These are some deep philosophical conflicts we all have to face, yet the church has little, if no teaching at all to cultivate a comprehensive worldview that helps us deal with these conflicts. In the title are three top conflicts that have been haunting me.
The first is around the doctrine of original sin, based on Rom. 5:12 - "through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned." Originally in Judaism, this wasn't a valid doctrine, the tasting of the forbidden fruit in the garden was a risky yet conscious choice, it was like going out for an adventure rather than staying at home. It became a fundamental doctrine during the medieval period, all the evils and chaos in the world could be attributed to mankind's sinful nature, including disease, natural disaster and foreign invasion, those were viewed as God's judgement; but ever since the Enlightenment and Reformation, it was rejected, and replaced with internal factors such as shame, trauma, mental issue or external factors such as injustice, inequality, cultural stigma. I believe this is the root cause of various cults and quasi-religious ideologies, including the de facto civil religion of "moralistic therapeutic Deism". The gospel message is consistent: "Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures," 1 Cor. 15:3, but misconception of "sin" NOT according to the Scripture leads to false christs.
The second is a view of human history, where do we come from and where are we going. Traditional pagan view of history across most cultures is a cyclical view, every civilization goes through "strong men" cycles of rise, peak, decline and collapse (i.e. hard times create strong men), history just constantly repeats itself following a fixed pattern, there's nothing new under the sun. Sometimes a strikingly similar historical event in one place at one time could be repeated in the other side of the planet several centuries later. Linear view, on the other hand, suggests that human history progresses in a certain direction, as demonstrated in king Nebuchadnezzar's dream, empires rise, fall and fracture, it will end with God's judgement, Christ's return and his millennial kingdom.
The third one is about how you view your own life in terms of human agency. "Plot-driven" and "character-driven" are literary terms, the former focuses on plot progression, characters are merely parts that drive the plot forward, each has a prescribed type and function; "character-driven" focuses on character development, and through the characters' own journey and maturation, they defy the odds, make consequential decisions that actually change their life trajectory and others'. So the first is submission to fate, the second is struggle with fate. These two attitudes are closely linked to the two views of history above, usually cyclical view is plot-driven, linear view is character-driven.
Most people probably have a hard time with the first one, original sin is offensive and unacceptable, but it's perfectly fine to me, it was the awareness of my sins that led me to Christ. The seven deadly sins - lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, anger, envy, pride - are our inherent weaknesses, only can they be overcome, with the seven heavenly virtues, which I consider as spiritual fruits even though they are slightly different from the nine in the bible. On the third one I have a mixed feeling, some teachings such as "remain in the same calling your were called.", "submission to husband, master, authority", "not my will but yours," "the end was declared from the beginning" espouse "submission to fate;" others such as Jacob's wrestling with God, parable of the talents, "such a time as this" teach "struggle with fate".
The second one particularly bothers me, a history nerd who likes reading history books and watching period shows. I think we can all agree that we live in a perilous time, full of chaos, decadence, uncertainty and misinformation, there seems to be no vision of the future. My first reaction is to dig up answers from history and draw parallels - is Trump Hitler as portrayed on the media? Or is he McKingley, a puppet of the 19th century oligarchs? A Neville Chamberlain on the international stage? Are we living in a new gilded age of the late 1890s? Or a new Great Depression combined with 1930s Nazi Germany? Or maybe the eve of a civil war, in wake of the Minnesota riot, which could be the new Bleeding Kansas? Christians ought to take the linear view, but the cyclical view is the path of least resistence, it is easy to perceive through existing patterns and formulas, it's much harder to imagine that all human accomplishments will come to an end, there won't even be reproduction in God's kingdom (Rev. 22:30), but it does make sense in a biblical way, as Christ's return marks the end of all human struggles.
The first is around the doctrine of original sin, based on Rom. 5:12 - "through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned." Originally in Judaism, this wasn't a valid doctrine, the tasting of the forbidden fruit in the garden was a risky yet conscious choice, it was like going out for an adventure rather than staying at home. It became a fundamental doctrine during the medieval period, all the evils and chaos in the world could be attributed to mankind's sinful nature, including disease, natural disaster and foreign invasion, those were viewed as God's judgement; but ever since the Enlightenment and Reformation, it was rejected, and replaced with internal factors such as shame, trauma, mental issue or external factors such as injustice, inequality, cultural stigma. I believe this is the root cause of various cults and quasi-religious ideologies, including the de facto civil religion of "moralistic therapeutic Deism". The gospel message is consistent: "Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures," 1 Cor. 15:3, but misconception of "sin" NOT according to the Scripture leads to false christs.
The second is a view of human history, where do we come from and where are we going. Traditional pagan view of history across most cultures is a cyclical view, every civilization goes through "strong men" cycles of rise, peak, decline and collapse (i.e. hard times create strong men), history just constantly repeats itself following a fixed pattern, there's nothing new under the sun. Sometimes a strikingly similar historical event in one place at one time could be repeated in the other side of the planet several centuries later. Linear view, on the other hand, suggests that human history progresses in a certain direction, as demonstrated in king Nebuchadnezzar's dream, empires rise, fall and fracture, it will end with God's judgement, Christ's return and his millennial kingdom.
The third one is about how you view your own life in terms of human agency. "Plot-driven" and "character-driven" are literary terms, the former focuses on plot progression, characters are merely parts that drive the plot forward, each has a prescribed type and function; "character-driven" focuses on character development, and through the characters' own journey and maturation, they defy the odds, make consequential decisions that actually change their life trajectory and others'. So the first is submission to fate, the second is struggle with fate. These two attitudes are closely linked to the two views of history above, usually cyclical view is plot-driven, linear view is character-driven.
Most people probably have a hard time with the first one, original sin is offensive and unacceptable, but it's perfectly fine to me, it was the awareness of my sins that led me to Christ. The seven deadly sins - lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, anger, envy, pride - are our inherent weaknesses, only can they be overcome, with the seven heavenly virtues, which I consider as spiritual fruits even though they are slightly different from the nine in the bible. On the third one I have a mixed feeling, some teachings such as "remain in the same calling your were called.", "submission to husband, master, authority", "not my will but yours," "the end was declared from the beginning" espouse "submission to fate;" others such as Jacob's wrestling with God, parable of the talents, "such a time as this" teach "struggle with fate".
The second one particularly bothers me, a history nerd who likes reading history books and watching period shows. I think we can all agree that we live in a perilous time, full of chaos, decadence, uncertainty and misinformation, there seems to be no vision of the future. My first reaction is to dig up answers from history and draw parallels - is Trump Hitler as portrayed on the media? Or is he McKingley, a puppet of the 19th century oligarchs? A Neville Chamberlain on the international stage? Are we living in a new gilded age of the late 1890s? Or a new Great Depression combined with 1930s Nazi Germany? Or maybe the eve of a civil war, in wake of the Minnesota riot, which could be the new Bleeding Kansas? Christians ought to take the linear view, but the cyclical view is the path of least resistence, it is easy to perceive through existing patterns and formulas, it's much harder to imagine that all human accomplishments will come to an end, there won't even be reproduction in God's kingdom (Rev. 22:30), but it does make sense in a biblical way, as Christ's return marks the end of all human struggles.
