Christmas (part i.)

in the great tradition of two-part thoughts..

on Christmas.

part i.: destructive

this evening I joined my family for a candlelight service at the church they've attended for the past two years. it's a place where I've always felt that something was awry - an intuitive reaction in my gut that something was wrong. and I mean a deeper sense of wrong than the involuntary wincing from the cliche four-chord 'praise songs' and 'three-bullet-point sermons.' tonight, I now know what the root of that sense was, for it was revealed with such gusto and enthusiasm that willful delusion is its only inhibitor.

or put another way, I have never felt a stronger urge to step up from a pew during 'worship,' walk toward the podium of a church, grab a microphone, and perform a small reenactment of Jesus-in-the-temple. truthfully, I wish I had.

or perhaps I am wrong. perhaps the proper way to honor the Christ for Whom we celebrate Christmas is by invoking the timeless, Jesus-first classics of "jingle bells" and "sleigh ride." perhaps the reason why Jesus Christ humbly came into His creation was to make us happy and 'shine light into our dark times.' perhaps the darkness He came to shine light into is really the doubt, distress, and disappointment inflicted on us by an unkind fate. perhaps Jesus Christ, the executed Lord of glory, is really nothing more than a tool for our benefit when we don't feel awesome. perhaps there is no place for fear in life, least of all towards the consuming-God-of-the-Angel-armies. perhaps the best way for the bride of Christ to honor her future Husband is by focusing on Him as little as possible, and when forced by pretense to speak of Him, to manipulate and transform her Saviour into a Rescuer-from-psychological-anxiety (for is this Jesus not more palatable to an unbelieving world?).

or as I should have learned from last week's service at another church, perhaps Christ came to earth to give us joy and help us to be thankful and kind to one another. perhaps that's the reason that mankind - US! - abused, tormented, despised, condemned, mocked, and unjustly executed the innocent and loving Son of the Living God. to help us to be thankful; to make our frustrating times a little happier.

have no doubt, my reader, that Christ accomplishes all of these things. but surely pagans recognize that this - the idea that He came, lived, suffered, died, and was resurrected primarily for these things alone - is a mockery and a foolishness beyond words! it is traitorous adultery, mindless delusion, and willful rejection of Christ as He is - for how else can we replace Him with a worthless idol/shadow of the true Christ? (or, as the men whose teaching I relate above suggest, a shadow of even a mere man! for what man would we, should he have given his life over to destruction for helping make people more thankful or brighter, not justly hold his goal as at most a sad pagan self-sacrifice, let alone an act worthy of worship? even an atheist sees this madness for what it is, in spite of his venom.)

in the theologically magnificent words of my younger sister: "what the hell?"

the one thing of Christianity, the only lesson it teaches (wherein it teaches all lessons to be taught) is the Gospel (to which the second part of this thought will be given). what was spoken tonight.. could not be legitimately called drivel. my dear reader, when you hear words about Jesus, when you hear Christians and non-Christians alike speak of Who He was and what He did, take heed. for many churches and many enemies of the church have said volumes about the Jesus-of-their-beliefs, rather than the Jesus who walked the Judean countryside two thousand years ago.

and it is that Jesus, the crucified, incarnate Logos of the immortal Father Who matters most - Jesus as He truly was, is, and will be.

God have mercy on us all.

and now for something a tad different..

a progressive ballad (draft i.)

behind moments
of piercing light,
everpresent
grey clouds reason,
hope, emotion,
and that other.
this is 'the life
under the sun' -
no conclusions,
only a morass
of distrustful,
poor 'evidence.'
what to conclude,
what do we see
fro the mere breath
of sense and space?
our fate is a
night of twilight.
discovery:
the twilight is
not a limit,
but rather Truth
in the absence
of any other.
(at least any
we can verify.)

to claim a god,
even The God
is then a show
and denial
of the only
Truth we can show.
the lack of proof
itself a proof,
or even a
complete disproof -
what do I care?
irrelevant.
passing from a
question of truth
to a matter
of convenience
and coherence,
I see no need.
it has passed to
the subjective:
unanswerable
questions that have
no bearing on
my moral life.

for morality
is still a goal -
and a noble one!
why shouldn't it?
to disobey
your conscience
is an act of
inward treason.
whether I cloak
it in a shroud
of 'reason' or
social contract -
whatever words
conceal the cause,
I have still found
the long-sought goal.

morality and
no God in sight.

'a mind awake'
is terrifying,
but a conscience
life-shattering.
no god in sight,
but the conscience
must be appeased,
be satisfied.
with nothing more
than a dark fog
at his command,
what higher truth
does man possess
than this rela-
tive, entirely
progressive thought?

ancients spoke thus:
'fear of the LORD
is the begin-
ing of wisdom.'
let us be clear:
never was a
more backwards and
primitive thought
captured by the
record of men.
the label is just
and the contempt
absent of fault,
for religion
of hate and fear
is exericse
of rhetoric
by sacred priests.
elaborate
unnecessary
and militant
imposition
of one conscience
and so much more.

a benefit of
having no faith
unsubstantiate
is that I know
the bounds of
my grey beliefs.
tolerance comes
automatic
and I am thus
free from the one
universally
agreed grievance.
but I cannot
take credit for
this great light-burst.
instead I will
humbly exalt
the winding of
history and
my experiences,
random yet wise;
with these in mind,
self-righteousness
is beyond me.

a Christian said

'without immortality,
everything is permitted.'

here is an abyss,
something that
we dare not draw
near to.
the anarchy
of conscience is
progressive as
long as it is
not taken too
seriously.
it requires
composure, a
courage that can
quickly leave
if you unwisely
plug the depths
of genuine
anarchy.
but if we take a
swift step back,
we see that this
is merely an
example of
natural law:
all things found in
moderation.
I know of no
other way to
escape this piece
of incomplete
reductio
ad absurdum.

ev'ry honest
belief has a
god in function.
in sum, my god
is certainly
not what they, in
arrogance call
the God of gods.
unable to
place the crown
on a mere man's brow,
I set it on
the mantle of
no-God-conscience.
anything else
is backwards fear
or idolatry.
a quiet word
softly comes: to some
contemptible,
but I regard
it a noble
defense of will,
a rebellion.