Sunday, May 3, 2009


(This is the compilation of a few smaller blog posts... all of them deserved more writing, but none of them were really going to get it.)

When life conflicts with thought, should it be regarded as an interruption, or as an opportunity to live out your thoughts? Obviously, we shouldn't spend all our time thinking, but spending time thinking will lead to action. But when life interrupts, what if we aren't done thinking? Or, how can we know when we're done, perhaps when life interrupts (becomes important enough to make you take notice of it through the thought.)

Are obvious answers always the result of the same thing? Something says that since truth is supposed to be simple, obviousness should be a result of truth. Of course, that isn't true, because often times what seems the obvious answer is wrong. And there's no obvious explanation of some truths, no matter how "simple" they might be. I guess simplicity does not mean obviousness.

I guilt-tripping really wrong, if it makes people do what's right? Perhaps acting as a result of being guilt-tripped is wrong, since your motives are incorrect, God cares about the heart. And so, in a way, perhaps guilt-tripping is also wrong, because it causes others to stumble. There should be a more obvious distinction between guilt-trips and conviction.

I don't even want to try to wrap my head around infinity.

How much do I care about the artistic quality of my blog posts? It's always a joy to create something that is pleasing to read... but then, I write things like this, that have nothing artistic about them. They're a collection of jumble thoughts. And although they can often be an accurate representation of my thoughts, it can be difficult to understand (even for me). Perhaps, perhaps I simply have to decide... do I want this to be a place for polished "essays" about my thoughts, or would I rather that it be a place that I can mind dump. I think this post is answer enough, but I'm still deciding.

No comments:

Post a Comment