

Afterwards, if any of that which has been blessed may remain unconsumed, let it then be treated with correct reverence, as the Presence of Our Lord. Once this is done, there can be no question of ever removing the Holy Presence, or of its loss, by eventual dissipation, evaporation or expiration. It should be retired securely, awaiting the next opportunity to participate in the sacrament, or as may be customary, put on display for veneration and adoration by those who seek to pray and meditate close to His Presence.

Proof God Exists & Why Create Us?

One way of proving that God exists begins by asking, "Can we demonstrate how God is the first cause needed for all that we perceive to exist?"

We can do this by using reason and logic, and the scientific evidence of observations of our Universe. Let's see ...

A. From ancient times, there has been a debate about whether the Universe is either Created or Eternal. But in the 20th century, astronomers discovered that the Universe is expanding. This is confirmed by the telescopes that were launched into space. This means that the Universe had a beginning, and if you imagine running it backwards you see that it goes back to what we call the "Big Bang." Thus, it is Not Eternal. And those same telescopes have also seen galaxies and stars that are much younger in the far distance (which is also the distant past).

B. So, if it began, we have to ask whether the Universe had a Cause, or was it Uncaused. But, by any verifiable scientific theory, the very thought that it could be uncaused is fundamentally absurd. There is no way for anything to come out of nothing. "Hawking Radiation" requires the event horizon of a black hole, and it slowly evaporates the central mass as it radiates. Even "quantum foam" needs the fabric of space itself for it to bubble into, and then it quickly annihilates itself. So we need a first Cause for the Universe itself.

C. Further, anything which has no cause would have to be self-sufficient and self-sustaining. But we know that the Universe is subject to the laws of thermodynamics, and has an inherent, irresistible tendency toward entropy. It will eventually run down and cease to function, and parts of it will stop long before the end. So it still needs something to sustain it, just to keep it in existence. That is yet another reason to deduce that it must have had a Cause from before the beginning, and could never have started itself.

D. Now, by what we know about the early Universe, right after the Big Bang, the fundamental constants that make the Laws of matter, space and time did not exist until after they themselves unfolded from that first colossal emergent event. Even our best theoretical physicists have no idea how those evolved. They just happened, and the Universe coalesced as a result. But why is that even important? Because it shows that the first Cause of everything must be timeless, spaceless and immaterial, and able to effect all of those fundamental laws.

E. After that, we observe that there two kinds of causes: Natural and Personal. By definition, natural causes require scientific explanations based on the laws of physics or biology. But before the Big Bang, there were no such laws. No gravity, no strong or weak atomic forces, no electromagnetism, no biology, or anything else. Even light had to wait. But Personal causes only require that someone chooses to do something.

F. However, Persons always act within relationships, and there are two kinds of relationships: subject/subject, and subject/object. Subject to subject interactions work by volition and response. And subject to object interactions work by imposing intent upon material inertia, to create difference. Without that difference, or distinction, everything would just be one messy clump without any meaning. But we can observe distinctions and differences, and impute a variety  of possible meanings to what we observe. So we know that there is a real subject/object relationship, which allows the Personal Cause to create.

G. So, let us summarize what we know by logical reasoning and scientific research to describe the attributes of this necessary Cause. It must be:
     1. Uncaused
     2. Self-sufficient
     3. Self-sustaining
     4. Timeless
     5. Spaceless
     6. Immaterial
     7. All Powerful
     8. Personal

H. This list of attributes is virtually the same as that which almost everyone has agreed is the basic description of God. Which leaves all of us with a, perhaps difficult, task -- to choose a belief system which accepts the necessity of recognizing a God who created our Universe.

So we have arrived at our conclusion:
The Universe exists, therefore God exists.
Q.E.D.

Our next question is closely related:

"Why did God create us?"

"Why" questions are a bit different from "How" questions. We have to look deeper. This question finds its answer even before the Universe and time began. It rests upon the very nature of God Himself.

A. God knows from personal experience how to relate to other persons. He is three, distinct but not separate, persons, sharing the same coextensive substance.

B. God has been eternally interested and involved with Himself, interacting via his triple persons, so intensely that His joy and love overflows with abundance.

C. All of God's actions are meaningful, and for any action to be meaningful, it must have a purpose. So by consensus in one accord, they sought to expand the divine communion by creating more persons to share with.

Step by step, God thought through the process for doing this.

D. God wanted to create something that would have initiative, and be interactive and meaningful.

E. Inanimate objects are of limited interest, as lacking any initiative to interact.

F. Only life can act with initiative and interact together, to seek food for survival and to perpetuate the species.

G. Even advanced animal life lacks depth of meaning. Mere cleverness is enough for them to accomplish their tasks.

H. Only fully self-aware Persons have sufficient initiative to interact together in thoughtful accord, and thus seek to create meaning for doing that. So God chose to make new beings much like Himself.

I. God decided to create a Universe which would be amenable, via natural laws of evolution, to the eventual creation of self-aware Persons. Its worlds should function mostly by mechanics, but allow for some interaction for guidance toward the right kind of creatures.

J. Thus apparently, God desired to create human kind, so that there might be an abundant society of self-aware, thoughtful Persons with whom the Divine Trinity could relate and converse.

K. Apparently, when there is no input from any outside source, even perfection can value further variety and novelty, even if just as an open horizon whereby it may share itself more widely.

Subsequent conjectural notes:

L. One can assume that the Heavens are home also to a variety of other species on other worlds, which also evolved because of the divine intention to create ever more persons to share with. That is why the Bible speaks of Angels, who sometimes help us. And unfortunately, we hear also of Demons, who apparently disagreed with the idea that a Trinity God should be the One in charge of everything.

M. Also according to tradition, the chief demon, Lucifer/Satan also disagreed with the decision to raise the human species to full personhood, on the grounds that we would never be obedient enough to be worthy of Heaven. So he tried to derail our development by introducing the concepts of good and evil too early, expecting us to fight among ourselves, before our capacity for faith was fully ready. Today, we know about Satan, because he is still trying to derail our development. In fact, he is known as The Greatest Deceiver, and goes by a few other aliases, too.

How can God allow Plague?

I wasn't sure that I wanted to publish this, during this time of suffering. But this topic seems to be very much on everyone's minds, with lots of discussion going on. So I figured that, since I had already written it a month ago, I should go ahead and let you read it.

How can an all-powerful and all-loving God allow a plague? This is the kind of question that theologians and philosophers have haggled over for millennia. We call these issues "theodicy." And the short answer is: "Such troubles are an opportunity to for us to strengthen our faith." But to give such a facile answer does everyone, including God, a disservice.

We have to remember that this world is not ultimately important. It is only a test, an opportunity to build up our character and faith, and finally, a winnowing of the wheat from the chaff. We cannot see from the divine ultimate perspective, and thus cannot say whether either the reasons or the means serve the best interests of people or God. But we can be assured that He has the ability to be as careful as He should be to tailor each person's experience and give to them an adequate opportunity to seek the right path and relationship with Him. What He wants from us is repentance and a new resolve to seek his grace and will. He only wants us to turn and follow our deepest conscience, and desire a relationship with Him that will lead to our transformation.

God does not simply allow bad things to happen and get out of hand. Perhaps they are instigated by Satan, challenging Him to prove how He can be just and merciful, and care for us in trying times. But still, He has the power to turn everything to good for those who love, follow and trust in Him. If Satan reaps a harvest from among the unbelievers, deceivers and deniers, that is all they deserve, even though we may lament the loss of some good people who might have been saved.

Yet even those who are taken by the plague have had some opportunity to cry out for God's help, before they reach despair. We must assume of course, that whoever was sent to speak to them of the Gospel has done so, or they have been given a Bible, or heard a broadcast. That is a great part of the reason why we were given the commission to spread the Gospel to all the ends of the Earth, so that all who might hear God's voice and believe could be saved.

But when a plague, or a war, or any threat to our lives, is expected, we have a chance to turn to Him and appeal for rescue. If we do so, He is faithful to save us, even if that means taking us to Heaven. And often an even larger good is also served, as for example, when governments and society learn to make peace, or to be prepared with the means to care for their people, for the next time some disaster threatens.

This is how God touches each of us as individuals, according to our special needs and our relationship to Him.

* the faithful are held in his hand
   - we are reminded to pursue holiness
   - we are protected from calamity
   - our salvation is assured

* doubters are encouraged to join
   - agnostics are touched in their hearts
   - we are called to repentance

* the unaware are alerted
   - they receive a wake up call
   - the spiritual dimension is revealed

* unbelievers are warned & harried
   - atheists are frightened
   - refusers may be punished

We might object that some people live in societies that forbid the preaching of the Gospel. That is true, and it is sad, but there have always been places beyond our reach. We can only keep trying to break down the walls that divide us. Now, we have new ways and technologies to reach into those dark corners, with radio and TV. And we must encourage our leaders and politicians to use their influence and find diplomatic doors to open for cultural sharing, including the Gospel.

Or we might cry out for the baby souls who have never been given the chance to know Jesus, and that too is sad beyond words. But those immature souls have been suffering a plague of their own for generations, not just a few months. Let us not be hypocrites, blaming Satan for claiming young souls, when we ourselves have been rejecting them by allowing them to be killed before they are ever born. Abortion is a plague among us, and certainly is not acceptable in God's sight. We need to build many more orphanages, and make adoption a simple procedure.

But closer to home, what about restrictions placed on us, as part of society's efforts to stop this plague in our cities? These may be onerous, but they are temporary, and we should cooperate. Maybe you think that going to worship is worth dying for, but is it worth killing innocents for? We do not become martyrs based on our own stiff-necked insistence on disobeying authority. God has been patient with us to give us political authorities to govern our societies. They should be concerned for the safety, health and welfare of their citizens, and the people should be willing to obey those directives given to protect the interests of everyone.

If our leaders do really care for us, they should be willing to err on the side of safety and caution, even as they present a hopeful and optimistic message. God does not look at class, or respect persons, and neither should our leaders cater to the interests of the rich and powerful. But if we lack full confidence in those given power over us, let each of us do our best to discern what is right, and act to preserve everyone's health and safety. This is especially true when our failing to stay safe may become the cause for others to suffer and die.

We who believe in God should remember our history, even though we may not count ourselves among the Jews. In the early days, the children of Israel wanted a king to lead them, because other nations had a king. But God did not want to give them one, because human rulers can wander away from Him, and pursue their own desires. He wanted to be their only true and just King. Eventually, He reluctantly allowed it, and Saul was crowned, and he showed us why God was hesitant. After Saul came David, a shepherd boy who wrote psalms for God, and he was a great king, and though he sinned, he also prayed from a contrite heart. Only a few in King David's lineage truly desired to be faithful,  righteous rulers, and they had their faults. Still, David was the start of the Messianic lineage. In the end, the Lord God performed a real miracle, and his own Son became our One True King. If we accept Him, we are already citizens of the eternal Kingdom of God, and we know how we should love Him and each other, as He asks.

But, we must always remember, under all kinds of circumstances, that this world is not our real home. We belong to the eternal Kingdom of Heaven, where Jesus Christ has promised us a home. Until we have come to the end of this life, and risen to stand before God, what we see around us in this world can only be an approximation of the world to come. May God grant that we will always be trying to make it better by doing our part to follow his instructions and love each other as much as we can.

Theological Musings: the Redemption

Christology: fully God and fully human 

The dispute between the Catholic Church and the (Nestorian) Assyrian Church of the East has been mended. According to the
"Common Christological Declaration" signed on November 11, 1994, by both Pope John Paul II, and Patriarch Dinkha IV, which reads in part:

"The Word of God, Second Person of the Holy Trinity, became incarnate by the power of the Holy Spirit in assuming from the holy Virgin Mary a body animated by a rational soul, with which He was indissolubly united from the moment of  his conception. Therefore, our Lord Jesus Christ is true God and true man, perfect in his divinity and perfect in his humanity, consubstantial with the Father and consubstantial with us in all things but sin."

From which perspective, I conjecture:

Doesn't the fact that the Logos needed the help of the Spirit imply that He had emptied Himself (kenosis) of the infinitude of his divine powers (not to say that He set aside his Divinity, He did not) so that He could become human and experience what it means to be and feel human? So that, as He grew up, Jesus did not always have access to the miraculous potentials of God, or else He would never have understood our limitations. But then, as He grew to understand and chose to grasp his vocation and mission to proclaim the Gospel of the Kingdom of God, then his divine powers came into their fullness. And then, his identity was confirmed to Him, and became observable to those who knew Him. Up until that time, only in small ways, as hints, was his true identity known to Himself and to his Mother (who fully believed from the beginning).

At the Annunciation: an interesting idea 

When the virgin Mary accepted her part in God's will, choosing obedience when she might have refused, she "balanced the books" that our original mother, Eve, had left with an indelible debit. By her simple obedience, she cancelled the original sin of disobedience, and thus conceived the Savior of the World. By this act, she crushed the head of the serpent who had tempted Eve in the Garden.

And this acceptance of the Divine Plan brought forth the salvation of each and every one of us, inasmuch as we have faith in her son, who grew up  to be the promised Messiah, Jesus, and whom we acknowledge as the Son of God. Indeed, this is our debt of gratitude, which we owe to our spiritual Mother, Mary, and for which we offer our prayers through the Rosary. Thank you, Dear Mother Mary!

Hail Mary, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus. Holy Mary, Mother of God, pray for us sinners, now and at the hour of our death. Amen.

This also is why the Church teaches that Mary was born without original sin, because by her agreement to cooperate with the Holy Spirit she erased her original sin for all time, eternally, as ratified by the Holy Spirit in eternity when the Logos was conceived in her womb. By her willing cooperation, Mary became the Mother of God and the first human born without original sin since the Fall.

Her agreement acted to effect, and to confirm, and to show the effect of being born free of original sin. As an act with eternal consequences, it also happened in eternity, with the cooperation of the Holy Spirit, and thus was outside of the normal constraints of chronology.

In this way also, Jesus was born fully human (and fully divine) but without sin, and therefore not compelled to sin and fall short of God's glory -- which, of course, it would be impossible for the Logos to fall short, because He is God.

As the New Adam, Jesus could say, not "the woman beguiled me, and I did eat," but "the woman freed me, and I was born." Can there be any better accolade for a daughter of Eve, than to be praised for having erased the first disobedience? No wonder she was crowned as the Queen of Heaven.

But what is "original sin"?

I think of it as a stain, left upon our human volition, as a result of our being born human, the children of Adam and Eve. (If you insist on saying that we are ascended from the apes, it hardly makes much difference. It was God who raised us.) The problem lies in the fact that we can't obey the good and right dictates of our own consciences. We know, from the teaching given us by society, what is right and what is wrong. And all too often, we choose the wrong, or we stray as near to it as we think we can get away with. It is the inevitable result of once having satisfied our baser desires, which always reminds us of the pleasure and advantages of choosing what it now suggests. But it need not be the result of our own choices, rather it is ingrained into our ancestral constitution and wired into our minds, from before our birth. It is like an addiction, as if we know the thrill of using a subtle but powerful drug, and just as destructive.

Yet all of this is not to say that we must always be slaves to sin. It is possible to break the addiction, or at least to weaken its hold on us. That is what the Saints have done, with the help of the grace of God. And yet, society always reminds us of how badly we behave, even as it tempts us, and then demands that we follow the right path without any mistakes. The Torah and the Jewish Bible are particularly good as an example to show us the way that we should go, and at the same time shaming us with the guilt of always falling short.

And it is at this point that I must shift gears and assert that it takes a strong degree of faith to find the strength to combat these innate, and basically selfish, tendencies. Mere philosophy does not have the capacity to both inform and train our moral sensibilities, and to forgive and refocus our desires when we fail. If you have no God, your own rationality, and rationalizations, become your god, and you will eventually fail to rise again. But if you have found the One, Best and True God, who has revealed Himself through the scriptures of the Jews and Christians, then you have found the source of the strength you need.

And so it falls to us to adopt the mindset that finds it possible to believe. First, that there is a God, who created us and cares about us. Second, that He gave us the scriptures as a guide for our lives, and it grieves Him when we don't try to follow. And third, that Jesus came down from Heaven to become a man, so that we could know that we are truly understood and forgiven. And finally, that Jesus and the Father, God, can give us the Holy Spirit, to dwell within our hearts as a hope and a promise. Thus we can renew our strength, and pick ourselves up to keep on trying until maybe we will overcome our original brokenness. In this way, we may be transformed into His image and likeness as we were originally created to be, when we were still in the Garden of Eden.