While searching for news articles related to my gen. ed. subject at uni (Science & Religion), I came across this interesting article about 4 guys in America, who are literally trying to live out their dreams* while helping others do the same*.
*to some extent.
These guys are roughly my age, i.e. one or two years older than me. Like me, they've realised life is too short. Unlike me, they're doing something about it.
So they came up with a list of 100 things they wanted to do before they die. When I read through the list, I figured that most of the items were fairly trivial. But having a second think about it, I suppose these things mean a lot to those guys, in one way or another.
You don't have to have a life-changing experience for something to mean a lot to you - for instance, having fun and being happy means a lot to me. Might not happen as much as it used to, but that's a result of my own decisions, and external influences. As much as I could blame it on somebody or something else, ultimately I claim responsibility over who influences me or affects me with their opinions and commands etc.
But again, I digress.
Back to the topic - I visited the guys' site (www.theburiedlife.com) and decided to read the blog posts from the very beginning. I kept having mixed emotions, because I was initially attracted to their mission after reading that they're helping other people achieve [some of] their dreams where they can.. but at the same time, the guys are having a blast on the road, being supported by sponsors, doing crazy things like successfully passing through security and making their way into the MTV awards, etc etc. Essentially, the message I'm getting is that they're not selfless (a la charity/relief organisations), but they're not selfish either. When they say they're "4 regular guys", they mean it.
I enjoy visiting their blog, it makes for some fun reading. And when my internet picks up speed again, I'll definitely be checking out their videos on YouTube (their ultimate plan is to create a film of their experiences).
Yes, they are making a difference to people's lives, here and there.
But are they inspirational? I'm not entirely sure about that.. yet.
A response to the news article "Students help others discover buried dreams"
----------------
Now playing: John Mayer - Message In A Bottle (live)
Sunday, September 30, 2007
Wednesday, September 26, 2007
week 9 discussion posts #1-3
On the topic of Prayer
Like Miroula, I also think that having more people pray for a particular person doesn't necessarily imply that they're competing in a popularity contest against other "teams" or prayer groups. I take a slightly different slant on this concept - maybe its more the peoples' way of telling God that here is this fellow comrade, who needs extra care, or extra strength, as they battle through whatever obstacle or difficulty or illness they are faced with.
And as for the "orphan with no friends" - I think there are many people in the world who pray for "all the disadvantaged", or "all the poverty-stricken families", etc. And if they're really passionate about that prayer, i.e. not just going through the motions, that's fantastic.
---
Anthony wrote:
"I am not sure why God would help the sick or the invalid if he was the instigator of the illnesses originally. It would be like changing your mind and if you are always right as he is supposed to be then he just wouldn't."
This raises a different perspective in my mind - perhaps God isn't always right. Perhaps the concept of 'perfection' and 'Godliness' is a completely delusional goal created by humans.
And another idea - what if God didn't create or instigate illnesses, and such bodily malfunctions were a by-product of humans' interactions with one another, which God may not necessarily have control over (assuming free-agent theory)?
Because the more I think about it, the more illogical it seems for God to be able to know every single little detail of our lives, or to be 100% correct, from start to finish - it's like having to eternally sit through a movie(s) that you already know the ending(s) to.
And Ariella wrote:
"I am not sure that I would interpret G-d being always right as Him being right in every decision that He makes, but rather that He is always right ... in His process, in His sequence of decisions. I think that allows Him room to change His mind."
This makes a little confused - correct me if I'm wrong, but that comment seems a little redundant.. because if God is right in his process, that means he has made the right decisions, doesn't it? If the sequence is correct, then the decisions were also spot-on? Perhaps I've misinterpreted :)
This is a little off-topic, but I think what I'm having difficulty with the idea that God has laid out all His grand, perfect plans, and is now sitting back to enjoy the show, and therefore He has no reason to change his mind.
Rather, it makes more sense to me that He is an active participant in our lives and the universe, tweaking things as He goes because He doesn't know what lies at the end (if there is such a thing).
----
Anthony wrote:
"Does this mean that you don't believe that God is all-powerful and all-knowing?"; and
"If you think that god's relationship with his children is so inspirational, why does he let come to harm?"
To answer the first, I think it's quite possible that God is not all-knowing and all-powerful - in which case, prayer (to me) becomes more of a communication with somebody or something who is more of a friend, albeit a friend who has a bit more power that you do (perhaps). Not perfect, but not human either.
And heck, He might not even exist! In which case prayer is a way of making ourselves feel better, self-therapy so to speak.
To answer the second (which was actually asked to Claire but anyway) - people need to make mistakes to learn. A child knows to stay away from a flame after being burnt. No amount of "Don't do this, don't do that" will teach a child, nor stop them from doing what it is they've been prohibited to do, unless they're really obedient/un-inquisitive. The more overprotective a parent is, the more rebellious a child will be.
Everybody learns through their experiences (an easy example - you learn more in the workplace that you do reading a textbook about your job), and sometimes those experiences aren't pleasant. There will be pain and hurt, and there will be things that you instantly regret. But you become stronger and wiser. It's the whole concept of "you wouldn't appreciate happiness so much, if you didn't experience sadness every now and again"
If God were to protect us from all the "bad" things, we'd just be living, breathing potatoes. Your life is enriched by the plethora of emotions and events you experience.
That response was a little on the not-really-related-to-religion side, but oh well :)
Like Miroula, I also think that having more people pray for a particular person doesn't necessarily imply that they're competing in a popularity contest against other "teams" or prayer groups. I take a slightly different slant on this concept - maybe its more the peoples' way of telling God that here is this fellow comrade, who needs extra care, or extra strength, as they battle through whatever obstacle or difficulty or illness they are faced with.
And as for the "orphan with no friends" - I think there are many people in the world who pray for "all the disadvantaged", or "all the poverty-stricken families", etc. And if they're really passionate about that prayer, i.e. not just going through the motions, that's fantastic.
---
Anthony wrote:
"I am not sure why God would help the sick or the invalid if he was the instigator of the illnesses originally. It would be like changing your mind and if you are always right as he is supposed to be then he just wouldn't."
This raises a different perspective in my mind - perhaps God isn't always right. Perhaps the concept of 'perfection' and 'Godliness' is a completely delusional goal created by humans.
And another idea - what if God didn't create or instigate illnesses, and such bodily malfunctions were a by-product of humans' interactions with one another, which God may not necessarily have control over (assuming free-agent theory)?
Because the more I think about it, the more illogical it seems for God to be able to know every single little detail of our lives, or to be 100% correct, from start to finish - it's like having to eternally sit through a movie(s) that you already know the ending(s) to.
And Ariella wrote:
"I am not sure that I would interpret G-d being always right as Him being right in every decision that He makes, but rather that He is always right ... in His process, in His sequence of decisions. I think that allows Him room to change His mind."
This makes a little confused - correct me if I'm wrong, but that comment seems a little redundant.. because if God is right in his process, that means he has made the right decisions, doesn't it? If the sequence is correct, then the decisions were also spot-on? Perhaps I've misinterpreted :)
This is a little off-topic, but I think what I'm having difficulty with the idea that God has laid out all His grand, perfect plans, and is now sitting back to enjoy the show, and therefore He has no reason to change his mind.
Rather, it makes more sense to me that He is an active participant in our lives and the universe, tweaking things as He goes because He doesn't know what lies at the end (if there is such a thing).
----
Anthony wrote:
"Does this mean that you don't believe that God is all-powerful and all-knowing?"; and
"If you think that god's relationship with his children is so inspirational, why does he let come to harm?"
To answer the first, I think it's quite possible that God is not all-knowing and all-powerful - in which case, prayer (to me) becomes more of a communication with somebody or something who is more of a friend, albeit a friend who has a bit more power that you do (perhaps). Not perfect, but not human either.
And heck, He might not even exist! In which case prayer is a way of making ourselves feel better, self-therapy so to speak.
To answer the second (which was actually asked to Claire but anyway) - people need to make mistakes to learn. A child knows to stay away from a flame after being burnt. No amount of "Don't do this, don't do that" will teach a child, nor stop them from doing what it is they've been prohibited to do, unless they're really obedient/un-inquisitive. The more overprotective a parent is, the more rebellious a child will be.
Everybody learns through their experiences (an easy example - you learn more in the workplace that you do reading a textbook about your job), and sometimes those experiences aren't pleasant. There will be pain and hurt, and there will be things that you instantly regret. But you become stronger and wiser. It's the whole concept of "you wouldn't appreciate happiness so much, if you didn't experience sadness every now and again"
If God were to protect us from all the "bad" things, we'd just be living, breathing potatoes. Your life is enriched by the plethora of emotions and events you experience.
That response was a little on the not-really-related-to-religion side, but oh well :)
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
mini reflections on discussion posts
While catching up on a few discussion threads, one Jeff's posts caught my eye.
He said: "After all, if God gave you life, it is his choice to do whatever he wants with it."
But, is it really?
I would have thought that God would have created us so that we could be independent beings, i.e. let us do whatever we want, even if it means that some people will be non-believers.. by creating us as individuals, that's the risk He should be willing to take, right?
Although I suppose that would be a bit stupid. I think we naturally take pride in our work, and similarly, God would like to do the same, so perhaps it makes sense that He should have the ability to steer us in whichever direction He desires, whether it's instilling fear in us so that we don't recklessly jump off a cliff in the name of extreme fun, or whether it's making love blossom between two people, so their lives become brighter.
Jeff also wrote: "Sometimes I have to side with the logic that God knows, but God can't help."
Maybe not a case of can't help, but chooses not to help..
He said: "After all, if God gave you life, it is his choice to do whatever he wants with it."
But, is it really?
I would have thought that God would have created us so that we could be independent beings, i.e. let us do whatever we want, even if it means that some people will be non-believers.. by creating us as individuals, that's the risk He should be willing to take, right?
Although I suppose that would be a bit stupid. I think we naturally take pride in our work, and similarly, God would like to do the same, so perhaps it makes sense that He should have the ability to steer us in whichever direction He desires, whether it's instilling fear in us so that we don't recklessly jump off a cliff in the name of extreme fun, or whether it's making love blossom between two people, so their lives become brighter.
Jeff also wrote: "Sometimes I have to side with the logic that God knows, but God can't help."
Maybe not a case of can't help, but chooses not to help..
week 8 discussion posts #3-4
On the topic of Providence, Free Will & Suffering
Discussion posts below altered slightly for the purposes of this blog
Responding to Priyanka - I felt that Ariella was implying that humans will inevitably live in a world that includes evil and suffering, because it is not possible for them to be "free-willed" and make the "right" decisions all the time. And I agree with this to an extent, in that yes, humans will inevitably make mistakes, the wrong decisions, etc. But that doesn't necessarily mean that we as humans will breed an environment with lots of negativity and general unpleasantness.
Perhaps such an environment would exist temporarily - but surely it would be possible for humans to exist co-operatively with one another and their surroundings - a Utopian ideal, I know, but if you can dream it, perhaps you can live it too. (I hope all the above makes sense!)
---
Miroula had a really interesting question. Perhaps humans had to develop an understanding of right and wrong, good and evil. So the basic emotions such as joy, fear, anger, sorrow were (and of course continue to be) an inherent part of human beings, but perhaps it wasn't until humans were exposed to different situations and a variety of interactions with one another, that they began to develop certain reactions to particular events.. and maybe then they developed a like/dislike of that event, which then caused their mind to separate the 'good' from the 'bad'.
Basically what I'm trying to say is, perhaps humans developed a sense of what was evil and what it meant to suffer, from their own feelings during certain life experiences.. so it didn't actually exist to begin with, it was a human concept, in a similar way that Time is considered to be a human concept (I think?).
Discussion posts below altered slightly for the purposes of this blog
Responding to Priyanka - I felt that Ariella was implying that humans will inevitably live in a world that includes evil and suffering, because it is not possible for them to be "free-willed" and make the "right" decisions all the time. And I agree with this to an extent, in that yes, humans will inevitably make mistakes, the wrong decisions, etc. But that doesn't necessarily mean that we as humans will breed an environment with lots of negativity and general unpleasantness.
Perhaps such an environment would exist temporarily - but surely it would be possible for humans to exist co-operatively with one another and their surroundings - a Utopian ideal, I know, but if you can dream it, perhaps you can live it too. (I hope all the above makes sense!)
---
Miroula had a really interesting question. Perhaps humans had to develop an understanding of right and wrong, good and evil. So the basic emotions such as joy, fear, anger, sorrow were (and of course continue to be) an inherent part of human beings, but perhaps it wasn't until humans were exposed to different situations and a variety of interactions with one another, that they began to develop certain reactions to particular events.. and maybe then they developed a like/dislike of that event, which then caused their mind to separate the 'good' from the 'bad'.
Basically what I'm trying to say is, perhaps humans developed a sense of what was evil and what it meant to suffer, from their own feelings during certain life experiences.. so it didn't actually exist to begin with, it was a human concept, in a similar way that Time is considered to be a human concept (I think?).
Monday, September 24, 2007
keep your friends close, but your enemies closer?
I read this article about a priest who was attacked by an intruder attempting to rob their Divine Word Mission. When interviewed, the priest said:
"I need to pray for the one who attacked me... I feel when I pray for him in the future he can be better - everyone wants to live in harmony."
It's not like it was a peaceful hit and run either. The priest goes on to say:
"At the time I was shocked. After he attacked me I didn't recognise he used a knife to attack me. He hit me but then when I saw my blood shedding I thought 'What happened?' I didn't feel any pain at the time so I was shocked. It was terrible."
Most other people would try and hunt down their attacker to ensure justice and appropriate punishment or penalty. But despite the shock and the injury, the priest chose to forgive his attacker by praying for him. To some people, such behaviour would be viewed as ridiculous. Why pray for somebody who almost killed you?
To me, I think the priest is showing God that he is capable of accepting that we must endure suffering throughout our lives, no matter how big or small, or how frequent, and it is the behaviour we portray in our most trialling moments, that illustrates our faith.
The reason I'm writing about this is because this priest's reaction to his attacker reminds me of the South African church congregation that was mentioned in the Week 8 lecture on Providence, Free Will & Suffering, where "On 25 July 1993 St James church in Capetown was attacked by men with rifles and grenades during the evening service. Several people were killed and many wounded."
And one of the church members then goes on to say that despite the tragedy, they are thankful that God thought them worthy of receiving this suffering. It's a totally different reaction to what you would expect of most people.
I have mixed emotions on this topic. Part of me respects the strength of these peoples' faiths in praying for their attackers, but another part of me feels 'odd' (for lack of a better word), because their attackers won't care about whether or not they're being prayed for. Although I suppose it's not that the victims are trying to communicate with the villains; rather, they're communicating with God in the belief or hope that God will make the villains seek repentance and therefore step away from a path of destruction and darkness, onto the road of truth and light.
A response to the article "Stabbed priest prays for attacker"
"I need to pray for the one who attacked me... I feel when I pray for him in the future he can be better - everyone wants to live in harmony."
It's not like it was a peaceful hit and run either. The priest goes on to say:
"At the time I was shocked. After he attacked me I didn't recognise he used a knife to attack me. He hit me but then when I saw my blood shedding I thought 'What happened?' I didn't feel any pain at the time so I was shocked. It was terrible."
Most other people would try and hunt down their attacker to ensure justice and appropriate punishment or penalty. But despite the shock and the injury, the priest chose to forgive his attacker by praying for him. To some people, such behaviour would be viewed as ridiculous. Why pray for somebody who almost killed you?
To me, I think the priest is showing God that he is capable of accepting that we must endure suffering throughout our lives, no matter how big or small, or how frequent, and it is the behaviour we portray in our most trialling moments, that illustrates our faith.
The reason I'm writing about this is because this priest's reaction to his attacker reminds me of the South African church congregation that was mentioned in the Week 8 lecture on Providence, Free Will & Suffering, where "On 25 July 1993 St James church in Capetown was attacked by men with rifles and grenades during the evening service. Several people were killed and many wounded."
And one of the church members then goes on to say that despite the tragedy, they are thankful that God thought them worthy of receiving this suffering. It's a totally different reaction to what you would expect of most people.
I have mixed emotions on this topic. Part of me respects the strength of these peoples' faiths in praying for their attackers, but another part of me feels 'odd' (for lack of a better word), because their attackers won't care about whether or not they're being prayed for. Although I suppose it's not that the victims are trying to communicate with the villains; rather, they're communicating with God in the belief or hope that God will make the villains seek repentance and therefore step away from a path of destruction and darkness, onto the road of truth and light.
A response to the article "Stabbed priest prays for attacker"
one of the most beautiful songs I've heard
Ennio Morricone's Love Theme from Cinema Paradiso.
It begins on the piano.
At first, the notes resonate up from the bass, pure and deep.
Then an alto melody floats down from above,
free of tempo and full of emotion.
The two hands complement each other well, flowing in delicious harmony..
And then the piano is joined by a violin, filled with desire and longing.
You can hear a certain wistfulness in the strings.
A chorus of violins sweep onto the musical scene, singing in unison with the piano.
Bit by bit, the melody grows..
A saxophone shadows the piano in another repeat of the main theme as the violins continue to sing passionately in the background.
The melody pulses with life, bursting into full bloom,
Ebbing and flowing like the waves that are pulled to and fro by the ocean.
Bit by bit, the melody slows..
and the soul is soothed.
---
When you think about it, it's a really simple song.. and that's what makes it beautiful.
Like Leonardo da Vinci said,
It begins on the piano.
At first, the notes resonate up from the bass, pure and deep.
Then an alto melody floats down from above,
free of tempo and full of emotion.
The two hands complement each other well, flowing in delicious harmony..
And then the piano is joined by a violin, filled with desire and longing.
You can hear a certain wistfulness in the strings.
A chorus of violins sweep onto the musical scene, singing in unison with the piano.
Bit by bit, the melody grows..
A saxophone shadows the piano in another repeat of the main theme as the violins continue to sing passionately in the background.
The melody pulses with life, bursting into full bloom,
Ebbing and flowing like the waves that are pulled to and fro by the ocean.
Bit by bit, the melody slows..
and the soul is soothed.
---
When you think about it, it's a really simple song.. and that's what makes it beautiful.
Like Leonardo da Vinci said,
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication."
----------------
Now playing: Ennio Morricone - Love Theme, Cinema Paradiso
Sunday, September 23, 2007
did God create life on Mars before Earth?
"An orbiting spacecraft has found evidence of what look like seven caves on the slopes of a Martian volcano, the space agency NASA said...
..'Whether these are just deep vertical shafts or openings into spacious caverns, they are entries to the subsurface of Mars,, said USGS researcher Tim Titus.
'Somewhere on Mars, caves might provide a protected niche for past or current life, or shelter for humans in the future.'"
Although the article notes that it was unlikely that these particular caves would have sheltered any kind of lifeforms (due to their immense altitude), the article got me thinking. What if we really are in a cyclic kind of universe? Maybe we're the nth civilization, and God created life on Mars before creating life on Earth, and once Earth is over and done with, he'll move onto Jupiter.. maybe not, but you get the idea.
It's an interesting thought. There's no real way to prove or disprove it, because we only know ourselves, our own Earthly existence. Perhaps our methods of measuring the ages of the planets are wrong, and they've been around for longer (or shorter) than we think. Of course this is all under the assumption that God exists as Creator, and He's been busy building all these universes, and different planets of different sizes and orbits..
Come to think of it, He must really like circles..
A response to the article "NASA spacecraft finds possible Mars caves"
..'Whether these are just deep vertical shafts or openings into spacious caverns, they are entries to the subsurface of Mars,, said USGS researcher Tim Titus.
'Somewhere on Mars, caves might provide a protected niche for past or current life, or shelter for humans in the future.'"
Although the article notes that it was unlikely that these particular caves would have sheltered any kind of lifeforms (due to their immense altitude), the article got me thinking. What if we really are in a cyclic kind of universe? Maybe we're the nth civilization, and God created life on Mars before creating life on Earth, and once Earth is over and done with, he'll move onto Jupiter.. maybe not, but you get the idea.
It's an interesting thought. There's no real way to prove or disprove it, because we only know ourselves, our own Earthly existence. Perhaps our methods of measuring the ages of the planets are wrong, and they've been around for longer (or shorter) than we think. Of course this is all under the assumption that God exists as Creator, and He's been busy building all these universes, and different planets of different sizes and orbits..
Come to think of it, He must really like circles..
A response to the article "NASA spacecraft finds possible Mars caves"
it's all about perspective
I'm a big fan of the National Geographic, mostly for their articles on wildlife and natural habitats, and the visual splendours they provide with their photographs from all over the world. I was just browsing a section of their website titled "Your Shot", which I think is basically a compilation of the best photos submitted by readers of NG.
There's this photo of a flower where the shot has zoomed in on its centre - I think it's a tropical flower of sorts. The colours are quite rich and vibrant, and it's not a bad photo. The shot was taken by a reader named Tomasz, and his caption reads,
My instant reaction was "Of course they do". But after a moment's reflection, I found myself applying this comment to life situations. Every day we get caught up in all the little things, and we stress, and we fret, and we fight about things we really don't need to be worrying about. The saying "making mountains out of molehills" comes to mind at this point.
What I'm try to get at, is that I think we lose perspective all too often, because it's easy to lose sight of something that is right before your eyes. Every now and then we should take a step back from our lives, take some time out to reflect on our position, and step back into the fray, feeling refreshed and re-energized. I've found that this works best if you drive out and sit on a beach, or a cliff overlooking the sea, at a time when there's nobody else around (late night, early morning).. the sound of the waves breaking against the shore or the rocks is a cleansing harmony.
There's this photo of a flower where the shot has zoomed in on its centre - I think it's a tropical flower of sorts. The colours are quite rich and vibrant, and it's not a bad photo. The shot was taken by a reader named Tomasz, and his caption reads,
Isn't it amazing how different things look up close?
My instant reaction was "Of course they do". But after a moment's reflection, I found myself applying this comment to life situations. Every day we get caught up in all the little things, and we stress, and we fret, and we fight about things we really don't need to be worrying about. The saying "making mountains out of molehills" comes to mind at this point.
What I'm try to get at, is that I think we lose perspective all too often, because it's easy to lose sight of something that is right before your eyes. Every now and then we should take a step back from our lives, take some time out to reflect on our position, and step back into the fray, feeling refreshed and re-energized. I've found that this works best if you drive out and sit on a beach, or a cliff overlooking the sea, at a time when there's nobody else around (late night, early morning).. the sound of the waves breaking against the shore or the rocks is a cleansing harmony.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)