Thursday, March 15, 2007

Existentialism 3

I was listening the the radio station my sister likes and I heard this song

Blessed Be - Jason Grey

I listened wondering why he couldn't read/sing about the beatitudes properly....(see unscriptural interpretation of the beatitudes) and the meek inherit the earth, not see the kingdom, and there is not even a 'broken ones' in the entire chapter.

Then he got to the third verse and I realised that it was a neo-Marxist existentialist interpretation!! If you are pretty, or strong, or brave you cannot go to heaven. If you are doing well (in business, perhaps) (thier words- 'got it made') you are outlawed immediately.

I got challenged to explain how this is wrong because Jesus himself said: "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter heaven"

I responded:
Jesus is saying (I believe) that the rich have so much to overcome because money can buy them everything material, and almost anything else that they have trouble not 'working for' heaven. They have to get over this huge hurdle and recognise that they and the most dirty beggar are equally sinful, guilty, and worthy of eternal punishment.

There will be rich people in heaven.....like Solomon, Job, Abraham, and Joseph (who was prime minister of the largest dynasty of his age)...in fact, God even blesses obedient christians who keep his commands!!

However, saying that capitalistic rich people...or "the strong, beautiful the brave" will not (to use the scriptural terms "inherit the Kingdom of heaven" is wrong, and borders on 'changing the gospel'.

So above all....DON'T take the Rich Young Ruler story out of context, and beware of this existentialism! It seems to be rampant!

5 comments:

Wingman said...

you are too hard on him! you could interpret it as existentialist, but thats not necessarily what he is saying, and you aught to give him the benefit of the doubt.

it all depends on by whose definition youve "got it made"! :) theres the One that matters, and the rest that dont

Warbler said...

Maybe....maybe he is singing it like most everyone else...to make money and be popular.

He could also be singing in ignorance...which is dumb because you are then identified with that song. If something like this were to be interpereted from your song, it is on your record....and it is all your fault.

He could also be singing it because that is the message that our water-christianity culture has accepted as gospel. Then it would also be his fault for not checking and scrutinizing all the things he accepts as fact with biblical truth.

In all cases he ought to have checked, researched, and double-checked.

Also, the song says clearely that the KofH os NOT for the beautiful and the strong. I don't see how that is muted out by another phrase put beside it. (i.e...the grammatical structure does not make the second line top the first line. They are gramatically equal.

Warbler said...

Overall..it is existentialist. I don't like to 'give breaks' for ignorance in (assumedly) competant adults. However, I shall be nicer in the future if you really feel this sorry for the guy!

Wingman said...

how do you know if hes singing it to make money and be popular?

I dont feel sorry for him, but if I did it would only be because you are making as of yet unsubstantiated accusations and judgments against him. the song itself could be interpreted by an ignorant person, or it could be properly interpreted by someone like you or I. what I am wondering is why you choose to interpret it as you do. are you just seeking to find trouble where trouble is not necessarily to be found?

Warbler said...

Why else do people sell albums but to make money?

Also, you try to be popular so more people will buy your albums...

I don't think I am 'making trouble'. I do happen to notice songs/books/people that are pertinent to the things I study.

One of the areas I think have a big impact on christianity in the 21st century is this 'new gospel'. As I said...much of it's spread is due to indoctrination and poor biblical knowledge.

I ask you if, based on all that you know of existentialism, this song would not qualify as exist. to a degree?

I think it would. The degree might be less than that of other things, however I thought it enough to note. I noted it b/c I thought that my readers might be interested.

May I ask in what way my post makes it seem like I am 'seeking trouble'?