World peace is just a song away!

There seems to be a common misunderstanding that we have not found the answer to world-wide peace. The truth is that it was discovered a very long time ago. In fact there are many people today who know exactly what it is and if you listen carefully you will find it in the lyrics of certain songs. The problem is not that we don't know the solution, rather the problem is that the solution has not been effectively applied.

Its not that the solution isn't perfect, because it is. There is no flaw in it at all, and if it was just implemented then there would be perfect harmony on earth. Everyone would be happy and pain and war would cease forever. The thing is, that there is a deeper issue that remains that will always sabotage any attempts at Nirvana on this earth and until that issue is addressed everything else is in vain.

There are many songs on the radio that irk me. Some of them are overtly rude, immorally suggestive, or just plain obnoxious. By far however, the songs that irritate me the most are the ones that many other people seem to get warm fuzzies over. They are the sort of songs like John Lennons "Imagine", or Billy Joels "We didn't start the fire". The first song grates against my being for its foolish concept that if we remove God and religion from society then there will be peace (yeah right, look at the last 100 years where God has slowly been fazed out and replaced with the greatest loss of human life and war atrocities since the beginning of recorded time). The second is distasteful to me because it is a cop out, and a passing of the buck. It states that we had nothing to do with the world being such a stuffed up place, but we are just trying our best to sort it out. It implies that we are perfect creatures born into an imperfect world and cannot be held liable for anything. The philosophical ramifications of that idea, even from a naturalistic, athiests point of view quickly show it to be complete nonsense, unless you attribute our problems to elusive and malicious aliens that are continually deceiving us.

The latest song that has made it on my short list of "songs written by intelligent idiots" violated my offended ears today. I am yet to find the Artist or title of the song so I will paraphrase the intent. Basically the thesis is that if we just stopped lying, cheating each other, and otherwise using people, and replaced it with love, concern and selflessness, then the world would be such a better place. I felt so enlightened by this knowledge that I was temporarily motivated to want to go into all the world and tell people that the answer to world peace had finally been discovered and if everyone just listened to this song then we could all live in harmonious bliss. (In case you didn't catch my tone it was one of "biting sarcasm")

Now in truth, this idea has been floating around for a very long time, and despite my scathing treatment, I do believe it to be true. However it always leaves out one minor detail: how we actually go about making it happen in reality. The problem is, and has always been, how to make people behave in this way. Throughout history some have tried it by being merciful and kind themselves, while others have tried to impose some sort of state rule that either passively or actively influenced people to behave well. Some have allowed people to find their own way there within less stringent guidelines while others have through despotism demanded it or taken lives.

Real life forces us to the conclusion that although we know the answer to worldwide peace, we somehow continue to fail in its implementation and cannot seem to find the way to make it stick. The arrogance and ignorance associated with a song that just re-states what people should do without a way for them to actually make it happen is like telling a village of poor, starving, under-nourished natives that the solution to their woes is to just eat more food. Or can you imagine walking up to single mother of five young children who struggles just to make the rent, and can't afford clothes or food for her children, and telling her that you have the answer to her woes, and that the answer is that she needs more money? Thank you captain obvious!

No, its not that we don't know ultimately the answer, its just that we are really just restating it in the opposite fashion to how we would state the problem. For instance, one problem is that more than two thirds of the world lives in abject poverty while the rest live in relative luxury. The captain obvious solution is to say that we just need to redistribute the wealth so that no one has to suffer such poverty. This sort of solution is not really a solution because it leaves out the "how". In the same way, proclaiming that the way to have a happier, more loving world is for people to behave in a happier, more loving manner, is merely restating the question as an opposite statement. It is no solution at all without further explaining how this could actually come about in reality, with real people in the real world. How do you successfully and permanently get people to be happier and more loving? That’s the question that I want to hear answered properly, and answered in every corner of the globe.

When we are ready to actually face the real question of "how" to make the world a better, happier and more peaceful place, we instantly run into a monumental obstacle that I believe is the reason why we have made very little progress in turning our world around. This monumental obstacle is human nature. You may call it the sinful nature, or sin, but the issue is that we all have an inbuilt mechanism that sabotages our valiant and altruistic efforts for a better world.

There is no doubt in my mind that unless we tackle this problem head on, all efforts to create an earthly Nirvana will ultimately fail. Unless we first work on personal reform we will always fail with corporate or national reform. Just look at how many people have been brought down from high positions because of their immoral personal lives.

Yes the answer to peace in the world is currently known by most of the people on earth. How to make it stick however is only known by a relative few. And those few only know because of the superior knowledge and love from the Creator of all things. The guy who brought it all into existence is the only one who has real answers. The created things cannot usurp the position of, nor be greater than the creator. Unfortunately the arrogant and proud component of the majority refuse to submit to the wisdom and rule of God, and therefore reject His messengers and consequently continue to fail in creating heaven without God.

When we achieve peace in our hearts, only then can we begin with the attempt to achieve peace on the earth, and God is the only one that can give lasting personal peace.

Words are not enough to describe ... or are they? pt2

The question then arises about the completeness of such a description, and I admit that there are not enough words to describe God fully. There perhaps are not words yet invented to describe some attributes of God, simply because God is far beyond our understanding. He is full of mystery and majesty beyond any human understanding. So it is here perhaps that one can truly say: “words are not enough” to describe the fullness of God.

However in this case words are not enough only from the point of view that the speaker is trying to explain or communicate something that they themselves don’t know or understand. It is rather a superfluous statement to in effect say: “words are not enough to explain something that I don’t know or understand”. How does a person describe what they have never known?

What we are talking about here are statements of fact, or descriptive phrases, yet some may argue that to speak of emotions is another thing altogether. Lets take the argument that some emotions are inexplicable and cannot be communicated with words. Certainly there is the common claim that there is a language of love that does not involve words, but whether this can be communicated with words is another matter.

Looking at an example may shed some light on this.

“Words are not enough to express the love I have for you”

Now in the western world where we use the word love so broadly and flippantly it is very easy to say that words are not enough to describe love. Perhaps in a sense this is true for many people who are bound by a limited grasp on their language and by the ubiquitous nature of the word “love”, however in Greek for instance, there are four words for love depending on the context. If everyone understood what these words meant, then certainly we would be a step closer to communicating our feelings of love more effectively. In fact, four times closer.

There is another approach to this as well. There are a number of literary techniques that can be used to convey emotion. Use of poetry with its verse and rhythm, metaphor and hyperbole can, through the careful use of words, describe things that a non-poet may struggle to convey with their words.

What about music? Can words evoke the same emotions as a captivating melody? Perhaps not, however that also is surely another question altogether. Words may not be enough to evoke certain emotions, or even to as effectively convey emotions. Music in itself is certainly a medium of communication on a profound level, yet music and lyric perhaps even more so.

I wonder whether from a philosophical level that we understand where a Christian is coming from when they say, “words are not enough” when referring to God.

The following are some possible interpretation that I think might be applied by some people to this statement.

1. A sceptic might say that they are using it as a tool to mystify God so that they can suck people in while brushing aside difficult questions or doubts.
2. One might think that the speaker says this because they are not intelligent enough to explain what they are trying to say, yet which they actually understand (due to limited vocabulary)
3. Perhaps the speaker actually doesn’t know anything worthwhile to say and so they use this phrase as cloak to conceal this fact.
4. It might reveal that the speaker places more emphasis on mystical spirituality than the word of God.
5. It is possible that the speaker understands that God is beyond human understanding and is using this phrase to remind people of just how mysterious and inexplicable God really is. It may also reveal an honest humility at how low we are compared to God. (morally, spiritually, in power, understanding etc)

A point that is pertinent in this discussion is the fact that the scriptures are very clear about the value of the word. When the scriptures speak about the power of Gods word bringing things into being by just speaking, how powerful a word of encouragement or wisdom is, how the word was from the beginning with God and how the word became flesh, it is clear that words are extremely powerful in many ways.

So if God places such importance upon words then surely it makes sense for us to recognise both the importance of words for our own understanding and also how effective they are in communication if used correctly.

We can conclude then that there certainly are things that cannot be communicated through words and that these things are mostly what we don’t know, what we don’t have the skills to put into words, or the listener does not have the language to comprehend.

On the other hand, to not give the word the very extremely important place that it deserves in communicating truth (even profound truth) would be a gross injustice to the word of God, and certainly diminishes the glory and power that is inherent in the spoken word. If anything, we need to dig deeper into the word of God and words in general to enhance our understanding and our effectiveness in communication and teaching. Perhaps on top of this it is also beneficial to develop understanding of each other so that we know at what level we need to communicate, for the specific person and the circumstances that they are in.

Words are not enough to describe ... or are they?

Have you ever heard a person say “words are not enough to express …” and then continue with whatever the subject they are referring to (usually related to love). However I wonder if this is really true or whether this is just a pat phrase used for the sake of hyperbole.

I believe there are two distinct possibilities that may act to invalidate this statement. They serve as explanations to perhaps suggest why words actually are enough in many instances, or at least could be enough given the right circumstances.

1. We don’t have the words (vocabulary) to express what is actually expressible in words.
2. We have the words in our vocabulary but we don’t really understand what they mean.

I suppose there is a third possibility also that one might say supports the statement in question, and that would be that a word (or number of words) have not been invented to explain a particular thing. Of course, with that being the case we simply invent a word to describe what that is, which was previously inexplicable.

As an ultimate statement the phrase “words are not enough” may very well be false in the majority of cases it is used. As a truth statement it borders on arrogance because there may very well exist words that are more than sufficient to explain it. It is akin to saying that you know that God does not exist anywhere in this universe. Of course unless you had been to every point in the entire universe, you could never truthfully say such an absolute. On the contrary, one single instance of proof, invalidates the entire opposite argument. A more honest statement would begin with “I don’t have the words to express …”.

The problem ultimately comes down to the ability of the speaker to communicate effectively the concept or emotion that they hold in their mind or heart.

Take the following example.

If I were to say to a child “God is an omnipotent and omniscient deity” the words would mean nothing unless that particular child had a firm grasp and understanding of the words “omniscient”, “omnipotent”, and “deity”. Of course the child may very well have an understanding of these attributes of God, yet may not understand the words being used.

Taking the child’s perspective in attempting to communicate this truth, and you would find that he would struggle with the right words to say. He may attempt it by saying something like the following.

“God is the most powerful thing in the universe and he knows everything”

Even after saying this he might add that “words are not enough” to express what he is really trying to say.

What I am pointing out in this instance is that for describing someone or something, often words actually are entirely sufficient. You can explain what God is like by saying that he is “slow to anger and abounding in love, a compassionate and forgiving God, a God who is just and righteous and full of glory and majesty”. In fact such a description could go on for many pages alone and each and every word would add to the listeners understanding of who God is, as long as the words used are understood to mean the same thing to both the speaker and the hearer. After all, how can you explain the colour yellow to someone who was blind from birth?