"the maker of the world with a belly button."
"the heart-stopping realization that in him you are part of something ancient, endless, unstoppable, and unfathomable. And that he, who can dig the Grand Canyon with his pinkie, thinks you're worth his death on Roman timber."
Next Door Savior became the obvious choice for our Sunday school class this past week. the work by max lucado touches on the fact that there is no person Jesus wouldn't try to reach and no place he wasn't willing to go. Jesus was just like each of us and talked to the lowest of society. He tried his best to reach each and everyone of them during his time on earth.
he has been where we have been. because he found each of us worthy, we should find each other worth. of friendship. love. grace.
At the end of the day, Jesus was entirely God and entirely man. He understood our struggles and took them on anyway. next time you think of how Jesus walked on this earth, just remember. he had a belly button. he also took time to give each of us our own.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Next Door Savior.
Posted by Samantha at 6:46 AM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Sorry, I removed my last post to edit it. I'm afraid it sounded too aggressive instead of assertive. That's not how I wanted to come across. Here's the new (improved?) version of my post:
___________________
I know it's taboo to comment on another's religious faith, but I hope you can accept that I'm responding to your blog without malice.
First, I'd like to point out that it's difficult for religious believers and others (non-believers?) to communicate on the topic because people who are religious are able to be because they have faith. That is, you're able to believe in your religion because you choose to believe, even when there's reason not to, because of faith (not because of science, logic, etc.). A person cannot prove religion to a nonbeliever; it's simply not provable. You have to believe because you want to, because you have faith. A non-religious person, on the other hand, does not have faith, and faith isn't something that can be forced on another. This makes it difficult to talk on the subject because one has to talk from the perspective of faith, and the other wants to hear something concrete, absolute, and logic-based. I think this is probably what people mean when they use the expression, "we're on a different wave-length."
That disclaimer behind us, I'd like to say that I don't really understand your blog. How can someone be entirely a god and entirely a man? A god (especially in a monotheistic religion) is the ruler and creator of the universe. It's something that's supposedly omnipotent and all-knowing; it's a miracle maker. A man is none of these things. Man is mortal, fallible, limited. These definitions are (logically) mutually exclusive. Something cannot be both fallible and omnipotent. In terms of logic and physics, no person can be two mutually exclusive things at once. How can you believe and state something that is such a logical fallacy? Obviously because its something you want to believe and embrace...
...even though it's impossible and illogical.
This probably comes across like I'm attacking you and everyone of your faith. My real intentions are to show you how religious posts sound to someone who's not religious.
I don't know if you're into historical lessons or not. Perhaps it doesn't matter to a faith-based system; I'm not sure. I'd like to point out, though, that Jesus was considered mortal by most until it was decided (through vote) that he was a man *and* a god... specifically, and the son of the Christian/Jewish god. This, in turn, created its own set of problems as Christians had to scramble to explain how there is only one true god, but there's still god *and* Jesus. I believe followers began to use the trinity and the shamrock symbol to demonstrate how this is (sort of) possible. I believe these explanations are truly good enough for believers who already have the faith necessary to believe it. I'd just like to point out that it's not good enough for non-believers.
OK, Andrew and I had a disagreement. He seems to think it's not common knowledge that St. Patrick used to the Irish Pagans' shamrock to teach them about the trinity. I thought it was. Apparently, I just know weird trivia. I'm not about to do another repost to fix that, though.
Post a Comment