Think Rightly About Yourselves
[This is a repost from 2013 with an additional translation added to the list below]
Text
Λέγω γὰρ διὰ τῆς χάριτος τῆς δοθείσης μοι παντὶ τῷ ὄντι ἐν ὑμῖν μὴ ὑπερφρονεῖν παρ᾽ ὃ δεῖ φρονεῖν ἀλλὰ φρονεῖν εἰς τὸ σωφρονεῖν, ἑκάστῳ ὡς ὁ θεὸς ἐμέρισεν μέτρον πίστεως. (Rom 12:3 BGT)
Translation
Upon first glance the obvious translation/meaning is, "For, I say to all of you through the grace which was given to me, do not think about yourselves more highly than it is necessary to think, but rather think [w/respect to yourselves] in a manner that leads to temperance; each one as God has given a measure of faith. (Romans 12:3)
Don't Be Yourself
You've heard it before. You have some problem and well-meaning p
If "be yourself" means "be honest about yourself, your weaknesses, and your abilities, lie neither to yourself or others" then I agree. If it means
The Loquacious Atheist: He Is Speaking Pure Gibberish
When I heard that Daniel Dennett's new book on consciousness was released, I didn't care. He has a tendency to argue in this format:
- Here's an idea it isn't worth explaining from the past.
- Here's my alternative that uses sciency words.
- It cannot be explained by current science, but with enough scientific advances, it obviously will be explained.
- Logic, etc.
I'm hardly exaggerating. It's like Sam Harris, but less endearing because it isn't podcast format and he doesn't look like Zoolander. I stopped reading Dennett's books when I recognized that pattern.
Abba Joseph, Beetle Kings, and Jesus
This little piece from the desert Fathers helpfully illustrates Matthew 5:14-16:
Abba Lot went to see Abba Joseph and said to him, “Abba, as far as I can I say my Little Office. I fast a little. I pray. I meditate. I live in peace and as far as I can, I purify my thoughts. What else am I to do?” “What else,” Abba Lot says, “can I do?” Then the old man stood up, stretched his hands towards heaven and his fingers became like ten lamps of fire, and he said to him, “If you will, you can become all flame.”
Jesus, in the passage mentioned, challenges his disciples to be the light of the world. Abba Joseph above tells Abba Lot, "If you will [desire to be a light], you can become all flame."
Remembering: Part 2
Previously, I mentioned the bizarre timing.
Two years ago, around the end of October, I ran into a friend at the bookstore. He was bandaged and seemed rather disheveled. He was wearing a hospital bracelet. A few days or weeks later (I can't remember), his wife called to let me know that he had disappeared. I figured that he was as good as dead. And so for the past two years, I listen to some of the music he wrote in November and I think briefly about our friendship, what I learned, what I could do better in current friendships, and pray for his family, etc.
Eric Johnson's Proposal for Christian Reading
Eric L. Johnson, Foundations for Soul Care: A Christian Psychology Proposal[1]
Below is a summary of Johnson’s rules for Christian reading. It’s a useful part of his book. Because these are my own words, anything poorly stated is my own fault, not Johnson’s.
- The goal of Christian reading, even leisure reading, is conformity to Christ. Therefore what and how we read matter.
- The Holy Spirit is the Christian reading light. This metaphor indicates that while reading, the Christian is cooperating with the Holy Spirit in coming to have self-knowledge, knowledge about what is being read, knowledge about the author, knowledge about the world, and knowledge about God.
- New Christians should ask wise guides for help in reading, both what to read, and how to understand it.
- There is a natural hierarchy in the texts we read:
- The canon of Scripture.
- Classic texts of the Christian traditions.
- Other quality texts (I would add, classical texts of one’s national, ethnic, or intellectual tradition).
- Inferior texts that aren’t worth reading.
- Bad texts which draw the readers from what is true, good, or beautiful.
- Banned texts, some texts are simply justifiably censured and censored.
- Non-Canonical texts need to be read with trust and suspicion.
- Reading non-Christian texts wisely increases wisdom and is therefore worthwhile.
References
[1] Eric L. Johnson, Foundations for Soul Care: A Christian Psychology Proposal (InterVarsity Press, 2007), 222-226.Vice Promotes Vices?
I don’t make it a habit of reading Vice magazine. But I clicked a link today that referenced a recently released study I had read a few months ago. The author let it be known that her whole point was to try to demonize male self-improvement by associating all masculinity with the dreaded Trumppernaut. But she also made several basic errors, like implicitly supporting socialism, failing to observe that the results aren’t indicative of individual character but policy preferences, or that other things like education among net-contributors also predicts aversion to wealth redistribution. Anyway, when my eyes flitted away from the cacophony of disconnected claims clustered around interview quotes, I saw several Vice headlines:
Goals, Systems, or Virtues?
Scott Adams is of the opinion that goals are for losers and systems are for winners. The reasoning is that goals make it psychologically easy to stop doing everything it took to achieve them once you achieve them (this problem is the main point of the book The Slight Edge). But not only so, goals make it harder to do the needful thing, because every day you haven't achieved your goal, wake up defeated. So he recommends systems, daily/weekly, monthly tasks that move you in a positive direction regardless of the final outcome.
The American Creed
While I am a Christian and therefore find allegiance to the kingdom of God, the person of Christ, my family, and personal virtue to trump loyalty to a nation or a state, I still really love being American. I went through a brief phase where my interest in Anabaptist theology and concerns for the dangers of statist loyalty and patriotic idolatry caused me to through out any concept of national identity with its abuses. That’s what Seneca and many of the early church fathers did with anger, it’s dangerous, so root it all out. But I do love America. I am, as David Bentley Hart says of himself, something of an american chauvinist. And so this closing salvo from Paul Johnson’s book, A History of the American People was touching to me, if not naive in some respects (I typed it because I wanted the passage to stick in my mind, any errors below are my own). It’s worth reading without my rambling reflections beneath it:
The Pincer Attack
One of the mostly commonly utilized conceptual weapons in the rhetorical attack on being a normal person is ‘sexual fluidity.’
In a nutshell: “Sexual fluidity is one or more changes in sexuality or sexual identity (sometimes known as sexual orientation identity).” It’s a favorite concept among third wave feminists, especially those who argue against hetero-normativity (which is another way of saying, ‘reproductively viable intercourse’). It is especially important to these theorizers because sexual fluidity is allegedly very common among women and therefore central to female experience. I suspect it’s actually common due to the difficulty some feminist theorists have finding partners of the opposite sex.