So, many of you may have already seen this documentary. I am sure that you have your opinions and some of you may have already written it off. Well, I just saw it for the first time tonight, and was elated to hear and see some of the issues that I discuss being brought to the forefront - questions about HOW we treat one another, not simply what we stand for.
We are free to disagree. And we are free to be unproductive, angry, bitter, condescending, hate-filled individuals. But if we call ourselves Christians, we're actually not. If we are a Christ follower, we willingly return that gift of free will back to the One who gave it to us, and we commit that gift to His greatest purpose. And I think this film really helped shed light on what so many Christians are trying to do in this country.
Committing our gift of free will to back to God means that we will go where he wants us to go and love who he wants us to love when he tells us to. And whom do we love? Well, sometimes we like to refer to them as the "lost." Jesus called them "the least of my brethren." So if you are a Christian, who qualifies as the "least"? The homeless? The poor? The infirmed? The dying? That's what we like to think, but I have always felt there is more to it than that.
Scripture has told me that the only "religion" that is pure and faultless and acceptable in the eyes of the Lord is to care for the widowed and orphaned in their distress and to keep one's self pure. So, are the least of them widows and orphans? No. We are ALL the least of his brothers. Straight, gay, male, female, rich, poor, homeless, addicted, pregnant, sterile, black, white, or mixed/other.
Honestly, how old does a person have to be before we stop considering them an orphan? How much time has to pass before a man or woman is no longer considered widowed? And how many of us can fall into that category - especially if, as Christians, we look at these people in the light of their orphaned state with respect to a relationship with "Father" God? Orphaned does not mean that the parents are dead, just that the children have no relationship with them for one reason or another. Isn't that the same with some of the people Christians consider "lost"?
There can be no accident that the two great commandments are to love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, all thy mind and all thy spirit/soul, and the second is to love thy neighbor as thyself, and the only pure religion is to care for widowed and orphaned in their distress and stay pure. They are commanding the same thing! In another way, if you are commanded to Love God with ALL your heart, and loving God is to be obedient to His commands, and His command is love thy neighbor as thyself, and ALL is 100%, how can we have any capacity left to love our neighbors?
It's BECAUSE loving our neighbors IS obedient to God and therefore IS loving him. You cannot love God without loving your neighbors. You cannot be obedient to God without loving your neighbors. You can't love your neighbors without caring for the widowed and orphaned in their distress, and that includes everyone! This doesn't mean that as Christians we are called to accept, love and endorse every lifestyle or action. But it does mean that we are called to respect our neighbors freedom to make those choices, to love them in spite of those choices because God loves them and us equally.
I know right now, some of you are arguing in your heads that the Great Commission calls Christians to go forth and spread the Gospel. No arguments here. My questions are not the "what to do?" it's the "how we're doing it?"
I recently attended a volunteer appreciation night at The Rock Church in San Diego. Over 4000 volunteers were in attendance. These people had logged over 253,000 hours of community service in the last year! And they did it much in the same way that the end of Lord, Save Us demonstrates. They are there to be the body of Christ. To be his hand that holds, his arms that hug, his ear that listens, his tenderness that cares. But there's no proselytizing no condemnation. Because salvation comes by faith. Faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen, meaning its a work of the heart and no man can change the heart of another.
This is why Christians, I encourage you all, not to be afraid of gay people and the "homosexual agenda" - don't be afraid of the "perfidious Jews" or "radical Muslims" - don't fear the homeless drug addict - don't be afraid of the wandering prostitute. Why? Because before they were all these things, they were born human beings. Many of them Christened in the same churches you attend now. And you can't reason, rationalize or determine where their lives went wrong and what they did to cause their misfortune, or what God's purpose is in their lives. All you can do is stand in the gap and offer a hug when someone calls them a name, live as a neighbor respecting them as people with a different opinion, volunteer in the trenches and wash the hair and feet and change the clothes of those in need, shut your mouths and open your ears and the hearts to hear the troubles and scars of a damaged spirit.
Because I believe firmly folks, that truly living like Christ, is not the preaching and shouting and swaying to contemporary Christian music - it's picking up a cross that is weighing someone else down to the ground and carrying it with them or for them for as long as God allows, while the world hurls its sins and insults upon your forgiven spirit and flesh. And sometimes while the very people you are helping do the same.
We were made in his image, to follow a path that pays the cost for those we have been called to love. Everyone. Perhaps by loving like this, people will see us as my close friend, and now Christ following Jew, put it - "living out what [we] say [we] believe." That changes hearts, and changed hearts change lives.
Thursday, April 5, 2012
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Examiner Readers and Huffington Post Readers CAN Agree!
Jason McCool posted the
following link: Click Here!
I read the whole article and was surprised and pleased to hear someone speak the same why that I do to people on both sides of the isle. Please review it and place your comments if you like. My comment (omegahil) is below along with a rebuttal to an individual who is most likely on my side of the isle. :)
FIRST LEVEL COMMENT omegahill | 30 minutes ago
The faith of a politician should be lived out in dignity and humility. I am disappointed by slings, arrows, and insults being hurled by people who profess the faith ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ISLE! The application of a Congressman's faith should be in quite reflection and prayer before casting a vote, before opening his mouth, before signing a document, and certainly before calling someone out of hand with no basis of scripture to support his claim.
I appreciate the author's direct yet gentle challenge of correction to Santorum. There really ought to be a movement of Christians determined to live the life apart from trying to make others do the same. It's God himself who leads us by cool waters and makes us lie down by green pastures, not the church or the politicians.
I consider myself a republican and a conservative, but I appreciate this critique, and I agree. Perhaps this is just another indication that the leaders of this country are NOT accurately representing the left and the right appropriately. I pray that more dialogue like this and more connections across the isle will change the behavior of our leaders.
In the meantime, please review this brief study about the "talking donkey." There IS a bit more to this story than most speculators are willing to seek out. Thanks for this commentary I hope to see more like this in HuffPost. http://mixedslashother.blogspot.com/2012/02/response-to-wacky-bible-stories-2.html
FIRST LEVEL COMMENT 2_amazed | 46 minutes ago
Now, I am NOT saying that President Obama is to blame for all the outrageous debt that we as a nation have incurred, ALL who have served in Washington—presidents and congressmen, both Democrats and Republicans—over the course of decades have created this mess.
However we, the people, are also to blame for not knowing enough about the Constitution to challenge the unconstitutional spending that has long gone on. We’ve allowed ourselves to be lulled into a false sense of security and have allowed someone else (the politicians) to play the ‘expert’ and this is the result. The Constitution was not designed to create a mega government that is all things to all people and supports cradle to grave care. I don’t know about you, but I can barely afford gas for my car, and I surely can’t afford to continue to support the government’s spending of my income. I give to charity on my own.
I don’t mind supporting a safety[net] for those that fall on hard times, but not generational support, and I do mind giving money for wasteful spending—of which there is much. We need to elect leaders today who will have the courage to refuse to incur even one more dollar in debt. We need to stop the spending. We are robbing our children and grandchildren of the blessing of liberty in order to fund the reckless spending of government today.
Hide Full Comment | Reply
omegahill | 0 minutes ago
I agree about many of the economic policies. But standard economic theory states that a government ought to restrict public sector spending and divert it to social and private enterprises in order to create sustainable income. Clinton did this. But a government cannot sustain this during wartime.
We ran into problems when during that government draw down, we privatized military operations. So when we had a need for military men and woman, we had neither capital nor human resources to mount a defense or commensurate retaliation. That's why we randomly dropped bombs. It's a combination of two administrations who ran to complete opposite sides of the boat. And the momentum capsized the country.
Right now, Obama IS trying to do the most sound economic thing; however, he cannot do it while we are still in conflict. That is why he is failing. He policies work best only at a time of peace. He's been trying to please too many people at one time. We could have saved trillions if we'd fired the private sector war-profiteering companies, and began redirecting those funds TOWARD our military.
They would have provided the training, facilities, personnel, weaponry, and resources at a much lower cost than Halliburton and any of those other private contractors. [The also would have been providing skills and longevity to enlisted men an women who'd have more incentive to continue serving.]
But this author's arguments are related only to the accusations that a "sinner" is levying against another "sinner." And I believe, if you try to read it again without bias or with the intention of placing blame, you'll likely agree.
I read the whole article and was surprised and pleased to hear someone speak the same why that I do to people on both sides of the isle. Please review it and place your comments if you like. My comment (omegahil) is below along with a rebuttal to an individual who is most likely on my side of the isle. :)
FIRST LEVEL COMMENT omegahill | 30 minutes ago
The faith of a politician should be lived out in dignity and humility. I am disappointed by slings, arrows, and insults being hurled by people who profess the faith ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ISLE! The application of a Congressman's faith should be in quite reflection and prayer before casting a vote, before opening his mouth, before signing a document, and certainly before calling someone out of hand with no basis of scripture to support his claim.
I appreciate the author's direct yet gentle challenge of correction to Santorum. There really ought to be a movement of Christians determined to live the life apart from trying to make others do the same. It's God himself who leads us by cool waters and makes us lie down by green pastures, not the church or the politicians.
I consider myself a republican and a conservative, but I appreciate this critique, and I agree. Perhaps this is just another indication that the leaders of this country are NOT accurately representing the left and the right appropriately. I pray that more dialogue like this and more connections across the isle will change the behavior of our leaders.
In the meantime, please review this brief study about the "talking donkey." There IS a bit more to this story than most speculators are willing to seek out. Thanks for this commentary I hope to see more like this in HuffPost. http://mixedslashother.blogspot.com/2012/02/response-to-wacky-bible-stories-2.html
FIRST LEVEL COMMENT 2_amazed | 46 minutes ago
Now, I am NOT saying that President Obama is to blame for all the outrageous debt that we as a nation have incurred, ALL who have served in Washington—presidents and congressmen, both Democrats and Republicans—over the course of decades have created this mess.
However we, the people, are also to blame for not knowing enough about the Constitution to challenge the unconstitutional spending that has long gone on. We’ve allowed ourselves to be lulled into a false sense of security and have allowed someone else (the politicians) to play the ‘expert’ and this is the result. The Constitution was not designed to create a mega government that is all things to all people and supports cradle to grave care. I don’t know about you, but I can barely afford gas for my car, and I surely can’t afford to continue to support the government’s spending of my income. I give to charity on my own.
I don’t mind supporting a safety[net] for those that fall on hard times, but not generational support, and I do mind giving money for wasteful spending—of which there is much. We need to elect leaders today who will have the courage to refuse to incur even one more dollar in debt. We need to stop the spending. We are robbing our children and grandchildren of the blessing of liberty in order to fund the reckless spending of government today.
Hide Full Comment | Reply
omegahill | 0 minutes ago
I agree about many of the economic policies. But standard economic theory states that a government ought to restrict public sector spending and divert it to social and private enterprises in order to create sustainable income. Clinton did this. But a government cannot sustain this during wartime.
We ran into problems when during that government draw down, we privatized military operations. So when we had a need for military men and woman, we had neither capital nor human resources to mount a defense or commensurate retaliation. That's why we randomly dropped bombs. It's a combination of two administrations who ran to complete opposite sides of the boat. And the momentum capsized the country.
Right now, Obama IS trying to do the most sound economic thing; however, he cannot do it while we are still in conflict. That is why he is failing. He policies work best only at a time of peace. He's been trying to please too many people at one time. We could have saved trillions if we'd fired the private sector war-profiteering companies, and began redirecting those funds TOWARD our military.
They would have provided the training, facilities, personnel, weaponry, and resources at a much lower cost than Halliburton and any of those other private contractors. [The also would have been providing skills and longevity to enlisted men an women who'd have more incentive to continue serving.]
But this author's arguments are related only to the accusations that a "sinner" is levying against another "sinner." And I believe, if you try to read it again without bias or with the intention of placing blame, you'll likely agree.
Sunday, February 19, 2012
A response to "Wacky Bible Stories 2"
A response to "Wacky Bible Stories 2" at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KF47aO4VLy0
You raise valid questions, unfortunately the answer was before you but you skipped past it.
There are sections of Numbers which, if taken out of context can be INCREDIBLY confusing. God actually did not change His mind, he was allowing Balaam to be exposed and putting Balak in his place.
When the bible says that Balak sent messengers, remember that it also said he sent them with a "divination fee." They wanted to hire Balaam to divine a curse against the people of Israel. Then, like a fool he goes to the God of Israel and asks his permission to to take this money and curse God's people. And God responds, "Do not go with them. You must not put a curse on those people because they are blessed."
So Balaam tells the messengers he cannot. But then they don't just return with distinguished princes, they returned with princes authorized to give more money. Balak wanted to sweeten the pot. Since this money changed Balaam's mind, he hoped it would change God's. Balaam was being greedy.
He WANTED to take that money. God doesn't violate our free will, but he WILL allow any path that we choose against him to be more difficult, and sometimes blocked.
He says, "since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, He gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done." Romans 1:28 and Genesis 6:5 "The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time."
So when Balaam asked a second time to curse the people of Israel for money, God tested him, and he failed. He gave him up to his desires and told him to go, and Balaam was happy to be "gettin paper."
The complication here is that now, Balaam has essentially walked away from and turned away from God for the purpose of bringing harm to his people. Ergo, send in the Angel of Lord to defend them. But Balaam eyes and ears had been closed to the truth because of his evil desires and choices.
So God made Balaam to hear the his donkey that could see the Angel to which Balaam had made himself blind. But God will try to reach people even if the animals or rocks have to do the speaking: "You have plotted the ruin of many peoples, shaming your own house and forfeiting your life. The stones of the wall will cry out, and the beams of the woodwork will echo it." Habakkuk 2:10-11; "“I tell you,” he replied, “if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out.”" Luke 19:40. Psalm 148 tells of all the creatures and creations that are made to praise the Lord. Simply put however, the animals have no choice but to do as God commands.
Free will is a right extended only to people. So, if by his very nature, God would cause a sheep to get Moses' attention, or the stones and woodwork of a house to obey Him, if we wanted to get Balaam's attention, who'd been driven mad by money and inconveniences (2 Peter 2:16), then yes, he could and would make a donkey talk, or appear to Balaam as doing so.
Now, about the claim that God never sent him another message, that is false. In fact, God inherently delivers this very same message to Balak that Balaam should have given to the first group of messengers: "Don't put a curse on those people because they are blessed." (Num 22:12); "How can I curse whose whom God has not cursed?" (Num 23:8) But this message wasn't good enough for Balak. He was determined to appease God with sacrifices because he rejected God's word.
But God says "Does the LORD delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as much as in obeying the voice of the LORD? To obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed is better than the fat of rams. (1 Sam 15:22) But this was already told to us in the story of Cain and Abel: "In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the LORD. But Abel brought fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The LORD looked with favor on Abel and his offering," (Gen 4:4)
So Balak was trying to buy off the Lord God against His people. Instead of obeying Him, seeking Him or trusting Him, Balak tried to turn to divination and bribery and brought Balaam down with Him. They tried this bribery 5 times, and each time the Lord gave Balaam a message for Balak. "God is not a man that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind...I have received a command to bless, he has blessed, and I cannot change it."(Num 23:19-20) "May those who bless you be blessed, and those who curse you be cursed!" (Num 24:9b)
And so Balaam blessed the Israelite people three times. This made Balak furious and he ordered him to go home with none of the financial compensation he'd promised. Now Balaam responds by saying even if you gave me all your silver and gold, I can do nothing but what the Lord commands. And then Balaam delivers a prophecy of Yeshwah the Messiah (Num 24:17, cross reference Mt. 2:2) and a second message about the coming victory over Amelek.
So, as you can see, God put both Balak and Balaam through the fire. He gave Balaam multiple opportunities to be obedient and stand on His word. Then he gave Balak an opportunity to be obedient and understand that he could neither curse nor defeat those whom God called blessed and victorious. The donkey speaking was merely to get Balaam to wake up to the sin of covetousness and greed which he'd committed in his heart by desiring Balak's prizes over the Word of God.
You raise valid questions, unfortunately the answer was before you but you skipped past it.
There are sections of Numbers which, if taken out of context can be INCREDIBLY confusing. God actually did not change His mind, he was allowing Balaam to be exposed and putting Balak in his place.
When the bible says that Balak sent messengers, remember that it also said he sent them with a "divination fee." They wanted to hire Balaam to divine a curse against the people of Israel. Then, like a fool he goes to the God of Israel and asks his permission to to take this money and curse God's people. And God responds, "Do not go with them. You must not put a curse on those people because they are blessed."
So Balaam tells the messengers he cannot. But then they don't just return with distinguished princes, they returned with princes authorized to give more money. Balak wanted to sweeten the pot. Since this money changed Balaam's mind, he hoped it would change God's. Balaam was being greedy.
He WANTED to take that money. God doesn't violate our free will, but he WILL allow any path that we choose against him to be more difficult, and sometimes blocked.
He says, "since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, He gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done." Romans 1:28 and Genesis 6:5 "The LORD saw how great man's wickedness on the earth had become, and that every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time."
So when Balaam asked a second time to curse the people of Israel for money, God tested him, and he failed. He gave him up to his desires and told him to go, and Balaam was happy to be "gettin paper."
The complication here is that now, Balaam has essentially walked away from and turned away from God for the purpose of bringing harm to his people. Ergo, send in the Angel of Lord to defend them. But Balaam eyes and ears had been closed to the truth because of his evil desires and choices.
So God made Balaam to hear the his donkey that could see the Angel to which Balaam had made himself blind. But God will try to reach people even if the animals or rocks have to do the speaking: "You have plotted the ruin of many peoples, shaming your own house and forfeiting your life. The stones of the wall will cry out, and the beams of the woodwork will echo it." Habakkuk 2:10-11; "“I tell you,” he replied, “if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out.”" Luke 19:40. Psalm 148 tells of all the creatures and creations that are made to praise the Lord. Simply put however, the animals have no choice but to do as God commands.
Free will is a right extended only to people. So, if by his very nature, God would cause a sheep to get Moses' attention, or the stones and woodwork of a house to obey Him, if we wanted to get Balaam's attention, who'd been driven mad by money and inconveniences (2 Peter 2:16), then yes, he could and would make a donkey talk, or appear to Balaam as doing so.
Now, about the claim that God never sent him another message, that is false. In fact, God inherently delivers this very same message to Balak that Balaam should have given to the first group of messengers: "Don't put a curse on those people because they are blessed." (Num 22:12); "How can I curse whose whom God has not cursed?" (Num 23:8) But this message wasn't good enough for Balak. He was determined to appease God with sacrifices because he rejected God's word.
But God says "Does the LORD delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as much as in obeying the voice of the LORD? To obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed is better than the fat of rams. (1 Sam 15:22) But this was already told to us in the story of Cain and Abel: "In the course of time Cain brought some of the fruits of the soil as an offering to the LORD. But Abel brought fat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The LORD looked with favor on Abel and his offering," (Gen 4:4)
So Balak was trying to buy off the Lord God against His people. Instead of obeying Him, seeking Him or trusting Him, Balak tried to turn to divination and bribery and brought Balaam down with Him. They tried this bribery 5 times, and each time the Lord gave Balaam a message for Balak. "God is not a man that he should lie, nor a son of man, that he should change his mind...I have received a command to bless, he has blessed, and I cannot change it."(Num 23:19-20) "May those who bless you be blessed, and those who curse you be cursed!" (Num 24:9b)
And so Balaam blessed the Israelite people three times. This made Balak furious and he ordered him to go home with none of the financial compensation he'd promised. Now Balaam responds by saying even if you gave me all your silver and gold, I can do nothing but what the Lord commands. And then Balaam delivers a prophecy of Yeshwah the Messiah (Num 24:17, cross reference Mt. 2:2) and a second message about the coming victory over Amelek.
So, as you can see, God put both Balak and Balaam through the fire. He gave Balaam multiple opportunities to be obedient and stand on His word. Then he gave Balak an opportunity to be obedient and understand that he could neither curse nor defeat those whom God called blessed and victorious. The donkey speaking was merely to get Balaam to wake up to the sin of covetousness and greed which he'd committed in his heart by desiring Balak's prizes over the Word of God.
Friday, February 3, 2012
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
DONATE TO HELP FIGHT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE! Phi Gamma Gamma is raising funds to support Saving Promise in the fight against domestic abuse and domestic violence.
Please attend our Casting a Legacy: A Promise for Change 10th Anniversary Gala
Click Here to view our Facebook Invite for More Information
or make a donation by clicking the DONATE button below:
Please attend our Casting a Legacy: A Promise for Change 10th Anniversary Gala
Click Here to view our Facebook Invite for More Information
or make a donation by clicking the DONATE button below:
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Happy Sunshiny Things...
Here's a post about happy things:
rainbows and buttercups
hair weaves and afro-puffs
snickerdoodle cookies and fries
cell phones that always work and
bosses that are not jerks
and work weeks that always fly by
it's magical what you can do
when you focus on the good things
and not the blues
taxes and alimony
weddings at the local Shoney's
a smoking section in the same room
Life's magical without any blues.
dumplings and creme brulee and
sunshine and tanqueray
and love making that lasts through the night
its when some come true and
some of them usually do so its
better to think everything's alright
So just smile and your future's looking bright.
do do doot dooooo, do do doot doooooo
do do doot dooooo, do do doot doooooo
it's alright.
rainbows and buttercups
hair weaves and afro-puffs
snickerdoodle cookies and fries
cell phones that always work and
bosses that are not jerks
and work weeks that always fly by
it's magical what you can do
when you focus on the good things
and not the blues
taxes and alimony
weddings at the local Shoney's
a smoking section in the same room
Life's magical without any blues.
dumplings and creme brulee and
sunshine and tanqueray
and love making that lasts through the night
its when some come true and
some of them usually do so its
better to think everything's alright
So just smile and your future's looking bright.
do do doot dooooo, do do doot doooooo
do do doot dooooo, do do doot doooooo
it's alright.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Where U Been?
I haven't written anything in a while. I realize it's because I always want what I write to be eloquent or impacting. Frankly, that is an exhausting thought, and even more so an activity.
I have been reading Steinbeck: A Life in Letters, and apparently John Steinbeck would start most of his days by writing letters to people - to get the juices going. I was thinking of him as a social networker. But the more I read, the more I realize that letter writing was more than social networking, it was knowing people, and allowing one's self to be known. More is said in handwritten letters than in all the text on Twitter or Facebook. People call the countless individuals in their lists "Friends" but in reality, they only about them - what's happened to them, who said what, what they saw - but they don't really know WHO they are.
The point is that JS revealed himself in these letters to friends and acquaintances, and I cannot think of the last time I truly received a sense of someone through any electronic means. It's always, ALWAYS superficial. I watch people talk about their friends and their "communities" but they have no idea who any of their neighbors actually are. They show no real interest in the PEOPLE who are next to them, that live with them. Rather this desire and longing for connection is placated by the hope that these electronic connections with people we never see, never touch, never feel, never smell, never laugh with, never hold, never pick up, never help are more real and these people are closer to us than the people with whom we could actually share these experiences.
Social media is reducing people's ability to walk up to other human beings, introduce themselves, and develop relationships. It's scary. It's cold, and it's alienating. Couples sit together for hours staring at their phones or PDA's desperately seeking more emotional stimulation from the 1000s of people online instead of facing the discomfort of trying to connect one-on-one with the person in the room.
Maybe that makes me old fashioned. But it is what it is. I am not trying to change the world or make an impact with these thoughts. I am just writing what I feel to get my juices flowing. This is mainly for me. Maybe there are more like me...but if there are...I am hoping that they will answer the door when I knock.
I have been reading Steinbeck: A Life in Letters, and apparently John Steinbeck would start most of his days by writing letters to people - to get the juices going. I was thinking of him as a social networker. But the more I read, the more I realize that letter writing was more than social networking, it was knowing people, and allowing one's self to be known. More is said in handwritten letters than in all the text on Twitter or Facebook. People call the countless individuals in their lists "Friends" but in reality, they only about them - what's happened to them, who said what, what they saw - but they don't really know WHO they are.
The point is that JS revealed himself in these letters to friends and acquaintances, and I cannot think of the last time I truly received a sense of someone through any electronic means. It's always, ALWAYS superficial. I watch people talk about their friends and their "communities" but they have no idea who any of their neighbors actually are. They show no real interest in the PEOPLE who are next to them, that live with them. Rather this desire and longing for connection is placated by the hope that these electronic connections with people we never see, never touch, never feel, never smell, never laugh with, never hold, never pick up, never help are more real and these people are closer to us than the people with whom we could actually share these experiences.
Social media is reducing people's ability to walk up to other human beings, introduce themselves, and develop relationships. It's scary. It's cold, and it's alienating. Couples sit together for hours staring at their phones or PDA's desperately seeking more emotional stimulation from the 1000s of people online instead of facing the discomfort of trying to connect one-on-one with the person in the room.
Maybe that makes me old fashioned. But it is what it is. I am not trying to change the world or make an impact with these thoughts. I am just writing what I feel to get my juices flowing. This is mainly for me. Maybe there are more like me...but if there are...I am hoping that they will answer the door when I knock.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)