Ingrained in almost every Christian's doctrine is the notion that humans have within them a soul that although non-physical (spiritual) resides within them. However, Brown and Murphy argue in Whatever Happened to the Soul: Scientific and Theological Portraits of Human Nature that humans do not actually have a soul but that the concept of the soul was brought into Christian thought from the Greeks and that our mind is so complex that it is capable of "soulishness."
First off I want to discuss the obvious apprehensions any Christians can and probably should have about discussing this issue. What scares people most is that if we take away a notion of spiritual being then we are left with just flesh and blood that carries no value to it. I think this is simply false because as Romans 1:20 says, "For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities - —his eternal power and divine nature - —have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse." So clearly the natural world, which has no soul, can carry an appearance that has the mark of the divine upon it. Another understandable reservation is that the concept of soul is so pervasive throughout Scripture that it is impossible to just fill in "a transcendent aspect of human nature" for "soul" without there being something lost from the author's original message. Fair enough, I don't consider myself an expert on the topic, but I feel that the Bible is true but that it is presented through a worldview (culture) that is different from our own and one great task in studying the Bible is learning how to apply what it says to your own individual life. So all I ask is that you keep an open, yet still critical, mind.
To introduce the topic I suggest reading a fellow Fuller student's, getting a Ph.D. in Philosophical Theology, blog as an introduction. But if you want to learn more you can read Brown's lecture on Descartesian concepts of mind (soul) and body, on recent neuropsychological research, and on determinism and free will in physicalist models of self. These lectures are more technical but offer a more in-depth look at the issue.
There are two main parts of his argument: that the soul is not necessary in Biblical faith and that despite pure physicalism humans can retain free will. I won't go into detail in the first. The second I find much more interesting. Here's the common argument: if humans don't have a soul, then they are just a bunch of neurons firing and so humans don't have any agency or free will. This was the main reason I believed in a soul. I thought that we needed to have some power that could overcome our mental wiring. If we live in a world of cause and effect, then everything that happens is deterministic and we have no control over what we do. We may have the experience of free will because we think we are thinking over different options but in reality, it is said, we are fixed in what we do and even in what we think about doing.
In a society that firmly believes in choice, as America does, it seems pretty obvious why this belief has not caught on more. We simply don't want to believe it. But
Brown's point in the lectures is that humans are capable of having free will and being purely physical beings at the same time. The argument, which is pretty hard to follow, is that the mind is so complex and full of networks that we are capable of circumventing deterministic problems. The familiar placebo effect will illustrate this better. The placebo effect occurs when the individual believes that some treatment will make them better, even when it is not actually doing anything physically. This is an example of a top-down influence on neuroanatomy, humans are able to exert control, albeit unconsciously, on the way their minds work.
Of course, there are clearly some issues that arise: artificial intelligence, severe brain damage, the concept of life after death, and many others. But the comforting feeling that arises is that we do not NEED to believe in a soul that we cannot prove exists (or can we?) in order to believe in free will. As a potential psychologist this means that to produce change in a client I will not always need to reward positive behavior and punish negative behavior in order to bring about change. By allowing the client to gain greater awareness of what is occurring inside of them, they will be empowered to change. It is a strong philosophical defense against those who believe that there is no right and wrong, that humans are simply a product of their environment.
And in case you're interested on my opinion on the matter, I am still deliberating. I find the prospect of a non-reductionistic physicalism to be consistent with my notion of spiritual growth as a process of training - or spiritual discipline - rather than as a supernatural intervention. But at the same time I remain hesitant because I'm not sure how my understanding of God and demons and the spiritual realm would be able to connect with a purely physical system. I accept that certain things occur outside of the realm of understanding and so I humbly accept that I will probably never know.
Questions? Comments? Concerns?
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Saturday, February 25, 2006
Thinking about My Orientation
I've been thinking about my orientation lately. No not my sexual orientation; my theoretical orientation. What kind of therapist do I want to do? There are several things to consider when you consider theoretical orientations. The first is effectiveness. Does it actually work? Does the therapeutic intervention do what it is supposed to do and does it do it better than other interventions? I have learned that some therapies work better than others but there really isn't one that is a cure-all for all problems. Cog-B and interpersonal therapies work best with depression. Behavioral therapy, like systematic desensitization, work best with phobias. By no means will I be able to become proficient in all 400 psychotherapy modalities and so I must choose to understand a select few.
The second thing to consider is the philosophy behind the theory. If I were to be a strict behaviorist then I would consider human beings to be like machines without any free will. Obviously that poses a problem for me as a Christian. So what I have to do is admit that some behaviors are less controlled by free will than others. Of course this makes sense Biblically because although we are said to have free will, there is plenty of evidence that God believes in using punishment and reward to encourage and discourage different behavior. If we were truly beings of free will then we would not be affected by consequences.
However, most theories don't break down so readily and so I need to reflect on what I believe constitutes the human experience. Does mental health mean freedom from psychologically distressing symptoms or does it mean emotional well-being? Do I believe that humans are essentially good or evil, or perhaps neither? What is the Imago Dei that God places on us? Obviously these questions have no clear answer - or at least it's not clear to me right now.
Thirdly, one must consider who you want to work with. This goes back to effectiveness again but we must consider what population we would work with and understand the philosophical questions well enough to know how you want to work with them.
Finally, I'm going to need to think about how to bring my faith into how I practice psychology. That does not always mean telling them about Christ, which would be unethical to do to people who are paying me for my time. But it does mean bringing in an understanding of grace and forgiveness that I can share with them. I believe one of the key ways to change a person is by teaching them to forgive. And the only way to teach them that is by showing them just how wretched they themselves are.
So there you have it. Welcome to a little bit of my world.
The second thing to consider is the philosophy behind the theory. If I were to be a strict behaviorist then I would consider human beings to be like machines without any free will. Obviously that poses a problem for me as a Christian. So what I have to do is admit that some behaviors are less controlled by free will than others. Of course this makes sense Biblically because although we are said to have free will, there is plenty of evidence that God believes in using punishment and reward to encourage and discourage different behavior. If we were truly beings of free will then we would not be affected by consequences.
However, most theories don't break down so readily and so I need to reflect on what I believe constitutes the human experience. Does mental health mean freedom from psychologically distressing symptoms or does it mean emotional well-being? Do I believe that humans are essentially good or evil, or perhaps neither? What is the Imago Dei that God places on us? Obviously these questions have no clear answer - or at least it's not clear to me right now.
Thirdly, one must consider who you want to work with. This goes back to effectiveness again but we must consider what population we would work with and understand the philosophical questions well enough to know how you want to work with them.
Finally, I'm going to need to think about how to bring my faith into how I practice psychology. That does not always mean telling them about Christ, which would be unethical to do to people who are paying me for my time. But it does mean bringing in an understanding of grace and forgiveness that I can share with them. I believe one of the key ways to change a person is by teaching them to forgive. And the only way to teach them that is by showing them just how wretched they themselves are.
So there you have it. Welcome to a little bit of my world.
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Suffering and Theodicy
My last post I discussed one of the lectures I attended on Friday and this blog will be about another lecture I attended that was on theodicy. For those who are unsure what theodicy means, as I was at the beginning of the lecture, it means the belief that God is good in the face of suffering. It is also commonly referred to as the problem of pain. I read several chapters from C.S. Lewis' The Problem of Pain in high school and I believe it was an honest and forthright attempt to explain God's goodness in the face of suffering. However, for those that have ever suffered it would probably leave one rather wanting.
The lecture was entitled The Problem of Pain Revisited: Some Insights & Implications for Servant-Practitioner-Scholars by Richard Butman of Wheaton College. I appreciated hearing Dr. Butman speak not only because he was an author of our primary text in one of my classes but also because he was an extremely heartfelt speaker who shared the pains of his experiences.
I will hardly do it all justice but I will try and summarize the key points. Despite our great desire to be able to cope with loss and our understanding that suffering produces character and perseverance, we continue to be battered by a life that is filled with frustration and sadness. We Christians often think that the healthy Christian will rebound from painful experiences quickly and see God's purpose in it all. Of course we allow ourselves some time to grieve and be in pain but we expect to recover quickly.
What we will eventually discover is that there will come a time when we are faced with a pain so terrible that it will set us back and cause us to question God. People find themselves asking the great question, why me? Of course many of us, myself included, wonder why calamity doesn't seem to be striking and we ask the equally important question, why not me?
It appears that if we cannot explain it away logically or passively dismiss it, the only positive alternative is to embrace our pain. To be able to grow from it and expand ourselves is the great challenge that we are faced with. We can either become better or bitter.
Finally, I must address the psychology that was presented in the lecture. The predictors of coping with loss are 1) social support, 2) a sense of efficacy, and 3) a sense of meaning and purpose in life. Here we find that God has prepared a faith and a community for us that we might find help in dealing with loss. The Christian church is meant to be social support. The Christian faith believes that God can work through us to help us recover. And the Christian hope is that we have not only eternal life in Heaven to look forward to but a mission of evangelism, restoration, and recovery while we are alive on earth.
On a personal note, some of you may or may not know that in junior high I was severely depressed. Of course it would be nice if I could share that my faith in God saved me from despair. Well it did to some extent because it did keep me from suicide. But I hated that God left me in that state for so long. I was depressed for two and a half long years. I wish I could say that I see God's great purpose in that experience but honestly, as a result of that time I became angrier, more emotionally isolated, and more hypocritical. Basically during my depression I became an ugly and wretched human. It is hard to make sense of all that because I thought God should have brought me out of it all and suddenly I would have been positively changed by my suffering. But I had let my depression make me bitter and resentful.
I do thank God now in a small part because I believe that my experiences will bring hope to those I counsel and understanding to those who want to support those who are depressed. I just pray that I do not waste the lessons in suffering I learned. I also thank God in faith that he has already worked those experiences into my life in mysterious and amazing ways (some of those ways have been revealed to me recently).
What is the takehome message? That depends on the feelings that all of this arose in you. If you read this and felt compassion and hope for the depressed, then the message for you is that you must be humble, you will not be able to fix anyone. If you felt despair and frustration, then your message is to recognize those parts of your own life where you have been wronged which you may be ignoring and grieve the pain you feel. And if you are depressed, then the message for you is grace - simply that God wishes to grow you but is willing to be incredibly patient with you every step of the way.
Friday, February 17, 2006
Narrative Living
I attended a conference at Fuller today called "Redeeming Difficult Hope: Working with Diverse Populations" and one of the lectures was called "Community Narratives and Personal Stories: A Framework for Thinking About the Art of Social and Individual Change." I suppose the reason I attended the conference is because I have recently been discovering the importance of developing "my story." But before I begin I want to clarify what is meant by narrative, at least as proscribed by Dr. Rappaport.
A story is a personal account while a narrative takes place in a community. Narratives occur all the time. It is our way of looking at the world. Psychological research has shown that eyewitnesses will often manufacture details because they have a certain script for events ( i.e. saying you saw a person wearing a sweater when it's cold out, although they in fact weren't). Another example given was that when we look at artwork it often invokes the need to tell a story. What was happening in this picture? By learning about the subjects in the art we can develop a story behind it. We often do this automatically without even thinking about it.
Narratives are also a way of looking at communities. They are composed of stereotypes, scripts, generalizations, and values. The example given in the lecture was that if we were to write a story about a housing project we would probably talk about drug use, blacks, and gangs. However, if we were to write a story on suburban neighborhoods we might write about innocent children, honest living, and perhaps a scandal or two of adultery. But we have narratives about communities that shape the way we think about things.
So what types of communities are there? Of course there are neighborhoods but there are also religious groups (congregational level and small group level), recreational affiliations, peer groups, professional groups, interest groups, sports teams, and plenty of others. And for each community we have a narrative that shapes how we think about them.
But here is where I want to add my own personal thoughts on the matter. I believe that thinking about and telling my story shapes how I view myself. I already have a story about myself. But when I choose to think about my story I end up thinking about the broader picture: my childhood, my mistakes, my successes, my loves, my hates, and my true identity. By choosing to do this we open ourselves up to being corrected by the facts about ourselves. For some this may mean becoming more humble about who we are. For others this may mean being a little more proud. But for both types it gives a truer sense of who you are.
Our lives have been full of positive and negative experiences. One way of empowering ourselves to change is by telling our stories to another person. By doing so, we are freed from the isolation of having a hidden past. It allows us to open up our vulnerabilities. I know nothing more wonderful than exposing your most darkest secrets with someone you trust and being accepted regardless. It is a glimpse of the unconditional love that restores our souls.
I challenge you to write down your autobiography. Maybe it can be limited to how you developed educationally and professionally. Maybe you can limit to how you have been trapped by resentments towards certain people. But however you choose to do it I think you will find it enlightening. And find a person you trust and share your story. Perhaps your pastor or just a trusted friend.
When I wrote about my development I was amazed at how much I learned that I had simply learned bad habits of living while I was depressed in junior high. Writing it down and learning about myself was redemptive and has freed me to see myself for who I really am. As Dr. Rappaport remarked, "Stories create us and we create the stories."
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
Bono Unplugged
I've been searching the web some to understand blogs and their origin and found out something interesting: they are supposed to be a log of what is occurring on the web. As opposed to online journals, which are personal accounts, blogs write specifically about online news, internet changes, and other stuff that occurs online. Considering all this I've decided my blog is more of a muse than either a blog or an online journal. But since it's officially called a blog I give you this article on Bono to enjoy.
In my opinion, Bono is a real pioneer. The church has lost the vision of caring for the poor but, as the article says, is reviving that interest. If I understand Bono's goal correctly it's that he hopes that there will no longer be people living on less than a dollar a day anywhere in the world. I applaud his vision and his passion. The article writes, "Bono said lately he's been struck by Isaiah 58, and particularly verse 8, which in several translations says if you help the poor, the Lord will be 'your rearguard.' Bono told us, 'God will watch your back. I love the street aspect of that.' Then he quietly added, 'And it's really been true in my own life.'"
Other parts of the article I enjoyed were:
"Asked about his own past criticism of contemporary gospel music, Bono admitted he was referring to what he saw as 'happy clappy' songs that lacked 'grit.' He said such music doesn't mean anything to him 'without a truth telling of where you are and where you live in your life.'"
I share his frustration that Christian songs have lost their honest appraisal of where we really stand before God. Many songs have focused on telling God how much we love him. Well that forgets to mention the precondition for our love for him - that he first loved us.
"With spontaneous eloquence, he said being a worship leader must be 'the highest of all art forms, to worship and call people into the presence of God.'"
Bono really is quite the poet. I consider U2 to be my favorite band largely because of how Bono's lyrics are both honest and hopeful at the same time.
In my opinion, Bono is a real pioneer. The church has lost the vision of caring for the poor but, as the article says, is reviving that interest. If I understand Bono's goal correctly it's that he hopes that there will no longer be people living on less than a dollar a day anywhere in the world. I applaud his vision and his passion. The article writes, "Bono said lately he's been struck by Isaiah 58, and particularly verse 8, which in several translations says if you help the poor, the Lord will be 'your rearguard.' Bono told us, 'God will watch your back. I love the street aspect of that.' Then he quietly added, 'And it's really been true in my own life.'"
Other parts of the article I enjoyed were:
"Asked about his own past criticism of contemporary gospel music, Bono admitted he was referring to what he saw as 'happy clappy' songs that lacked 'grit.' He said such music doesn't mean anything to him 'without a truth telling of where you are and where you live in your life.'"
I share his frustration that Christian songs have lost their honest appraisal of where we really stand before God. Many songs have focused on telling God how much we love him. Well that forgets to mention the precondition for our love for him - that he first loved us.
"With spontaneous eloquence, he said being a worship leader must be 'the highest of all art forms, to worship and call people into the presence of God.'"
Bono really is quite the poet. I consider U2 to be my favorite band largely because of how Bono's lyrics are both honest and hopeful at the same time.
Carry your electric chair
Originally posted January 30th, 2005.
Matthew 18:24-26
24Then Jesus said to his disciples, "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. 25For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it. 26What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul?
Now I'm not typically the type that tosses scripture around, because I think people often misuse verses, but I heard a sermon on this one and felt it was worth sharing primarily because the verse has become a tad trite but behind it is something truly profound. But let's remind ourselves that "the cross" was not a religious symbol for the 1st century Palestinian Jew. Crucifixion was reserved for insurrectionists and the vilest of criminals and so any association with it, prior to Christ, hinted that you were amongst the worst of the people. The Romans would occasionally crucify thousands of revolutionaries as a public spectacle of anyone that might try to usurp their power. It was very public and for the Jews it was especially heinous because they believe that anyone who "hung from a tree" carried a curse on them.
So why did Jesus say this? I believe that rather than trying to encourage his disciples to endure the rough times in their life, as it commonly used today, he said this in order to inform them of the great embarassment they must suffer as they follow him. This great embarassment is universal to all Christians - it is essentially saying that I am no good at living at my own life so I'm going to live it like Christ did. Admitting that we have done some terrible and vile things in our life. Yes that's embarassing! Why? Because who wants to admit that they are screwing up their lives everyday? Who wants to admit that God is not just a crutch but a wheelchair... and that we are crippled. I know it's not in my nature to do that.
But the truly staggering conclusion that every Christian makes (and continues to make, hopefully) is ... yes, I'm that messed up. I sin that much and I've hurt others that badly. And the "gospel," or the good news in English, is simply that God has readily forgiven us in some spiritual way that we can hardly comprehend through Jesus' execution. But much more than that: God promises us that when we deny the life we were living, we will find it!
I dunno maybe I'm coming off as some high minded preacher who doesn't understand much. But one thing I do understand is that in accepting my faults, rather than hiding them, I have found the freedom to live a "holy" life... and it's not about bible studies or rules and regulations... it's about finding hope and joy and faith and love. That's what I have found and I'd be a fool to let loose of my grip on it. (But I'm a fool so don't expect too much out of me)
Matthew 18:24-26
24Then Jesus said to his disciples, "If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. 25For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it. 26What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul?
Now I'm not typically the type that tosses scripture around, because I think people often misuse verses, but I heard a sermon on this one and felt it was worth sharing primarily because the verse has become a tad trite but behind it is something truly profound. But let's remind ourselves that "the cross" was not a religious symbol for the 1st century Palestinian Jew. Crucifixion was reserved for insurrectionists and the vilest of criminals and so any association with it, prior to Christ, hinted that you were amongst the worst of the people. The Romans would occasionally crucify thousands of revolutionaries as a public spectacle of anyone that might try to usurp their power. It was very public and for the Jews it was especially heinous because they believe that anyone who "hung from a tree" carried a curse on them.
So why did Jesus say this? I believe that rather than trying to encourage his disciples to endure the rough times in their life, as it commonly used today, he said this in order to inform them of the great embarassment they must suffer as they follow him. This great embarassment is universal to all Christians - it is essentially saying that I am no good at living at my own life so I'm going to live it like Christ did. Admitting that we have done some terrible and vile things in our life. Yes that's embarassing! Why? Because who wants to admit that they are screwing up their lives everyday? Who wants to admit that God is not just a crutch but a wheelchair... and that we are crippled. I know it's not in my nature to do that.
But the truly staggering conclusion that every Christian makes (and continues to make, hopefully) is ... yes, I'm that messed up. I sin that much and I've hurt others that badly. And the "gospel," or the good news in English, is simply that God has readily forgiven us in some spiritual way that we can hardly comprehend through Jesus' execution. But much more than that: God promises us that when we deny the life we were living, we will find it!
I dunno maybe I'm coming off as some high minded preacher who doesn't understand much. But one thing I do understand is that in accepting my faults, rather than hiding them, I have found the freedom to live a "holy" life... and it's not about bible studies or rules and regulations... it's about finding hope and joy and faith and love. That's what I have found and I'd be a fool to let loose of my grip on it. (But I'm a fool so don't expect too much out of me)
Excerpts
Originally posted January 19th, 2006.
Well I wrote a paper on how psychology and spirituality intersect for a scholarship from my school. Anyways if you are a faithful reader of my blog, as more and more people are, you would notice that this is one of my passions. Well maybe I didn't write about it explicitly but it was definitely in there. Anyways, I thought I'd share some quotes from my paper to give you the gist of it. Too long? Well it's a 10 page paper so duh! But read the first few quotes, I think it will catch your interest.
Spiritually integrative living is simply living in a way that reflects your faith in a God who is real, powerful, and perfect.
Spiritual transformation occurs as a result of seeing God’s faithfulness in one area and making a decision, in faith, to follow God in other areas, believing that God will once again prove faithful.... [or in other words] is simply moving towards a spiritually integrated lifestyle.
Now if you would survey a newly converted Christian, I do not think that you will find that they really exude much spiritual “fruit.” The supernatural intervention that we all wish would occur just does not seem to be happening. That is because, in my opinion, spiritual transformation occurs through very ordinary and “unspiritual” means.
By (the church) subjecting it’s members to a weekly sermon, Sunday school for the more devout, and an encouragement to set off a daily quiet time, many believers, myself included for most of my life, have been convinced that spiritual growth came when you have heard the message enough times, as if it did not take intentional implementation.
But if one admits their own inability to manage their own life then they have admitted that they must follow outside advice to get better.
I was often mistaken in my Christian walk to believe that changing myself meant creating a seething hatred within myself over my sins....But part of human nature is that our emotions are merely a signal for us to change and not a solution to our problems. It is crucial to understand that our sickness is incurable by our own power.
I have noticed that the spiritual disciplines are so indoctrinated... that even the mention of them often evokes a great deal of negative feelings.... because along with the spiritual disciplines comes a burden of guilt for not practicing them.
***The person who practices the spiritual disciplines rightly is doing so because they are keenly aware at how their life self-destructs when they try to manage it themselves. ***
When someone begins a relationship with God they have to commit to it or it will ruin them. The guilt produced by living in the awareness of God’s presence without actually changing your lifestyle will simply destroy you.
Once you are there you must learn to take wise counsel, study the Word, and surrender each moment to God. For each negative thought, you must replace it with a positive thought. For each instance where you want to sin, you will find that you must make an action of love. I have learned that you must become aware of your feelings, reactions, and thoughts.
But it seems that each step we take in faith, although we feel like it is the worst way in the world to do things, brings us to a better place where we grow in hope and freedom. That hope and freedom is the ultimate goal of spiritually integrated living.
Comments? Questions? Criticisms?
Well I wrote a paper on how psychology and spirituality intersect for a scholarship from my school. Anyways if you are a faithful reader of my blog, as more and more people are, you would notice that this is one of my passions. Well maybe I didn't write about it explicitly but it was definitely in there. Anyways, I thought I'd share some quotes from my paper to give you the gist of it. Too long? Well it's a 10 page paper so duh! But read the first few quotes, I think it will catch your interest.
Spiritually integrative living is simply living in a way that reflects your faith in a God who is real, powerful, and perfect.
Spiritual transformation occurs as a result of seeing God’s faithfulness in one area and making a decision, in faith, to follow God in other areas, believing that God will once again prove faithful.... [or in other words] is simply moving towards a spiritually integrated lifestyle.
Now if you would survey a newly converted Christian, I do not think that you will find that they really exude much spiritual “fruit.” The supernatural intervention that we all wish would occur just does not seem to be happening. That is because, in my opinion, spiritual transformation occurs through very ordinary and “unspiritual” means.
By (the church) subjecting it’s members to a weekly sermon, Sunday school for the more devout, and an encouragement to set off a daily quiet time, many believers, myself included for most of my life, have been convinced that spiritual growth came when you have heard the message enough times, as if it did not take intentional implementation.
But if one admits their own inability to manage their own life then they have admitted that they must follow outside advice to get better.
I was often mistaken in my Christian walk to believe that changing myself meant creating a seething hatred within myself over my sins....But part of human nature is that our emotions are merely a signal for us to change and not a solution to our problems. It is crucial to understand that our sickness is incurable by our own power.
I have noticed that the spiritual disciplines are so indoctrinated... that even the mention of them often evokes a great deal of negative feelings.... because along with the spiritual disciplines comes a burden of guilt for not practicing them.
***The person who practices the spiritual disciplines rightly is doing so because they are keenly aware at how their life self-destructs when they try to manage it themselves. ***
When someone begins a relationship with God they have to commit to it or it will ruin them. The guilt produced by living in the awareness of God’s presence without actually changing your lifestyle will simply destroy you.
Once you are there you must learn to take wise counsel, study the Word, and surrender each moment to God. For each negative thought, you must replace it with a positive thought. For each instance where you want to sin, you will find that you must make an action of love. I have learned that you must become aware of your feelings, reactions, and thoughts.
But it seems that each step we take in faith, although we feel like it is the worst way in the world to do things, brings us to a better place where we grow in hope and freedom. That hope and freedom is the ultimate goal of spiritually integrated living.
Comments? Questions? Criticisms?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)