Warning: include(/home/nascent/public_html/wp-content/themes/organic_structure/sidebar_left.php) [function.include]: failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/nascent/public_html/wp-content/themes/organic_structure/tag.php on line 5

Warning: include() [function.include]: Failed opening '/home/nascent/public_html/wp-content/themes/organic_structure/sidebar_left.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/lib/php') in /home/nascent/public_html/wp-content/themes/organic_structure/tag.php on line 5

(False) Humility?

Is it an hon­est dis­play of humil­ity, or an exam­ple of (need­less) self-abasement? Or is it sim­ply an intel­lec­tual acknowl­edge­ment? I’m talk­ing about those peo­ple who describe them­selves in some­thing like the fol­low­ing way: “32, hus­band, brother, pas­tor, author, hater, fail­ure, ser­vant, sin­ner…” What do peo­ple mean when they describe them­selves as ‘hater, fail­ure… sin­ner’? Do they mean the same thing when par­tic­u­lar PoMo (post­mod­ern) Chris­tians describe them­selves as ‘hereti­cal’? I see these descrip­tions a lot on Face­book, so there must be some sort of non­cha­lant atti­tude sur­round­ing them (or are they titles?). I sup­pose I’m strug­gling with the point, what is the point? It doesn’t read like humil­ity to me, nor does it read like a sim­ple stat­ing of facts. Rather, it reads as some­thing false. I don’t know what, but it doesn’t seem sincere.

While pur­chas­ing my clas­si­cal gui­tar I asked the gui­tar tech why he didn’t … (Read more)

Inconsistent self

This is just a short thought in con­tin­u­a­tion from my post yes­ter­day on the virtue of mag­na­nim­ity. I find that there are cer­tain feel­ings which are related to those of inad­e­quacy, and I’ll call them ‘thoughts of con­sis­tency”. To give an exam­ple, this would take the form of doing or say­ing some­thing early in life and then com­ing to dis­agree with that view as one grows older. Truth­fully I don’t think there is any­thing wrong with this, and would think it rather hard to grow if not for express­ing views which are allowed to evolve. Take for instance a post I wrote quite a while ago, “Response to Post­mod­ern Bib­li­cal Author­ity” (it’s worth read­ing, so check it out). Since writ­ing it I’ve come to read more on the sub­ject (such as Lyotard’s books), and as a result I’ve come to bet­ter under­stand the argu­ment pre­sented.  Now, this is … (Read more)