Anyone Want to End Piracy?

SOPA and PIPA

At this point, I imagine anyone with Internet access has heard of SOPA and PIPA. I found last Wednesday’s online protest quite enjoyable. I love political activism; I love seeing a people stand up to Washington and the large companies who try to purchase power over us*; and I hope this bill goes down because it will do little concerning piracy but could change the Internet as we know it.

Wednesday was a big win. I hope neither of these bills (and anything like them) ever pass.

But I’m also concerned about piracy, the issue some had hoped the bills would address. I’m concerned by the realization that *many* good persons are pirating music, films, and software…but few seem care.

I have a story about piracy. A story from my life.

My Lack of Music Problem

I was never one to listen to music regularly, so over the course of my high school years I acquired only a couple music CDs. But when I went to school (Virginia) in the Fall of 2004, I realized I do enjoy listening to music sometimes; it’s just that when I was home I’d relied upon overhearing music others were playing. So I set about to fix my lack of music problem.

It started small, I ripped a couple of my sister’s CDs to my computer, and I used iTunes to manage my music. It wasn’t long before I wanted to listen to something else, so I found it online for free (maybe a Russian site, etcetera).

Next thing you know, I wasn’t just using iTunes, I was also using MyTunes (pirating music from other computers that shared music via iTunes). Within months I’d amassed tens of gigabytes of music. It was wonderful—I had everything from Elvis to Shania Twain to Papa Roach to Snoop Dogg to Nickel Creek.

Reality Check

After this behavior began (probably more than a year later) I had a conversation with a friend. He confronted me: piracy is wrong, he clearly conveyed; it’s theft.

The wheels began turning in my head. Our conversation didn’t last too long…but I continued to have one with myself for a long while; I wanted to justify my behavior, explain how it wasn’t that bad.

(An Aside Concerning Definitions)

I realize that not everyone agrees upon what piracy means, and I don’t plan to settle the discussion now (I’m not entirely sure myself).

Yes, gray areas exist. For the purposes of this post, let’s ignore those gray areas and focus on the clear areas (such as the piracy I was guilty of early in my college years).

And let’s face it, though gray area piracy does occur often, straight up piracy is super common, and it’s done by normal and generally upstanding citizens of our nation.

Is Internet Piracy Really Theft?

Obviously theft is wrong. If someone questions this, we have other issues with which to deal! (Exodus 20:15, “You shall not steal.”)

Certainly back in the day that mostly applied to physical property (e.g. baskets, pigs, hammers, and pens)

But what about intellectual property (IP—the IP in PIPA)? IP is less tangible (e.g. brand names, music, designs, and prose).

Consider this passage:

1 Corinthians 9:9-11, For it is written in the law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain.” Is it oxen God is concerned about? 10 Or does He say it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written, that he who plows should plow in hope, and he who threshes in hope should be partaker of his hope. 11 If we have sown spiritual things for you, is it a great thing if we reap your material things?

In a relatively direct way Paul is saying that intangible investments (i.e. teaching, prayer, etc.) that he and others have made are worthy of material compensation. Paul used a passage from the law of Moses, and shows that it was not written so much for the sake of oxen, but as a specific instance of a big idea: it is right and good for us to enjoy the fruit of our labor.

And Paul’s specific application shows that whether that labor results in something super tangible like houses and crops or something less tangible such as excellent public addresses and written letters, it is right and good for the laborer to enjoy the fruit of his labor.

Ecclesiastes 3:13, Every man should eat and drink and enjoy the good of all his labor—it is the gift of God.

Thus, when people write/perform/record music, when they design logos, when they create video games, when they write screenplays, etc…it is good and right for them to enjoy the fruit of their labor. And if they write a super popular screenplay, then it is good and right for them to enjoy *lots* of fruit.

(And, yes—for those quick to judge—it is also good and right for them to be generous with that fruit.)

Personal Attestation: As someone who’s possessed much more intellectual property than traditional property, I can bear witness to the fact that that IP often is the result of much labor! (That said, I’m a big open source fan and don’t mind sharing the fruit of *most* of my labor.)

I’ve recorded music, played shows, written at length, built software, etc. IP is most definitely the result of labor, and it should be enjoyed by the laborer. And when you use or make a copy of that property without permission, you’re depriving a laborer of the fruit of his labors; you’re muzzling the ox. This is sin.

(Again, fair use is massively important…and there are many gray areas. I briefly addressed this in the aside earlier in the post.)

My Excuses

After determining it was wrong, I still wanted to justify my piracy—I didn’t want to lose all the music I’d acquired!

These are two excuses I actually told myself:

  1. Everyone Does It

So? Since when does God call us to the holiness standard set by “everyone”?

I had no answer.

  1. I Don’t Feel Convicted When I Pirate Music

This seemed to satisfy. After all, if celebrating no day as holy doesn’t bother your conscience, then don’t celebrate, right (Rom. 14)? And then I realized, “How terrifying—that my actions are clearly condemned by the Word of God and yet not by my own conscience!”

It was as if my conscience had been “seared with a hot iron” (1 Tim 4:2); it was unresponsive to this sin.

The End of My Story

I repented. I deleted the music. I do my best to refrain from piracy (again, there definitely are gray areas).

And my conscience is much more sensitive in this area now. (I’m even convicted as I write this concerning a piece of software; I need to look into the licensing details!)

Conclusion

What’s the solution? Well, certainly not SOPA and PIPA! They wouldn’t have stopped the college-freshman-me anyway…but a lot of passion was exhibited the other day—a people taking a stand for liberty.

And I would love to see as much passion exhibited by a people in support of the respect of intellectual property. And not a stand that necessarily results in laws, but results in individuals calling each other out and taking a stand for God honoring activity.

Piracy might get someone the coolest things fastest, but I don’t think piracy is cool in God’s book.

The end.

* (I didn’t want to distract from my point up top…but this is too good not to mention!) We’ve all long known that corporations regularly bribe politicians through campaign contributions (and are often successful). One amazingly direct quotation surfaced through this whole SOPA/PIPA ordeal, a statement from a studio chief who said, “God knows how much money we’ve given to Obama and the Democrats and yet they’re not supporting our interests.”

§78 · January 23, 2012 · 1472 Words · Essays, Miscellaneous, Politics · Comments Off · Tags: , , ,

Part Three (A): The Kalam Cosmological Argument

Note: This is part of a mini-series; I recommend reading the posts in order.

Introduction

Well, it’s been longer than I anticipated since the last post, I guess I got distracted, and then lost vision. But now I’m back.

I haven’t been able to reduce Part Three below two thousand words, so I’ve decided to break it up further into two posts, Three (A) and Three (B). In this post I will introduce the argument, and then consider it’s second premise.

The Kalam Cosmological Argument

Much credit goes to William Lane Craig, a prominent scholar who’s excellent presentation of this argument has had a great impact on me.

(Much credit is also due to my friend, Carson Smith, who has engaged with me in dialogue for many hours concerning this and related subjects. He also authored sections of this, but I cannot remember which ones.)

The Kalam Cosmological Argument, one of many versions of the Cosmological Argument, is an argument for the existence of a cause of our universe, and takes the form of a very simple syllogism.

  1. Everything that began to exist had a cause
  2. The universe began to exist
  3. Therefore, the universe had a cause

Using this basic syllogism, let us proceed.

Validity of the Syllogism

Firstly, does this syllogism represent valid logic? That is, if the (1) first and (2) second premises are true, does (3) the conclusion necessarily follow? The answer is yes, for this syllogism is of a simple form:

1. All A are B
2. x is an A
3. Therefore, x is B

This syllogism represents simple and valid logic. Thus, if the premises are true, then the conclusion necessarily is true also. In order to determine the soundness or reasonability of the conclusion, we now must examine the premises. The conclusion is as true/sound/reasonable as the weakest premise.

First we’ll analyze the (2) second premise.

Evidence for the Truthfulness of the Second Premise:

Metaphysics

The second premise:

  1. The universe began to exist

If the universe did not begin to exist, then it is eternal and has an infinite past. However, it can be demonstrated that the actualization of an infinite quantity quickly leads to absurd results. Infinities cannot exist in reality. Stick with me for a moment, this will make sense. Another simple syllogism:

  1. An actually infinite number of things cannot exist in reality
  2. A beginningless series of events is an infinite number of things
  3. Therefore, a beginningless series of events cannot exist in reality

Simply put, infinities cannot be actualized.

Additionally,

  1. An eternal universe must exist over an infinite period of time
  2. An infinite period of time would imply a beginningless series of events
  3. A beginningless series of events cannot exist in reality
  4. Therefore an infinite period of time cannot exist in reality
  5. Therefore the universe cannot be eternal

This states that time without a beginning means that there exists an actually infinite set of time events. But since we know that infinities cannot be actualized, then time must have a beginning, and the universe must not be eternal.

This is an important point to understand, so let’s continue further. Some more illustrative arguments:

Billiard Balls

Suppose person A has an actually infinite number of billiard balls. Person A could give ten of the balls to person B, but he would still have an infinite number of balls himself. Infinity minus ten equals infinity.

Continuing with this for a moment, suppose person A gave person B every other ball in his collection, an infinite number of balls. So person A keeps an infinite number of balls, every other ball, while giving away and infinite number of balls. Infinity minus infinity equals infinity.

This math works on paper, but when applied to actuality, it becomes absurd. We all know that if you have a bucket of balls, no matter how big (even a bucket the size of our galaxy) if you give away ten billiard balls, then you will have ten less. You will not have the same amount.

Similarly, if you give away your total number of balls, then you will have none left. Infinite numbers are useful for lots of stuff, but they cannot be actualized…it’s absurd.

In this case with the billiard balls, we encounter a situation in which infinity minus ten (or even infinity minus infinity) does not change the actual number of balls remaining; there are still an infinite number of balls. This defies logic, and therefore, due to the law of non-contradiction, this example demonstrates that actualized infinities cannot exist in reality.

Walking Home

Enough with the billiard balls, let’s consider a situation more directly analogous to infinite time.

Suppose that you started walking home from a position an actually infinite number of steps (yards) away from your home. Now imagine that you take one step. If you subtract one step from infinity, you still have an infinite number of steps remaining, and so your one step closer to your home has simply positioned you another infinite number of steps away from your home. In essence, after one step you now have an “infinity minus one” number of steps to go, which is, of course, just another infinite number of steps. No matter how many steps you take, you will aways have an infinite number of steps to traverse, and so you will never make it home.

Not only can we not actualize infinities because of the absurdity and the law of non-contradiction, but we could never traverse an infinite number of steps, events, or pass through an infinite amount of time, even if such quantities of distance or time were real.

Back to Our universe

Now let us consider some things about the universe. If the universe were eternal—as in, has always existed, as in, did not begin to exist, as in, has existed from an infinite past—then between the infinite past and the present exists an infinite expanse of time. As has been demonstrated, an infinite expanse of distance, time, or anything, cannot be fully traversed, and so our universe could never traverse that infinite expanse of time to reach the present. Given an infinite past, our universe would always be in transit to the present, an infinite amount of time away.

However, we have reached the present! The universe has reached “now”!

The only way the universe could have reached “now”, is for it to have traversed a finite expanse of time on its way to “now”. If it traversed a finite expanse of time to reach now, which it must have done, then there must have been a beginning at which it began. The only way to have a finite expanse of time before “now”, is to have a beginning.

To Summarize The Metaphysical Arguments

Infinities can never be actualized, only approached. Thus time as we know it (think space time) had a beginning.

Thus, our universe is not eternal, but began to exist at some point in the past.

Contemporary Science

The non-eternal nature of our universe can be attested through an analysis of the impossibility and absurdity of eternal time. However, is a logical analysis of the absurd effects of infinite time just a theoretical idea about the non-eternality of the universe, or does the realm of science provide us with any additional information to confirm or deny the claim that the universe is not eternal?

The answer to this question is: Yes! Scientific observations do provide additional information about the eternality or non-eternality of the universe. In fact, scientific observation has done much to corroborate the theory that the universe is not eternal, has not always been, and therefore had a beginning…aka…”the universe began to exist”.

Redshift and Expansion

One of the many observations directing one to the conclusion that the universe had a beginning is fact of the current expansion of the universe. In 1929, Edwin Hubble observed that galaxies appeared to be moving away from each other, based on his observation of the redshift in the light received from distant supernovae. Hubble’s observations and subsequent conclusions demonstrated that the universe is expanding. This conclusion carries the implication that the universe had a definite beginning; for movement backward in time necessarily entails the progressive densification of our universe, and consequently, if one were to continue to move backward in time, eventually they would reach a state in which the universe was unexpanded and extremely dense. If one were to travel far enough into the past, they would reach the point in time when the expansion began, thus representing the beginning of the universe. The event causing this unexpanded and dense amount of material to expand, is commonly known as the Big Bang, and marks the beginning of our universe.

Accelerated Expansion

In 1998, a monumental discovery was made by cosmologists indicating that the universe is not only expanding, but expanding more rapidly now than it was in the past. Again, the discovery that our universe is expanding (at an accelerating pace no-less) is a strong evidence that in the distant past, the universe began to exist. However, the discovery of the universe’s accelerating expansion also demonstrates that the universe will not collapse back on itself, destroying the postulation that the universe has oscillated back and forth, eternally, by means of successive Big Bangs and “Big Crunches”. Digressing back to the original point, the accelerating expansion of the universe is yet another corroboration that the universe’s expansion and the universe itself began at some point in the distant past.

Modern Science

The beginning of the universe has also been described by leading cosmologists and theoretical physicists such as Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose. In their publications, “The Cosmic Black-Body Radiation and the Existence of Singularities in our Universe” (Astrophysics Journal 152 (1968), pp. 25-36) (co-written with George Ellis), and “The Singularities of Gravitational Collapse and Cosmology” (Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series A, 314 (1970) pp. 529-548), Hawking and Penrose conclude that space and time, along with matter and energy, had a distinct beginning at some point in the past. Stated more simply, they concluded that before the Big Bang, time, space, energy, and matter did not exist. Instead, everything began to exist only once the Big Bang occurred.

Reasonability

The Kalam Cosmological Argument is simple. But it is valid and it’s conclusion is bold. The debate concerns the reasonability of the premises.

  1. The universe began to exist

This premise is highly reasonable. It is strongly supported by metaphysical arguments and modern physics and cosmology.

Next we’ll consider the (1) first premise. And then we’ll consider the reasonability of the conclusion and its implications.

§51 · June 14, 2011 · 1850 Words · Apologetics (The Mini-Series), Essays · Comments Off · Tags: , , , , ,

Social Security: Can I Opt Out?

Tax Day Is Coming

Nothing gets me more interested in how the government spends money than cutting a check for thousands of dollars. (Full disclosure: I only paid about 16.5% of my income for the last year, but a few thousand dollars is pretty significant to this guy who works a couple part-time jobs!)

If the government’s goal is to get me heavily interested in Federal fiscal policy, they have succeeded. I’m always interested in such things, but after filing my taxes today, I’m freshly aware of my personal and emotional investment! (Hey, Scripture is right: where my money is my heart is also.)

So I pay a small amount, but it still left a dent that has caused renewed interest!

Mostly (about 12.4% of my 16%) my money went to Social Security. “How do I feel about this?” Well, I’m glad you asked…I happen to be fairly interested in this at present!

My Friend Sam

Let me give a simple illustration that sheds some light on how Social Security is currently working.

There are two characters: my friend Sam and me.

I’m terrible at saving money. I happen to get a gig where miraculously I earn $10 million. Knowing my propensity to frivolously spend, I decide to give the money to my friend Sam for one year for safe keeping, and he agrees to the plan.

Sam now has the $10 million.

“Should I put it under a giant mattress?” He asks. “No, that is impractical and unsafe.”

“Should I put it all in the stock market? Nah, too dangerous. But a savings account is too boring and the money won’t do anything useful for a year.”

He has an idea, “I’ll lend it to myself! Yes, I’ve paid back my college loans, and I’ve never missed a payment on my home mortgage. I’m safe, and could do lots of useful things with the money.”

Stellar idea, right?

After he’s loaned himself the money, he finds that he has a lot of spending money on hand. He buys his mother a new car, completes his home mortgage, and donates one hundred thousand to a charity downtown for the homeless.

A couple months later he decides to remodel most of his house, purchase a new car himself, hand each of his several children twenty grand in cash for academic assistance, throws a county wide festival at a substantial financial loss, hires a personal trainer and a housekeeper, and donates another hundred thousand to the charity downtown.

Life is good. Sam owes himself some money, but that’s ok, right?

Halfway through the year Sam learns of another charitable organization in need, and makes a commitment of five hundred thousand dollars every month. He notices that the local high school could really use a new building, so he donates five million dollars towards a construction project. He makes a monthly commitment to supporting a computer laboratory with IT support too—these kids need to have proper access to the digital age.

The year ends.

I come back to Sam looking for my money. I have an idea for a small business startup that I’m really excited about (a brick and mortar business). Sam says, “Ugh…oops.”

Social Security

To be fair, this illustration is very simplistic. A few corrections:

  • With Social Security (SS), this happened over a longer period of time—kind of like a frog in water, you don’t always realize how dumb something is when you get into it a bit at a time.
  • With SS, it started out with amounts that reasonable could be rapaid. Unfortunately, it has grown to trillions of dollars and the government (with many other trillions of dollars of debt) is now in about as dire a situation as Sam with $10 million.
  • To be clear, a lot of the things that the government has done with the trillions of dollars were not entirely evil but often driven by nice motives.

If you’re unfamiliar with SS, the basic idea is that along with standard taxes, about 12.4% (half paid by employers) of an individual’s income is given to the government. And then once that person becomes disabled or retired, they start receiving SS checks from the government. Essentially, it is mandatory, government run insurance/pension plan.

During much of the program, the government has brought in more money than it’s paid (all the baby boomers were paying). Having this money, they decided to invest it in themselves. They take our retirement money and spent it on schools, roads, Libya, international abortion, etc.

(Didn’t know that our tax dollars, partly go towards funding abortions overseas? http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/23/obama.abortion/.)

The government has continued this process for years, and it’s at the point where they’ve spent trillions—too much for them to just cough up without some serious pain.

All That to Say

I’m fine at saving money. Even if “Sam” was actually intelligent and trustworthy, I don’t need his help. I’d save and invest the money myself.

There is another siginificant difference between the illustration and the actual system:

  • One is optional (the illustration) and the other is required (Social Security)

(I guess one could theoretically avoid SS by moving to Kenya or something). SS is not an optional government service, it is mandatory.

Just like I’d opt out of having my friend Sam help me out, I’d opt out of Social Security even if the system worked well.

But not only am I forced to participate, but the system doesn’t work well! Uncle Sam is terrible with money. Spending is out of control, why would I ever go to the government even if I needed help?

I’m not sure of a great solution. Reign in spending, pay off the debt (both foreign and intra-government), and live within our means. Personally, I’d rather not participate in Social Security. But if I have to, let’s at least make the system responsible! #votesmart

§43 · April 13, 2011 · 1015 Words · Essays · 7 comments · Tags: , , , ,

Part Two: Concerning Proof and Reasonability

Note: This is part of a mini-series; I recommend reading the posts in order.

Can You Prove It?

You might think you know many truths and can *prove* them. But seriously, what can you actually prove? Cogito ergo sum (I think, therefore I am), Descartes’s famous premise. It is quite good.

But moving beyond that basic idea, it is pretty hard to prove anything.

Can you prove your body actually exists? What if you are in the Matrix—your mind is plugged into a virtual reality system somewhere? Can you prove you aren’t? Can you prove that the people around you aren’t figments of your imagination?

No, you can’t actually prove these things.

However, we don’t get anywhere useful by questioning obviously reasonable ideas like the actuality of our bodies. Unless you are presented with a good reason to doubt, trust your reality is actuality; it will allow you to continue on to much more interesting conclusions! It takes some faith to believe your body exists and that the people around you exist, but it is more useful to believe, and since there is no evidence to the contrary it is reasonable to believe our reality.

Sometimes this point becomes very significant because people will ask, concerning my beliefs, “Can you prove it?” Well, no. I don’t think I can. But I cannot even prove your existence! But what I can do is show that my beliefs are very reasonable. Can you?

Reasonability

So rather than trying to prove X before exercising faith, one simply needs to judge X’s reasonability. I essentially already covered this in the last post, but I want to make sure my bases are covered.

There are at least a few ways we judge if something is reasonable:

  • we use science (observable, measurable, and repeatable tests)
  • we use intuition (if something just “feels wrong” it is very difficult to believe)
  • we use our experience (I like to call it experiential data)
  • we use logic (propositional, predicate, categorical, math, etc.)

And then we come to a conclusion concerning a thing’s reasonability.

Of course, if we want to have good results then we need to be careful in our judgement. If we have an unsound premise or variable that is unaccounted for in a test, then our conclusion may be entirely unreasonable! So let’s proceed cautiously.

Teaser

If you’re bored so far, the next post might be more interesting: what’s the explanation for the existence of the Universe? Yes, my favorite version of the Cosmological Argument.

§44 · April 12, 2011 · 446 Words · Apologetics (The Mini-Series), Essays · 1 comment · Tags: , ,

Faith and Healing: A Little “Something”?

Preface

These are thoughts. A glimpse into my mind. I’m don’t have a solid conclusion of which I wish to persuade you. Of course I want to challenge you to pursue Jesus…and every bit of truth. Just don’t take these thoughts as super “firm”. Their the thoughts of one who still hasn’t fully settled on a specific set of thoughts!

First

This past week a friend wrote a good post concerning faith and healing. His main points:

  • Biblical faith looks outward not inward—don’t have faith in yourself, or even faith in faith…have faith in God!
  • The fruit of biblical faith is confidence, not confusion or inferiority
  • Sons have access to their father, so ask
  • Now and not yet—as believers we live the “already not yet” in lots of way; healing is in the same boat, sometimes God heals in the “now”, and sometimes God heals in the “not yet”.

If I wrote the post it would sound different and have some different wordings on account of other doctrines. But essentially his post describes what I teach and live. I very much agree.

Again, I agree with these thoughts, I don’t want my further ideas to detract from that. However, I feel like what I teach and live is often lacking a little “something”…which I haven’t quite defined exactly.

I don’t have a clear idea of what the “something” is, but it has to do with expectation, posture, responsibility, simple faith, and maybe more. My conclusion is not well defined, but simply an encouragement to be open to and pursuing a little “something” that is difficult for me to define precisely, but I think all can see it through at least a couple Bible stories. Hopefully it becomes slightly more clear as I continue.

Two Bible Stories

From Mark chapter nine: a possessed boy healed.

*Note, this story is primarily about deliverance…not so much healing, but I think it very much applies to the present discussion.

14 And when He came to the disciples, He saw a great multitude around them, and scribes disputing with them. 15 Immediately, when they saw Him, all the people were greatly amazed, and running to Him, greeted Him. 16 And He asked the scribes, “What are you discussing with them?” 17 Then one of the crowd answered and said, “Teacher, I brought You my son, who has a mute spirit. 18 And wherever it seizes him, it throws him down; he foams at the mouth, gnashes his teeth, and becomes rigid. So I spoke to Your disciples, that they should cast it out, but they could not.” 19 He answered him and said, “O faithless generation, how long shall I be with you? How long shall I bear with you? Bring him to Me.” 20 Then they brought him to Him. And when he saw Him, immediately the spirit convulsed him, and he fell on the ground and wallowed, foaming at the mouth. 21 So He asked his father, “How long has this been happening to him?” And he said, “From childhood. 22 And often he has thrown him both into the fire and into the water to destroy him. But if You can do anything, have compassion on us and help us.” 23 Jesus said to him, “If you can believe, all things are possible to him who believes.” 24 Immediately the father of the child cried out and said with tears, “Lord, I believe; help my unbelief!” 25 When Jesus saw that the people came running together, He rebuked the unclean spirit, saying to it, “Deaf and dumb spirit, I command you, come out of him and enter him no more!” 26 Then the spirit cried out, convulsed him greatly, and came out of him. And he became as one dead, so that many said, “He is dead.” 27 But Jesus took him by the hand and lifted him up, and he arose. 28 And when He had come into the house, His disciples asked Him privately, “Why could we not cast it out?” 29 So He said to them, “This kind can come out by nothing but prayer and fasting.”

From Mark chapter eleven: the withered fig tree.

12 Now the next day, when they had come out from Bethany, He was hungry. 13 And seeing from afar a fig tree having leaves, He went to see if perhaps He would find something on it. When He came to it, He found nothing but leaves, for it was not the season for figs. 14 In response Jesus said to it, “Let no one eat fruit from you ever again.” And His disciples heard it.

20 Now in the morning, as they passed by, they saw the fig tree dried up from the roots. 21 And Peter, remembering, said to Him, “Rabbi, look! The fig tree which You cursed has withered away.” 22 So Jesus answered and said to them, “Have faith in God. 23 For assuredly, I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, ‘Be removed and be cast into the sea,’ and does not doubt in his heart, but believes that those things he says will be done, he will have whatever he says. 24 Therefore I say to you, whatever things you ask when you pray, believe that you receive them, and you will have them.

Faith and My Story

For most of my life, I have had absolute faith that God is able to do whatever He wants. Unless you count random thoughts that are quickly taken captive (“how crazy is this, I believe in an invisible man in the sky!?”), I’ve just not doubted God. However, my faith that God will heal the person I’m praying for has not been so steady.

Additionally, by the middle of high school and continuing for a few years, I had faith that when I believed I would receive what I requested, then I would receive it. (By the way, that last idea is almost straight from Mark eleven.)

Sometimes I prayed for people and saw marked results—headaches gone, joints with greater range of motion, etc. Sometimes I prayed and nothing seemed to happen, I just figured someone (maybe me) hadn’t really believed we’d receive. I didn’t analyze it much though, you don’t need to experience “paralysis by analysis” to be aware of it!

But then, at the end of January of 2008, an abscess formed on one of my tonsils. It hurt like mad. It got to the point where I only slept for periods of less than an hour at a time. I remember asking with complete expectation to be healed. I expected to be healed.

As evidence: I was actually surprised that I wasn’t healed. I prayed again and again, crying out in tears. After a few days, my faith that I would receive what I asked when I believed I would receive went from ten to zero. In the end I had surgery…and my body recovered quickly, but emotionally I was left in a bit of shock.

My faith in God and His ability did not falter…just my faith in what Mark 11:24 says, “whatever things you ask when you pray, believe that you receive them, and you will have them.”

I realized, I don’t understand something. I’m missing something. Was Mark mistranslated? Did he get the story wrong from Peter? idk…the questions weren’t supposed to make sense…I was shocked. I had asked, believing I would receive…but I hadn’t. It was just confusing.

The “Something”

Over the past few years since then, I’ve come to a slightly more mature and generally Biblical position (very similar to Derek’s). But I feel like I’m supposed to have a little bit of the “something”…and reading his post freshly challenged me to think about it.

Unfortunately, as a result of not understanding why I wasn’t healed…as a result of missing something. I lost the “something” that these passages encourage. A kind of expectation. A kind of responsibility. A kind of posture. A kind of simple faith. A difficult to define precisely “something”. It’s true, I can’t precisely define it. But when I read the two stories in Mark that I presented previously, they convey the “something”…they impart a bit of the “something”. They challenge me a bit.

Faith in faith? I don’t think that’s quite right.

Faith in us? Not that either.

BUT, something about us…and something about faith. Read the stories again if you’ve already forgotten, but here are some highlight statements with brief thoughts:

Jesus siad, “O faithless generation.” We, you and me, the “something” has something to do with us.

“If you can believe, all things are possible to him who believes.” Speaking specifically to the father, but I think it contains a challenge for all of us.

“Lord, I believe; help my unbelief!” Again, this father had something to do with the “something”.

“He rebuked the unclean spirit, saying to it, ‘Deaf and dumb spirit, I command you, come out of him and enter him no more!’” The “something” brings along some sort of authority…he commanded.

“This kind can come out by nothing but prayer and fasting.” Our posture matters, it has something to do with the “something”.

“Therefore I say to you, whatever things you ask when you pray, believe that you receive them, and you will have them.”

Wrapping It Up

After my experience a couple of years ago, my faith that I would receive what I asked for when I believed I would receive it, yeah, that faith…it went to about a zero. Interestingly, as I’ve continued asking God to heal (having total faith that He is able to heal if He chooses), consider these ideas, and grow in my relationship with Him, my faith that my request actually means something has begun to increase…I’ve begun to recover bits of the “something” I had lost.

Have faith in Jesus. Ask. If it doesn’t happen when and how you expected, don’t over analyze to paralysis!

But don’t lose the “something”. At least not entirely. The expectation that believing you will receive effects what you receive…that your posture has something to do with it…

I’m not back to a ten, and I’m not sure we’re supposed to be at tens (yep, that’s what I said). But there is a “something” that I get from those passages, and I encourage you to be challenged by these passages and to walk in a bit of the “something” too.

As these are still thoughts in process…I’d love to hear and be influenced by yours.

§34 · March 29, 2011 · 1808 Words · Essays · 13 comments · Tags: ,

← Older entries