Not long ago, I was finding myself perpetually annoyed by someone who has been complaining a lot about how his "friends" do not call him to invite him to things. While parts of me would give the "Oh, I'm sorry" shpeel. Other parts of me were saying, "OK already, I get it. Then, go get some new friends because yours obviously don't like you." So true to my insensitive nature. But let's face it, folks. No one is that completely insensitive!!! I wish I was because then I wouldn't be posting this blog.
This morning, I attempted calling 4 people to go to Costco with. I don't really care about the going to Costco part, just wanted to "talk." I was shut down 3x and the 4th time just felt like it because it went to voice mail. Oh, how our egos really get to us.
Today has been a lonely day. I don't think I have many. But I went on with my day, meal planning, driving around running errands. Thinking about angsty FB posts I would put up (even though I'm currently fasting from FB) or some e-mail I'd write or how I'd write the e-mail without sounding angsty. Or how I should've interrupted when friends have said, "well, I can't do it now, but just give me a call next time you're free." Next time I'm free? Sure, I get it, I work part-time and that makes me more "free" than everyone else. Does that also mean that I'm the one that does all the calling and scheduling with all my friends, too? Am I being lazy and selfish?
Does that mean that my friends actually want to hang out with me if they're never calling to schedule anything? Does that mean they're my friends? Can't I just not call them back and let our friendship fade into oblivion as I wallow in bitterness? That's what I'd like to do.
The sad thing is that this feeling of me always being the "initiator" in almost all my friendships has occurred enough times in the span of my life that I've come to realize that maybe I ought to stop sweeping the feeling under the rug (in the name of Christ, of course - otherwise, it's just not doable) and finally deal with them. Maybe, as a recent planning questionnaire I created asks, I should ask myself, "Do I need to redeem my view of friendship?"
What about the lack of recipricocity bothers me? I feel rejected.
Why do they not schedule? Because they think I'm more busy and should schedule them in. Or maybe they're selfish. Or maybe they don't really want to hang out with me.
Why can't I say something to them? Because there must be more...?
What do I expect of my friendships?
Is it reasonable? Is it biblical?
What is it that I expect to bring to my friendships?
Is it reasonable? biblical?
What does it mean when a season calls a friend(s) out of that regular friendship? What does it look like?
That's about as far as I've gotten thinking and praying about all of this....
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Saturday, January 9, 2010
United in Christ
I had an interesting experience today with a fellow believer. We have some differences in our interpretation of the Bible, and were discussing it today. The differences were minor, and our discussion was good, but the interesting thing happened on our way home.
A man noticing the Bible in my hand decided it would be good to confront us both on the relativity of history. He wasn't really seeking to talk about the issues but rather just argue them. His main basic argument is that we can't really know what is historically accurate. He maintained that truths are relative, and he can only be sure of what is true to him. As such, if all interpretations are relative and that the Bible is just an interpretation that is relative and holds no historical significance as we cannot know if it is true. I asked him how we are to believe that his hypothesis is in fact true, because according to his theory, his theory itself is only relative to him and is thus impossible to know if it is true. I don't think he understood the fallacy of his argument and that it was a self-refuting idea, but it was an interesting conversation none the less. But this was still not the most interesting part of my day.
While the conversation was interesting, I think there was an even more interesting lesson that I learned from it all. The cool thing was, that even though my friend and I had previously been debating over smaller secondary biblical issues, we still remained united in the central understanding of who Jesus is and what he has done for us.
A man noticing the Bible in my hand decided it would be good to confront us both on the relativity of history. He wasn't really seeking to talk about the issues but rather just argue them. His main basic argument is that we can't really know what is historically accurate. He maintained that truths are relative, and he can only be sure of what is true to him. As such, if all interpretations are relative and that the Bible is just an interpretation that is relative and holds no historical significance as we cannot know if it is true. I asked him how we are to believe that his hypothesis is in fact true, because according to his theory, his theory itself is only relative to him and is thus impossible to know if it is true. I don't think he understood the fallacy of his argument and that it was a self-refuting idea, but it was an interesting conversation none the less. But this was still not the most interesting part of my day.
While the conversation was interesting, I think there was an even more interesting lesson that I learned from it all. The cool thing was, that even though my friend and I had previously been debating over smaller secondary biblical issues, we still remained united in the central understanding of who Jesus is and what he has done for us.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)