Focusing on What Really Matters

Posted on January 10, 2012 by Bruce Gerencser

This entry is part 50 of 52 in the series My Journey

How should we approach this thing we call life? At this moment, we are living, breathing, thinking human beings. Someday, beyond our next breath, we will die. Our bodies will cease to be alive. Death is the one certainty in life. No one escapes death.

As a Christian, I viewed life this way:

Life is given to us by God.
Life is a preparatory time for life after death.
Troubles, trials, and adversity will certainly come our way but these things are part of God plan for us. He is testing us, trying us, and developing a longing in us for Heaven.
While pleasure and happiness have their place in the human experience, it is far more important to know the joy of the Lord, and if need be deny oneself pleasure and happiness for the sake of God’s Kingdom and the eternal reward that awaits those who run the race God has set before them.
While there is nothing wrong with material things they do have the power to corrupt and distract us from that which really matters. As the Westminster Catechism says : What is the chief end of man? Man’s chief end is to glorify God and enjoy him forever.
Life is lived with God, his will, and eternity always in the background. Death is seen as a promotion from this life to the next. While we will leave our loved ones behind for a time, we know that if they are followers of Jesus we will see them again in Heaven.

As an atheist, I view life this way:

Life is given to us by our parents.
This life is all we have. There is no life after death, no second chances, no do-overs. This is it.
Troubles, trials, and adversity will certainly come our way. These things happen to most everyone, and it is the price we pay for being among the living. Sometimes these things happen due to our bad choices or rash, foolish decisions. However, many things befall us simply due to luck. Wrong place. Wrong time. Wrong circumstance. Bad genetics.
Pleasure and happiness are to be sought after since this life is all we have. In seeking pleasure and happiness we should consider the affect on others of our seeking pleasure and happiness, but we should not allow others to stand in way of our pursuit of these things. Life is too short to allow others to dictate the parameters by which we live our lives.
We should seek after those things which give our life meaning and purpose. While there is a place in the human experience for living for the sake of others, this should not be at the expense of our own meaning and purpose. While narcissism is not a trait most humans value, neither is living a life that belongs to everyone but the person living it. ( and this includes living a life for a deity)
Since life is defined by the space between birth and death it is important for us to live each day to its fullest. Every day we live means we are one day closer to death. While death may provide a release from pain and sickness it is bittersweet. Bittersweet because we are leaving behind those things which mattered to us. Above all, we are leaving behind those we love.

Today, I watched the final show of the acclaimed HBO series Six Feet Under. (created by True Blood creator, Alan Ball) The show is about the Fisher Family and their funeral home business. For five seasons viewers are taken on a journey with the Fisher family and death. I found Six Feet Under to be one of the best dramas I have ever viewed.

In the final show the writers tried to tie all the loose ends together. A few episodes back Nate Fisher had a brain aneurism and died at age 40. He left behind a wife, 2 children, and a complicated life. The last several shows focused on Nate, his contradictory life, and its effect on everyone his life touched.

The final few moments of the show were the most powerful moments I have ever experienced while watching TV. I wept as the show moved through the lives of all the Fisher family……as they aged……..and one by one died. All of them dead. No one escaped.

While it would be easy to say “how sad” I found it to a reminder of how important it is to value and cherish the life we have. We spend so much time doing things that are meaningless and that add nothing to our life. I know it is very easy to get sucked into normalcy, to just go with the flow. We tell ourselves, Tomorrow. Perhaps a Bible verse is appropriate here:

Boast not thyself of to morrow; for thou knowest not what a day may bring forth. (Proverbs 27:1)

Perhaps each of us need to ask ourselves:

Am I happy?
What is it I want to do with my life?
What brings me pleasure and happiness?
What do I want to do that I have not yet done?

What are your answers telling you? What are your thoughts on what I have shared here?

Series NavigationA Sunday Night RambleI Moved

http://fallenfromgrace.net Bruce Gerencser

You need to brush up on your theology, friend.

Since God gives the gifts, his glory is the end-all.

Not that I believe one word of this. I think it is a great system for Christians to avoid culpability for what they do. It also robs the Christian of what is due him. A Christian deserves credit for doing good just like an atheist does. No need for a fictional middle man to get in the way. I find giving God credit for anything quite demeaning to those who actually do the work.

Since God controls everything…….I am sure you have no problem with me giving God credit for the evil in the world. After all……….he is in control, is he not?
http://atheismforpeace.blogspot.com/ Formerchristianatheist

You should have added another four thoughts on your list…could have had a new and much improved ten commandments!

As I gave up Christianity and made the inevitable shift in my views about life and death, I initially felt sadness and disappointment that heaven was not true. There was perhaps a bit of fear too. Not of hell anymore, but just of the thought that when I die, that is the end of it. Relatively quickly, though, I found new joy by realizing and truly recognizing that this is the only life I have and therefore every single day is incredibly valuable. Setting aside my dissapointments was eaiser once I compared being dead to the same as what I was like before I was born. Not much to fear there! I value life MUCH more than when I was a Christian. It makes me sad to think of my family members who still believe going through life and almost wishing it away. Now, I still feel a little bit cheated by those that taught me religion. The only disappointment I have now is nothing to do with the lack of an afterlife, but rather the disappointment that I “wasted” some years there not truly appreciating this life.

Ftp565

To be honest, I wish that the Christians I knew had this same perspective. I would say it’s a tenet we should live by whether we are religious or not. We are not guaranteed tomorrow so live for today!
http://fallenfromgrace.net Bruce Gerencser

I still deal with the “wasted” years problem. I know I must move on with what I have but it is hard not to think that I gave the best physical parts of my life to a God and a job that meant nothing. I know I needed that experience to make me what I am today BUT I still lament the loss of time. (and money)

http://republic-of-gilead.blogspot.com/ Ahab

I have to say that my life became much richer, freer, and more hopeful when I deconverted. Instead of conforming to rigid and arbitrary rules to avoid eternal torture, I can now focus on living a rich and meaningful life in the here and now. Instead of passively accepting the church’s teachings about what constitutes goodness, I can reason it out for myself.
Ftp565

Bruce, I happened to come across your posts by accident, and I have to say that I love your insights. Thank you for sharing! I just wanted to say that as a Christian I disagree with viewing life as you describe in 2, 3, and 4, and don’t entirely agree with 6. I think a lot of Christians have the purpose of Christianity messed up. I believe that we are not supposed to live this life for the next but live this life for this life. Sin (my definition simply pure selfishness) has us only living for ourselves. However, as people freed from sin we should be able to live this life the way it was meant to be lived; bearing and sharing the burdens and joys of this life with each other. Life was meant to be enjoyed with others and to experience the joy and pleasure that living the life we were created to live brings. Sacrificing up pleasure for “the joy of the Lord” should not be the case. The joy of the Lord and the pleasure we enjoy should match up; it’s sin that keeps that from happening. Living life should not be with eternity in the background. Trying to better this world now should be our goal; to bring heaven to earth. After all isn’t that what Jesus teaches his disciples to pray? “Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.” Yes, we have the promised hope of a resurrection and eternal life after we die, but the goal is to make this world better for you and for me right now. Just some thoughts.

http://thekatiejones.net Katie Jones

I know you say that sin is pure selfishness, but I’d like to know how many cases you see of “pure” selfishness. It is my understanding that selfishness and selflessness most often work in tandem, and it is a balance between the two that bring joy both to the self and to others. I am not sure why the world has to be constructed in such a black-or-white manner when it comes to absolute ideas such as sin. I wonder, if life really is about living it here and now, what is the need for eternity? If the joy of the Lord *should* align with our pleasures, does that mean our pleasures are dictated by God’s joy or that God’s joy is dictated by our pleasures? Is one not consequential on the other? If they really do match up, what is the actual consequence of God’s joy if one could take the perspective that it’s being masked by our pleasure? Does God really approve of everything we find pleasurable? I see this as a nice setup for simply phasing God out of the picture rather than finding any sort of excuse to glorify Him. You basically wind up glorifying yourself. Pure selfishness! Full circle.

Ftp565

Much like any discussion on religion or philosophy! In the realm of Psychology it is argued that there is even such a thing as a selfless act (altruism). That no matter what we do, we do it for our own benefit in some way or another. There is the belief among many Psychologists that there is no true selfless act. I, myself, am a more “live in the grey (gray)” kind of guy. However, even with my own actions I can see where I have done them solely for myself, and I have had people admit that to me as well. So it’s not really having a black and white view on selfishness; it’s realizing that a lot of the things that we do in this life are solely for our own benefit. I’m sure there are cases where the two accomplish the same goal, but which is the driving factor for you in the act? Could it be both? Sure. Are there times where it’s just one over the other? I’m sure there are.

My other statement comes from Dietrich Bonhoeffer in his work “Discipleship”. Here he makes the statement the obedient are faithful and the faithful are obedient. And he also mentions that the cross is a source of our greatest joy. I was stipulating in a not so clear way that through our faith in Jesus we are transformed and our heart beats more and more like God’s. We have the same yearning to do good in this world and in the lives of others that God has. Our joy isn’t dictated by God’s joy now do our pleasures dictate God’s joy, but the joy and desires become one in the same; not one “ruling” over the other but equal.

As for your last question, I would argue that a lot of the things that we find pleasurable, God would find pleasurable as well. There are things that can be twisted and perverted for our own selfish enjoyment, but the things that really involve living beyond ourselves or involve us taking time to enjoy the life we’ve been given.

http://thekatiejones.net Katie Jones

Yes, just like most of religion and philosophy. That is part of my point. I am not sure how we can claim much certainty in the truth values of many religious and philosophical ideas since we can follow them around in circles, which is why I felt such disconnect as a Christian when I realized I didn’t put God’s existence under the same scrutiny as doctrinal notions. It made more sense to me when I could finally say that I don’t know that God exists, and I’m not sure how well I can know that.

I am uncertain as to how I can claim to what degree my actions may be selfish or selfless. It seems likely that there are several underlying factors that we don’t identify in our reasoning process, and that is where I give psychology its credit. Because of this, I am wary about such an idea as sin. Sin is a defiance to God, and I am not sure how well we are controlling that defiance, particularly if we really are talking about “heart” matters and not just our work. The way you propose this idea of pure selfishness sounds pretty black-or-white to me, but I recognize that’s just my perspective.All that stuff about transformation and such is essentially conjecture on a broad realm. I definitely had a hard time really caring about “the cross” as a Christian. I always felt far too removed from that event for it to hold much value to me. It’s sort of the Thomas Paine notion that your revelation doesn’t really hold any truth value beyond the first degree if any at all. In that way, I am not moved toward the faith by observing others living in faith. I have a yearning to do good in this world without God. My joy is dictated both by my pleasures and others’ pleasures. I’ve had really twisted thinking in the past when I tried to see how those could align with God’s, especially since God somewhat reveals himself through Scripture and yet is so very mysterious. But again, perhaps I’m missing the broad point, so then I ask why God wouldn’t help me understand that all those times I prayed for understanding.To that last statement you made, it’s pretty clear to me that we can be moved to living “beyond ourselves” without God. There can be much joy in life without God. There’s actually quite a bit more joy for me. I simply can’t recognize how joy must be derived from God. I see no foundation for such a claim, though it is an absolute claim.

Ftp565

I would agree that joy can be experienced without the presence of God. From my perspective, when God set the world in motion (creation, and yes I do subscribe to evolution and not spontaneous appearance…but who said that God couldn’t work in such a way). And since what God created was good and very good; why wouldn’t there be joy and pleasures in this life? Why would we need God to experience the joy in the things that He made good? I don’t think that this is the case, and you can have a joy filled life without God in it.

To me Christianity is more than just being able to really enjoy life. It’s about trying to make this life enjoyable for me and for those who come into contact with me. It’s about knowing that God loves me just as I am without needing me to change, but works in my life to help me be the person I was created to be. It’s about being and wanting to be connected with the Creator of all things, and working with that Creator to bring heaven into our world here and now.

I understand that this part is all simple conjecture. We cannot measure or assume to know how a God can possible change our thinking or as people would say “our hearts”. If we were to run an MRI on a person who didn’t believe in God and then run it again when they did; besides the difference in brain activity effected by time and age, we wouldn’t really see much of a difference. Then there’s trying to prove the existence of something you can’t possibly prove the existence for. And in the same matter you can’t prove that God doesn’t exist. So that’s where the circles and philosophy come into play. In my opinion, Philosophy is all about trying to prove the improvable.

Do I know 100% that God is real and that He is there? No I do not and cannot know that. I believe it’s the case, and I have my doubts from time to time. But I personally feel that God showed me in a way that He was there. Could I be wrong? Yes. Could I be wrong that there is even a deity at all? Yes. So I can see where you are coming from. None of this religious stuff cannot enter into the realm of science since science seeks to prove or disprove theories. And since religion cannot be proved or disproved it cannot be held accountable to the scientific method. However, just because it doesn’t fit into the realm of the scientific method doesn’t mean that it can or should be discredited.
Jim Jones

“Could I be wrong that there is even a deity at all? Yes.”

Even if there is a deity (an oxymoronic concept) there is no reason at all to trust a word in the Bible, Qur’an, Book of Mormon or Scientology text or any other like book. They are clearly the constructs of man and are as flawed as their authors. Most teenagers could write a better moral guide. So you will have to impute your deity’s ‘desires’ otherwise.
Ftp565

However, I take the belief and stance that the Bible is the written work and history of God’s interaction with humanity. I also belief that in that people have interjected their own positions and thoughts on the matter which is actually evident in the texts that our translations come from. Some of the earliest manuscripts that we have available don’t have all of what is in our Bible; that comes from notes made in margins later on. There are also parts where one author says that God approved of something, and then a prophet later on states that God disapproved of the same action. I will not claim that the Bible is infallible, and I also believe in taking a historical/critical approach. However, I will also hold that the Bible is divinely inspired as well. That there are parts where God acted in the lives of humanity and it was recorded to be retold and remembered. I also use what would be called “The Greatest Commandment” in the New Testament of the Bible to sort through what may or may not be man’s involvement in trying to be oppressive. That commandment is to love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul, and mind and the other like it, to love your neighbor as yourself. The last of which would be wonderful if most of the world lived by it regardless of whether or not a deity exists.
http://fallenfromgrace.net Bruce Gerencser

So I will ask you like I ask everyone who makes the claim you do………exactly which parts are inspired? How can you know empirically that they are inspired? Is this not, once again, a faith claim.

Since the originals texts do not exist we have no way of knowing what the original authors wrote. How do you know that the books in the Bible are accurate? (forget inspired or infallible, I am just looking for accurate) How do you know the gnostic gospels are not the real God inspired text and that Jesus was never meant to considered God? (as the Arians would insist)
Ftp565

It’s a good question because it is based on faith. To go on a brief tangent, I would have loved to see an original to see how much it has changed over time! I mentioned before I go off of the the greatest commandment and things that relate as such in the Old Testament. Of course knowing whether or not they were truly Jesus’ words is just not possible. However, in light of how I see God working and acting in the Old Testament, mainly off of the prophetic texts, I would at least make a case that it is at least in line with what has been stated to be God’s opinion.

In that sense I cannot imagine that telling a woman that there is no room for her in the afterlife with other Christians simply because she is a woman and that her only hope is to become as much of a man as possible is more oppressive…then what about Paul you may ask. There is more that I would find against the gnostics, i.e. needing a special knowledge in order to become a god, etc. that I just have not seen as the way in which God would work in the world, but this is getting long already. I would argue the opposite that God doesn’t want us to be more divine; God wants us to be more human.

The gnostic Gospel of Thomas has a theme of elitism and oppression within it. You could say something similar of Paul and the things he wrote. First we have to classify Pauline and neo-Pauline texts such as Ephesians. Even though they are attributed to Paul, even the Greek writing style is so vastly different from Paul’s that the closest thing to it being from Paul is the name at the beginning. It would be the equivalent of me writing something up and putting your name at the top.

As for the Pauline texts, you have to ask the question, how can a man who says that all are equal in Christ including male and female later on set up the man as the head and the woman as subordinate? Certain texts such as head coverings would need to be interpreted in the context of the time it was written. The wealthy women showed off status by having big hair. Even rich and poor should be equal in Christ and status should not be shown off in the church in Paul’s eyes; so he told the women to cover their heads.

Sorry, got off-track. As for the Arians, the argument that “there was a time that Jesus was not” was a way to try and explain monotheism while holding Christ up in a deific sense. The only biblical source that refuses this claim is the gospel of John which is the later of the canonical scriptures estimated to be written around 99 AD (I’m sure you know the dates quite well so I won’t bore you). However, it’s at this point that my faith perspective comes in because it’s in what I believe about sin and our free will (I am mostly Lutheran in my views) that proclaims my faith in a Jesus that is God in human flesh. It’s the view that God needed to step in and do something because of our sin in the world and nothing else would do. It would take God to move in and show us that we could trust Him. So it’s at that point I would say that the Arians would be wrong because only God could do it. Again this is all faith based and speculation, but it’s what I believe.
Jim Jones

“It’s a good question because it is based on faith.”

Faith == wishful thinking.
http://thekatiejones.net Katie Jones

I love it when Christians do approach God the way you are, because it means you have no interest in forcing your doctrine upon others. I respect that so much about you.

I do agree with Jim. It seems as though you need to override or justify a lot of the tenants for morality in the Bible in order to come to the place where you are. I see that a lot of more liberal Christians are willing to chalk up a lot of both Old and New Testament writings to the culture of the time rather than trying to bring them 2,000+ years into the future. This is a good thing! I did the same thing, and I went further into wondering why I must believe God’s truth is only contained in this one book and not other books. I kept expanding my big picture outlook until I became a deist. And then, agnostic.

I think we agree that if there is a God, he understands our condition and our reasoning. I do wonder why such a God would watch me take the honest path I did toward unbelief if that really did concern him. If there is a God, I don’t think any of us can trust books written by humans to understand God’s essence. What limitations and confusions such a notion has caused.
Jim Jones

“I did the same thing, and I went further into wondering why I must believe God’s truth is only contained in this one book and not other books.”

“In dark ages people are best guided by religion, as in a pitch-black night a blind man is the best guide; he knows the roads and paths better than a man who can see. When daylight comes, however, it is foolish to use blind old men as guides.”
–– Heinrich Heine 1834

“Spirituality is a comforting lie that we tell ourselves to get us through the day. Reality is a method of teaching ourselves to not fool ourselves.”

“Americans increasingly live in a “world where fantasy is more real than reality.”
–– Daniel Boorstin

“Knowledge is confused with how we are made to feel.”
–– C Hedges

“The culture of illusion thrives by robbing us of the intellectual and linguistic tools to separate illusion from truth.”
–– C Hedges

“A public that can no longer distinguish truth from fiction is left to interpret reality through illusion.”
–– C Hedges

“… shake off all the fears of servile prejudices under which weak minds are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a god because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear. You will naturally examine first the religion of your own country. Read the bible then, as you would read Livy or Tacitus . . . those facts in the bible which contradict the laws of nature, must be examined with more care, and under a variety of faces. Here you must recur to the pretensions of the writer to inspiration from god. Examine upon what evidence his pretensions are founded, and whether that evidence is so strong as that its falsehood would be more improbable than a change of the laws of nature in the case he relates . . . Do not be frightened from this enquiry by any fear of its consequences.”
–– (Thomas Jefferson, letter to his young nephew Peter Carr, August 10, 1787)
http://fallenfromgrace.net Bruce Gerencser

If Christians would stop dragging Christianity into the scientific arena I would agree with you, BUT Christians, particularly American Christians, seem heaven-bent on having scientific respectability so they try to get creationism taught in the school and generally make fools of themselves in the process. (Which they think is fine because they consider themselves fools for Christ)
Jim Jones

“ I simply can’t recognize how joy must be derived from God. I see no foundation for such a claim, though it is an absolute claim.”

Theism had spread much misery on the earth and continues to do so to this day. This

http://www.postmormon.org/exp_e/index.php/pomopedia/Personal_Accounts_of_Leaving_Mormonism

has many accounts of terrible misery and even crimes caused by or covered up by the LDS (TSCC) which should shock anyone’s conscience.

http://jamesbradfordpate.blogspot.com/ James Pate

Hey, that’s Dexter in the upper left!

http://fallenfromgrace.net Bruce Gerencser

Yes, Dexter…….2000-2005. In Six Feet Under he is a slightly effeminate gay man whose partner is a macho gay man. Very different from the Dexter character.

Spa1218

Love this post Bruce. So true.

Fallen From Grace

From Eternity to Here, One Man's Journey

Focusing on What Really Matters