Old Year’s Resolutions? (Or, perhaps, something yet more radical?)

Again we come to the end of another year… nearly. In fact we’ve actually got just short of another whole month before its end. The trouble is it seems to have gone awfully quickly, and I feel my life is little better now than it has been for the past quite a number of years. So, I’ve been thinking- instead of waiting a whole ‘nother month before making New Year’s Resolutions, how about finishing the old year the way you mean to go on? If one is really to make such a radical difference, why not start now and not wait until some arbitrary start-over time, which perhaps means you aren’t really serious?

It’s not just the problems in my own life I need to get right, of course, which are numerous. I’ve been wondering about how screwed up the world is. I amongst all the arguments I’ve been having on YouTube about the merits or otherwise of free-market capitalism as opposed to Marxism and everything in between, wondering about the ongoing economic turmoil and the hopeless state of politics, whether we ought to remain in the EU or not, &c., it rather strikes me that there is something very wrong. Even if we are to assume that capitalism has played its part in development and reducing poverty- yet we should still realise there are still a lot of desparately poor people in the world, a lot of environmental damage, and that business is taking its share of the blame. But what drives business? Us. It only exists as long as someone is buying its good and services, if people want what it has to offer, or allow ourselves to be conned into believing so. I wonder what all these campaigns, all this politicking and so on is really doing. We need to change first. So, perhaps there is an even greater need to make a real difference than just personal ones.

Of course one can hardly escape a certain festival already being hyped up as part of Phase 2 of the silly season. And we are once again needing to be challenged as to whether it should really be about the baby in a manger who would grow up to be nailed to a tree, or the portly chap with the white beard, red coat and reindeer. And another video, being shared by a certain friend on a certain social networking site, certainly makes me wonder all the more. And whether we need a paradigm shift in the way we think. The video, by the way, is here:

Really the two representative figures could not be more different. One represents ultimate self-sacrifice and selflessness, and moreover, of the God we Christians are supposed to understand. The other represents the secular (if not pagan), materialistic, worldly side of things, that if it is selfless at all, gives to its own and rewards only those it thinks deserve it. (The man who died on the tree did it to redeem those who certainly deserved nothing of the sort.)

All this digresses of course from the somewhat trivial idea of making a few small resolutions in order to improve one’s own life. Perhaps indeed though one ought to start somewhere. The question is, exactly where? I shall perhaps give myself a little time to think about it, and return to it in another post in a day or two. Meanwhile, I must start by doing something positive and serious before the next 24 hours is up.

Meanwhile, a question- what would your Old Year’s Resolutions be? What suggestions do you have for mine? How would you have them not just to change your own life, but impact on others and maybe the world? (If we start small, it might build up…)

And by the way, the baby in the manger who grew up to be nailed to a tree and die is, of course, Jesus. I would suggest He also didn’t stay dead, but rose to new life, so that we too, could die and live again. That, I contend, is the essence of real change. The thing is, do we trust Him to do that? (If, indeed, some of us believe in Him at all?)

Addendum, 1st January 2022: This post has been edited for reasons of personal privacy.

Religion, atheism, moral awkwardnesses, and all that (pt. 1)

Now I have other, much better and perhaps more interesting or amusing things I could be talking about on this blog. But after reading a certain post on a certain blog, and having got into heated arguments in the comments section of that post with the blog’s author, and on a certain discussion forum elsewhere on the internet having come across much the same sort of issue, I feel like it is about time I addressed certain issues which, to say the least, are going to be pretty divisive.

(And yes, after reading the above, some of my readers are wondering what the bleeping heck I am on about. Why can’t this guy just write clearly?)

It is often the criticism made of atheists and skeptics that ‘religion’ is pretty much the cause of most or all of the world’s problems, responsible for all manner of wars, injustices and atrocities. And whilst indeed what is commonly called religion has played a contributing factor in many of these things, often it is given far more credit than it deserves. It’s not like mankind has not managed to commit wars, injustices and atrocities completely independently of religion, after all, and may or may not even have tacked on religion as an excuse. Think about it: were the Troubles in Northern Ireland, say, a conflict concerning Protestants and Catholics? Or about whether Northern Ireland should be part of Britain, or part of the Republic of Ireland? And what about Emperor Constantine, the man who is credited with making Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire, really conquering by the sign of and in the name of Christ? Or was he just using the faith for political gain and as a convenient way of uniting the already fractious empire? And did that act, ultimately, do more to damage the perception of the faith than anythng else in history? After all, it is a sad thing when something which is supposedly not of this world, which is supposed to stand headlong against all the world’s evil, corruption and wickedness, is co-opted by it and used to justify that very evil?

Or is that really so?

Because it is also the same criticism of those atheists and skeptics that said Christianity in particular, whilst supposedly claiming to be all about love and righteousness, is anything but, and that its foundational documents, that collection of writings called the Holy Bible, is full of all manner of atrocities including slavery, genocide, oppression of women and more.

The trouble is, on the face of it they might seem to be right.

Yet in ways, not all is as it seems. For instance, many of these allegations prove to be completely unfounded when you understand the text for what it really is, the context of the ancient world (which let’s not forget was not only operating under much different constraints to now, but did not and cannot be expected to share all of our values and presuppositions about what is right), and so on.  I don’t claim to understand everything about this of course, as I am no scholar or full-time apologist, but it certainly makes for enlightening reading. Yet other things, when viewed from a radically different angle, turn out not to be unspeakable evils, but perhaps unfortunate though necessary ones. In future posts I may try to address these issues in more depth, though time, space and willingness do not permit such in this one.

It might be also worth pointing out that many views the atheists and skeptics themselves tend to hold are far from perfect. I could mention certain things such as abortion, say, though at the same time I realise that particular issue is not simply divided by matters of faith. There are “pro-life” atheists and quite probably people of faith who are probably ‘pro-choice’. (Both of those terms are lacking.) I could mention the historical example of Marxist-Leninist communism, which also sought to do away with religion (and yes, a certain fellow-blogger who knows who she is, it was an atheistic value-system as well as a political ideology) in the name of providing a fairer and better world. At the same time, it is unfair to assume that all atheists are like the communists became, or to assume they share that political ideal. After all, Ayn Rand despised Communism and Christianity alike, in favour of an also extreme laissez-faire ideology the complete opposite of communism. I could use the example of Rand too, though I dare say many atheists despise her views too. But it all goes to show how rejection of religion does not imply whatever else we believe is automatically better.

And ultimately, I would like to show my faith as not one of evil but of good- of love shown to those whom all others have rejected, of sins forgiven, of the sick healed and the hungry fed and injustice replaced by justice. Of a God who is Love, not some vindictive and uncaring monster.

I very much doubt I can do it, but as the Apostle Peter said, “always be ready to give an answer to everyone who asks you a reason concerning the hope that is in you…” (1 Peter 3:15, WEB)- and that is hope, not despair and disbelief.