Hope

[Socrates4Jesus]

A “thank you” to Socrates and Ut; Ut for your poignant, stimulating but simple thoughts; Socrates for your uncanny ability and desire to excite participation from those who have so much to offer as you, yourself, do. I hope to see more of your blogs

And thank you to you for your encouragement! But please tell me, Hamlet in your opinion, do you think my idea that hope is a feeling of trust and faith is a rational determination of trust was given to us by God, or by some deceiver?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

I did almost respond to your statement about belief in God-I can’t remember why I decided not to-maybe I forgot. …

Or maybe God distracted you so that you or i might continue to mull it over in our minds?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

The purpose of our faith is to provide light along this way-to inform the hope we have inside. Or sumpin’ like that. …

Excellent thought!

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

… I’m not sure-it’s definitely close. One thing is that faith goes beyond what reason can ascertain on its own. The truths we believe may not be unreasonable but nevertheless are not believable without supernatural help. So I guess Christian faith is more like a supernatural certainty, and trust may be implied as well. This doesn’t mean we can’t provide plausible reasons for our faith-only that we can’t hope to prove it by rational argument alone.

If we speak of hope as an emotion this would still need to mean having the experience of confidence within us concerning things which are not unreasonable to hope in but again which go beyond reasons ability to attain to.

But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, 1Peter 3:15

Well, said! I can see God is with all of us as our unseen teacher, at least that is my confident hope.



Your thoughts remind me of the words of Christ Himself:

“No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.”
(John 6)

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

We have yet to hear from David. Let’s give him the rest of the day and then i’ll propose the best definition of Faith, Hope and perhaps Love that i (hopefully with the Holy Spirit’s help?) can.

After that, if you all are willing, we’ll see what these insights tell us about which of the three ladies will be our champion! (But please try not to laugh as the gentle beauties remove their dresses, put on Amazonian armor, and try to lift the swords of truth.)



http://www.spartanandamazonwarriors.com/images/WarriorMaiden3.gif

 

[utunumsint]

Good thoughts, those! Thank you, Ut.

Very well, then, you at least agree that hope is a kind of non-rational (though not necessarily irrational), intuitive, or emotional feeling of that one should trust God. Faith, on the other hand, is a rational, logical, non-emotional, decision to trust God based on evidence and reason.

Now, let’s see if the others agree.

But because the source of most of our doctrines come from direct revelation from God, then the content is often beyond our power of reason to grasp (although it does not oppose reason). Unaided by active participation in the God who calls through the initial influx of grace, we could never believe this (for the foolishness of God is more powerful than the wisdom of man - as Paul says somewhere). That is why prayer is indispensible to evangelization. It is through the Holy Spirit that our intellects are convinced of the faith, and our hearts of the hope of attainment of our end.

God bless,
Ut

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

But because the source of most of our doctrines come from direct revelation from God, then the content is often beyond our power of reason to grasp (although it does not oppose reason). Unaided by active participation in the God who calls through the initial influx of grace, we could never believe this (for the foolishness of God is more powerful than the wisdom of man - as Paul says somewhere). That is why prayer is indispensible to evangelization. It is through the Holy Spirit that our intellects are convinced of the faith, and our hearts of the hope of attainment of our end.

God bless,
Ut

I wholeheartedly agree.

Also, i’m starting to see that my earlier personification of Lady Hope was flawed. Rather than have her speak of her hope that Sir Socrates would prevail in battle, she should have silently shown this with her expressions. For it seems to me that my emotions have never spoken to me in tangable words. Anger, attraction for my wife, happiness, sadness, guilt, joy, and the like are all silent feelings, communicating much, perhaps, but not with intelligible words.

Is this your experience as well, Ut?

 

[utunumsint]

I wholeheartedly agree.

Also, i’m starting to see that my earlier personification of Lady Hope was flawed. Rather than have her speak of her hope that Sir Socrates would prevail in battle, she should have silently shown this with her expressions. For it seems to me that my emotions have never spoken to me in tangable words. Anger, attraction for my wife, happiness, sadness, guilt, joy, and the like are all silent feelings, communicating much, perhaps, but not with intelligible words.

Is this your experience as well, Ut?

Yes. I agree.

There is stoic tendancy within Christianity that disparages emotion from the getgo. “Love has nothing to do with emotion. It is all will.” is the common refrain. But the very love of God has as its object the enjoyment of God in beatitude. This enjoyment is surely an emotion? Surely the hope of that enjoyment is that which gives energy to our actions, motivates us to self sacrifice, and mortification. As Paul says somewhere, if there is no resurection to hope for, we are the most pitiable of men. Because for Paul, it is this hope that gives him the drive to do anything and everything that he does! This hope…this energy, is emotional and from the heart!! It is the stubornly cherished desire, and expectant belief in hope’s fulfillment that allowed the martyrs to die for their faith, even when all they had to do was make a two minute libation to Ceasar, or to the pagan God. Their hope would not allow them to do it.

That is also why Paul says we do not hope for what we have, but wait in patient expectation for that future reality to be ours, although the joy and peace that hope can give through God’s grace is a foretaste of heaven. But in heaven, hope, and faith will be fulfilled because we will possess the object of our desire, which faith describes, and hope yearns for. Then only Love will remain eternally.

God bless,
Ut

 

[Hamlet123]

And thank you to you for your encouragement! But please tell me, Hamlet in your opinion, do you think my idea that hope is a feeling of trust and faith is a rational determination of trust was given to us by God, or by some deceiver?

Thank you for wanting to know my opinion. Confusious said, “to be opinionated and uninformed is the first sign of a fool.” I am a bit hazy understanding you request. Do you mean: "…do you think…my idea is from God? Is that what you are asking; what is the source of your idea. Is the source God?
Or are you asking if I think the Material definition of hope and faith are as you stated - hope = a feeling of trust; faith = rational determintion of trust?

 

[Hamlet123]

Yes. I agree.

There is stoic tendancy within Christianity that disparages emotion from the getgo. “Love has nothing to do with emotion. It is all will.” is the common refrain. But the very love of God has as its object the enjoyment of God in beatitude. This enjoyment is surely an emotion? Surely the hope of that enjoyment is that which gives energy to our actions, motivates us to self sacrifice, and mortification. As Paul says somewhere, if there is no resurection to hope for, we are the most pitiable of men. Because for Paul, it is this hope that gives him the drive to do anything and everything that he does! This hope…this energy, is emotional and from the heart!! It is the stubornly cherished desire, and expectant belief in hope’s fulfillment that allowed the martyrs to die for their faith, even when all they had to do was make a two minute libation to Ceasar, or to the pagan God. Their hope would not allow them to do it.

That is also why Paul says we do not hope for what we have, but wait in patient expectation for that future reality to be ours, although the joy and peace that hope can give through God’s grace is a foretaste of heaven. But in heaven, hope, and faith will be fulfilled because we will possess the object of our desire, which faith describes, and hope yearns for. Then only Love will remain eternally.

God bless,
Ut

Beautiful. Just beautiful!
But your observation that love is defined stoically in the Christian community as without feelings is a challenge to my data? What particular community? I have found in my “walk” that many Christians are emontion driven, very subjective. And logic, rational judgement plays a small role. They typically employee logic to support their actions AFTER they make a faith decision. Now my data, my “walk”, has been for years in the Baptist community having become a Catholic recently; but I must tell you, many Catholics (in my experience) think similiarly.

For years I thought people were wrong being this way. But I (just) don’t know now. Abraham and Mary did not employee an abundant amount of logic. I think my delima borders on Socrates’ question regarding the source of his assumption (God or a Deceiver?)

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Thank you for wanting to know my opinion. Confusious said, “to be opinionated and uninformed is the first sign of a fool.” I am a bit hazy understanding you request. Do you mean: "…do you think…my idea is from God? Is that what you are asking; what is the source of your idea. Is the source God?
Or are you asking if I think the Material definition of hope and faith are as you stated - hope = a feeling of trust; faith = rational determintion of trust?

The latter. I suppose only God would know the former.

 

[utunumsint]

Beautiful. Just beautiful!
But your observation that love is defined stoically in the Christian community as without feelings is a challenge to my data? What particular community?

This is the typical response to someone who says “I just don’t feel inspired” or “Christianity/catholicism is just not doing it for me emotionally anymore” or, “I don’t feel God anymore.” The response is not to base your faith on emotional variations. And they are right, to a certain extent. But this doesn’t mean that emotions are not important. The loss of that enthusiasm, joy, and hope, no matter who you are, is a positive evil that we should pray to God for healing. Sometimes God gives us times of emotional aridity, in which we feel we are just going through the motions, but no one likes these times. Of course, God only knows why he sends us these times of aridity. And sometimes they are spiritually very good for us, detaching us from all that is impure in our motivations (e.g. getting addicted to emotional highs).

I have found in my “walk” that many Christians are emontion driven, very subjective. And logic, rational judgement plays a small role. They typically employee logic to support their actions AFTER they make a faith decision. Now my data, my “walk”, has been for years in the Baptist community having become a Catholic recently; but I must tell you, many Catholics (in my experience) think similiarly.

This is my early exprience as well. But after I came to a love for the faith early on, in university I almost lost it, until I started to study the classics, and the intellectual foundation on which the Catholic tradition is situated. No one wants to hope in something that is false, so the search for a deeper understanding of the faith is very important. It gives us the rational basis by which we can respond to the unbeliever, and those who hate our faith. The intellectual formation allows us to keep our peace and our joy when confronted with people like Dawkins, or Hitchens, dedicated to destroying all religion, and Christianity in particular.

For years I thought people were wrong being this way. But I (just) don’t know now. Abraham and Mary did not employee an abundant amount of logic. I think my delima borders on Socrates’ question regarding the source of his assumption (God or a Deceiver?)

Its never faith alone, or hope alone, or love alone. We have a mind, and a heart, or a right brain and a left brain, and we must continually feed those aspects of our personality so we can be an integrated faith that support us through any trial. Paul himself speaks of these things in military terms

Eph 6:11 Put on the armor of God so that you may be able to stand firm against the tactics of the devil. 12 For our struggle is not with flesh and blood but with the principalities, with the powers, with the world rulers of this present darkness, with the evil spirits in the heavens. 13 Therefore, put on the armor of God, that you may be able to resist on the evil day and, having done everything, to hold your ground. 14 So stand fast with your loins girded in truth, clothed with righteousness as a breastplate, 15 and your feet shod in readiness for the gospel of peace. 16 In all circumstances, hold faith as a shield, to quench all (the) flaming arrows of the evil one. 17 And take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.

Here he defines the armor of God as “standing fast with your loins girded in truth…” , and “…hold faith as a sheild”. So truth and faith are linked together as aspects that defend us from evil. Not just emotional enthusiasm. This make sense, especially since Jesus himself says we must be gentle as doves, but cunning as serpents.

God bless,
Ut

 

[fhansen]

There is stoic tendancy within Christianity that disparages emotion from the getgo. “Love has nothing to do with emotion. It is all will.” is the common refrain. But the very love of God has as its object the enjoyment of God in beatitude. This enjoyment is surely an emotion?
Ut

I think this is all too true. I don’t think we know how to value love as it deserves-or maybe we know little of what it really is-and love’s the whole enchilada! I really think Gods’ purpose for us here on earth is concerned with this very thing-to mold us into beings who’ll recognize love - who’ll come to know its’ true value-in part by the experience of being exiled from it. We can get a vague glimpse of it here with our earthly affections but the love of God is something else again. And how do we categorize it? Love’s an experience-the experience of a Being who is love. If love’s an emotion it puts emotions into the forefront of what we should desire and is an emotion capable of satisfying us eternally. But for now the best way I can think of the love God has for us and wants us to know and have ourselves is as an experience, of a supernatural reality, yet one we can taste of here on earth especially as He brings us closer to Himself.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

I’m reminded of the conversation Socrates had regarding the nature of Hope, and i think it adds to my understanding of the nature of Hope. After coming to an agreement as to the nature of bodily pleasure, they discuss another type of pleasure:

SOCRATES: But now accept also the anticipation by the soul itself of these … experiences; the hope before the actual pleasure will be pleasant and comforting, while the expectation of pain will be frightening and painful.

PROTARCHUS: This turns out to be a different kind of pleasure and pain, namely the expectation that the soul experiences by itself, apart from the body.

SOCRATES: Your assumption is correct. In both cases, as I see it at least, pleasure and pain will arise pure and unmixed with each other.
(Philebus 32)

It appears to me that they accurately portray Hope, not just as an emotion, but also a pleasurable one. And i find it interesting that a saint, in the process of being martyred, would experience both pain and pleasure–bodily pain from the torture and pain of the soul in leaving loved ones behind, but also the pleasure of Hope that the result will be eternal pleasure in the presence of Jesus. This seems to be the case of St. Paul, who wrote from death row:

If I am to go on living in the body, this will mean fruitful labor for me. Yet what shall I choose? I do not know! I am torn between the two: I desire to depart and be with Christ, which is better by far; but it is more necessary for you that I remain in the body.
(Philippians 1)

Perhaps this is the kind of pleasure our Lord had in mind when He said the following?

“Until now you have not asked for anything in my name. Ask and you will receive, and your joy will be complete.”
(John 16)

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

At this point i’d like to submit for the approval of each a revised definition of Hope and Faith:

**
2a. Hope **is an emotion and a virtue that God helps to create in the soul or mind of a Catholic or other Christian. Hope is not rational thought, rather, it is a pleasurable feeling of expectation that some future good will result. Hope is sometimes a non-rational (though not always an irrational) conviction of certainty and even trust in some expected future event or in someone. An example of Hope is a Catholic who prays that God will heal her sick daughter and ends her prayer with the words, “Not my will but Thy will be done.” She might have a hopeful trust that God answers prayer and a hopeful expectation (though not a certain one) that God will indeed heal her child.

1a. Faith is a belief and a virtue the God helps to create in the soul or mind of a Catholic or other Christian. Faith is not an emotion, rather, it is knowledge that something is true or someone is trustworthy, and can be (though might not always be) certainty and complete trust in that truth or person. Faith is usually a reasoned response to evidence (either observed or communicated) and usually a rational (though sometimes an irrational) belief. An example of Faith is a Catholic who believes that God is and that He rewards those who earnestly seek Him. He might have a rational trust that God exists and that He will answer His prayers, though not always the way he expects.

Please let me know whether these should be revised and how. Also, does anyone have a proposed definition of Love?

 

[Hamlet123]

Please let me know whether these should be revised and how. Also, does anyone have a proposed definition of Love?

I could very well be wrong but after long thought and many discussions, I think we come close to the definition here.
Love: the desire for the beautiful.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Please let me know whether these should be revised and how. Also, does anyone have a proposed definition of Love?

I could very well be wrong but after long thought and many discussions, I think we come close to the definition here.
Love: the desire for the beautiful.

Yes, i agree that Love, like Hope, is an emotion. Would you say that is all it is, or is there more to love about Love?

 

[Hamlet123]

Yes, i agree that Love, like Hope, is an emotion. Would you say that is all it is, or is there more to love about Love?

Assuming God is a just God, then it must be more than an emotion, a feeling. We can not give ourselves emotions; albeit, we can do things to enchance, engender or excite but we can not create emotions.

Two: God commanded us to love.

So if God is just and God commands us to love, then we must love with or without feelings.

Now the delima: If all the above is true then love (at least in part) foundationally is not a feeling.

Here is a thought: We all love ourselves, true? How often to we berate ourselves even (sometimes) to the point of suicide? We treat the one we love the most (ourselves) rather poorly and have bad feelings, emotions toward that person. Yet we love him (ourselves).

 

[utunumsint]

Yes, i agree that Love, like Hope, is an emotion. Would you say that is all it is, or is there more to love about Love?

Our love is an emotion, yes but naturally speaking, it is kind of selfish… We naturally love those who love us, and who treat us well. With difficulty, we love our neighbours, naturally speaking, but if we get something out of it, loving them is much easier. As Paul says, one might possibly die for a virtuous person, but never for someone who is utterly sinful, like ourselves. Our natural love is tainted with self interest.

C.S. Lewis proposed this in his book, the four loves where he analyzes storge (mother love), filia (friendship), eros (sexual love), and agape (christian love).

The fourth love, agape, is…disinterested love. In Lewis’ view, it does not destroy the other loves, but perfects them, and removes what is corrupt and selfish in them.

When God invites us to love him, we are loving a God who dwells in unaproachable light. He is a purifying fire as tha author of Hebrews declares. He commanded us to love him from the mountain of the ten commandements, but all the people could manage was abject fear. In the face of the infinite, omnipotent, omnicient God, this is the only appropriate response. As is said, one cannot see the face of God and live.

IMO it took the incarnation, the cross, and the Eucharist for us to truly learn how to love God in and throught his humanity. But the cross itself is still a symbol of that purifying fire that turns our human love into divine love (agape - take up your cross and follow me).

For those who have chosen a life of selfishness and evil, this fire will burn them and be hell for them. For those who have purified themselves in this life through good works by corresponding to the grace of God, this fire will be the joys of heaven.

Just some thoughts…

God bless,
Ut

 

[utunumsint]

The end result of this love for God is union with God, and death to self. At least all that is selfish and evil in the self. This is not some kind of budhist liberation from self, but a kind of discovery or regeneration of our true self. Selves that Love God above all things, and in that joy love neighbour as ourselves.

This is the purpose of sanctifying grace in our lives. It is to bring us to this union with God.

God bless,
Ut