God has never explained to humans the secret of physical birth—then why should we hesitate to accept the birth of the spiritual human? Both come from God. “There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of the life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any human have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness. #RandolphHarris 1 of 21

“However, if the Spirit of one that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, one that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you. Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh. For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the spirit of adoption, whereby we say, Abba, Father. The spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God…Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities: for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered. And one that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is in the mind of the spirit, because one maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God,” reports Romans 8.1-16, 26-27. This sounds difficult to our modern ears, strange and almost unintelligible. Words like “spirit” and “flesh,” “sin” and “law,” “life” and “death,” in their various combinations, appear to us as philosophical abstractions, rather than as concrete descriptions of Christian experience. #RandolphHarris 2 of 21

For Paul, however, they express the most real and the most concrete experience of his life. This eighth chapter of his letter to the Christians in Rome is like a hymn praising, in ecstatic words, the new reality which has appeared to him, which was revealed in history and had transformed his whole existence. Paul calls this new being “Christ,” in so far as it has first become visible in Jesus the Christ. And he calls it “Spirit,” in so far as it is a reality in the spirit of every Christian, and in the spirit which constitutes the assembly of Christians in every place and time. Both names designate the same reality. Christ is the Spirit, and the Spirit is the Spirit of Christ. A Christian is one who participates in this new reality, that is, one who has the Spirit. “If any human have not the Spirit of Christ, one is none of one’s life.” To be a Christian means to have the Spirit, and any description of Christianity must be a description of the manifestations of the Spirit. Let us follow the description that Paul gives us of the Spirit; and let us compare our own experience with it. In so doing we may discover both how far away we are from the experience of Paul, and, at the same time, how similar our experience is to his. #RandolphHarris 3 of 21

These strange words of his may reveal more to us about our lives than anything our contemporaries may think and write about the nature of humans, their lives, and this destiny. “The Spirit Himself beareth witness with our spirit that we are the children of God.” These words imply that our spirit is unable to give us such assurance. Our spirit, that is, our natural mind, our though, our will, our emotions, the whole of our interior life, cannot give us the certainty that we are the children of God. This does not mean that Paul depreciates human nature and spirit. On the contrary in speaking of our spirit, he acknowledges the creativity of humans, their similarity to God Who is Spirit, their ability to be free oneself, and to liberate all nature, from vanity and the bondage of corruption by one’s own liberation. “For we are also his offspring,” he told the Athenians in his famous speech on the Areopagus, thus confirming their own philosophers. Paul thinks as highly of humans as any modern could do. A famous Renaissance philosopher describes, in lyrical words, the position of humans at the center of nature, one’s infinity and creativity, the unity and fulfillment in one of all natural powers. #RandolphHarris 4 of 21

Paul would agree. However, Paul knew something more than the Greek philosophers knew, something which the Renaissance philosophers had forgotten, namely, that human spirit is bound to human flesh, and that human flesh is hostile to God. “Human flesh” does not mean human body. Human’s body, according to Paul, can become a temple of the Spirit. However, “human flesh” means the natural human inclinations, human’s desires, their needs, their way of thinking, the aim of their will, the character of their feeling, in so far as it is separated from the Spirit and is hostile to it. “Flesh” is the distortion of human nature, the abuse of its creativity—the abuse, first of all, f its infinity, in the service of its unlimited desire and its unlimited will to power. This desire, of which we know something through recent psychology, and this will to power, of which we have learned much from modern sociology, are rooted in our individual existence in time and space, in body and flesh. This is what Paul calls the power of distorted flesh. He describes the will of flesh with a profundity which cannot be equalled. “The carnal mind (mind of the flesh) is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be!” #RandolphHarris 5 of 21

If we receive a law which we must acknowledge and which, on the other hand, we cannot fulfill, our soul inevitably develops hatred against one who has given the law. The father, being the representative of the law which stands against the child’s desire, necessarily becomes the object of the unconscious hate, which may become conscious and may appear with tremendous force. If the law against its unordered and unrestricted desire were felt by the child to be arbitrary and unjustified, this would not be so. However, it is felt to be justified. It has become part of the child’s “super-ego,” as recent psychology would say; or, in the language of traditional ethics, it has become a demand of one’s conscious. Because the law given by the father is good, and the child cannot help recognizing this, and therefore because the law is inescapable, the child must hate the father; for he seems to be the cause of the torturing split in the child’s soul. That is the situation of humans before God. The natural human hates God and regards Him as the enemy, because He represents for humans the law which one cannot reach, against which one struggles, and which at the same time, one must acknowledge as good and true. #RandolphHarris 6 of 21

There is no difference, at this point, between the theist and the atheist. Atheism is only a form of enmity against God, namely, that God Who represents the law, and, with the law, the split and the despair and the meaninglessness of our existence. The atheist as well as the theist hates to be confronted with what one ought to be, with the ultimate meaning and good which one cannot deny and yet which one cannot reach. The atheist gives other names to God, Whom one hates, but one cannot escape Him, any more than one can escape one’s hatred of Him. This is the reason Paul does not say: “Our own spirit witnesses to us that we are the children of God.” Our own spirit only witnesses that we are his enemies! Always when Christianity speaks of God and of our loving God in our daily life, it should remember that. The majesty of God is challenged, when we make Him the loving Father before we have recognized Him as the condemning law, Whom we hate in the depths of our hearts. “The Spirit beareth witness with our spirit that we are the children of God.” Something new has come, a new reality, a new being, a Spirit distinguished from our spirit, yet able to make itself understood to our spirit, beyond us and yet in us. The whole message of Christianity is contained in this statement. #RandolphHarris 7 of 21

Christianity overcomes law and despair by the certainty that we are the children of God. There is nothing higher than this. For although we are in the flesh and under the law and in the cleavage of our existence, we are, at the same time, in the Spirit and in the fulfillment and unity with the ultimate meaning of our life. This paradox, for Paul, is the astonishing and, humanly speaking, the incredible content of Christianity. This certainty gave him the impulse to preach his message to the whole World, and to conquer it. It gave him the power to break with his caste and his nation, and to take upon himself an abundant among of suffering and struggle, and finally, martyrdom. Christ has overcome the law, the system of command which makes us slaves because we cannot escape it, and which throws us into despair because it makes us enemies of our own destiny and our own ultimate good. Having this certainty that we are the children of God means, for Paul, “having the Spirit.” Out of this certainty follows everything that makes Christian existence what it is. First of all, it gives us the power to cry, “Abba, Father!” that is the power to pray the Lord’s prayer. Only one who has the Spirit has the power to say “Father” to God. #RandolphHarris 8 of 21

The mind plays an important role in determining what a person is able to see, will, feel, and desire. If this is true, then intellectual development can pay rich dividends in the changes that result in one’s other faculties. In order to focus our thoughts about this topic, let us consider the mind’s role in the process of seeing. Philosophers distinguish three different kinds of seeing. Consider an ordinary case of seeing a dog. First, there is simple seeing: having the dog directly present to you in your visual field and noticing the dog. You do not need to have a concept of what a dog is to see one. For example, a little child could see a dog without having a concept of what a dog is supposed to be. In fact, you do not even need to be thinking about a dog to see it. I could see a dog while looking out my window as I ponder the topic of this essay. Even though I would not be thinking about the dog, I could still see it and, later, recall from memory the dog’s colour. In simple seeing, a person sees merely by means of the soul’s faculty of sight. Second, there is seeing as. Here I see an object as being something or other. I may see the dog as a dog. I may even see the dog as a cat if the lighting is poor and I have been led to believe that only cats, but no dogs, live in the area. #RandolphHarris 9 of 21

I can see the dog as my neighbour’s favourite pet. An act of seeing as involves classifying the object of sight as an example of a mental concept, and concepts are located in the mind. Thus, an act of seeing as requires both the faculties of sight and mind working together. When I see a dog as a dog, I must have some concept of what it is to be a dog and apply this concept to the object I am seeing. I could not see a dog as a dog the first time I saw one since I would not have the relevant concept yet. Likewise, to see a dog as my neighbour’s favourite pet, I need the concept of a neighbour, a pet, and being a favourite. Third, there is seeing that. Here one judges with the mind that some perceptual belief is true. If I see that the dog is my neighbour’s favourite pet, I judge that this belief is true of the object I am seeing. If I merely see the dog as my neighbour’s favourite pet, I do not really have to think this is true. I may just be playing with different concept in my mind. I may be thinking, What would it be like to see his dog as my neighbour’s favourite pet? even though I do not think it really is. A developed mind helps us see, but how? Simple seeing only involves the faculty of sight. However, seeing as and seeing that involves the mind. This is why the more one knows, the more one can see. #RandolphHarris 10 of 21

A doctor and I can look at the same skin condition (a case of simple seeing), but he observes more than I do because his mind is filled with medical concepts and beliefs I do not have, which enable him or her to notice things I fail to observe. One can see the sore as a basal cell or as a squamous cell carcinoma—that is, he or she can look at the skin area in both ways to be in a position to look for the right things, so that one can identify it, or “see it as,” a basal cell. I cannot do this because my mind lacks the relevant intellectual categories the doctor possesses. I can stare at the same sore all day long and not see what the doctor sees. Consider another example. Last week the news covered a march on Washington in favour of children’s rights. A congresswoman made the following argument: “Governments should honour children’s rights. Therefore, just as the government should vouchsafe a child’s right not to be molested and stalked, so it should do so for a child’s right to government-sponsored day care.” Now, what is wrong with this argument as it stands? Do you see what I see in this piece of reasoning? If I pace a mental distinction in your mind, it may help your seeing: the distinction between negative and positive rights. #RandolphHarris 11 of 21

A negative right is a right to be protected from some sort of harm. Negative rights place a duty on the government to keep others from doing something to me. A positive right is a right to have something provided for me. Positive rights place a duty on the government to force others (for instance by taxation) to do something for me. For example, if health care is a negative right, the government must see to it that I can get whatever health care I can afford by my own labour unhindered by unfair limitations based on race, creed, or gender. However, if health care is a positive right, the government has a duty to raise the taxes sufficient to provide me with health care. In the congresswoman’s argument about children’s rights, she fails to make this distinction. Moreover, many people believe that New Testament teaching on the state implies that it is responsible for protecting negative rights, not for providing positive ones. The issue here is not that these people (conservatives) are correct in this regard (though I think they). The issue is that, for a long time, the distinction between negative and positive rights has been recognized, and many informed political philosophers have raised arguments against positive rights. #RandolphHarris 12 of 21

This conflict means that a person cannot simply assert that because the government should guard a child’s negative right to be protected against abuse, it is also the government’s duty to provide day care for children. A person could read the congresswoman’s statement several times and not see this issue is he or she did not have the intellectual concepts and beliefs already in mind. This example illustrates the way knowledge helps one see things unavailable to one who has not developed his or her intellect in the relevant area of study. We often read the Bible, hear the news, listen to a sermon, or talk to friends, yet we do not get much out of it. One central reason for this may be our lack of knowledge and intellectual growth. The more you know, the more you see and hear because your mind brings more to the task of “seeing as” or “seeing that.” In fact, the more you know about extrabiblical matters, the more you will see in the Bible. Why? Because you will see distinctions in the Bible or connections between Scripture and an issues in another area of life that would not be possible without the concepts and categories placed in the mind’s structure by gaining the relevant knowledge in those extrabiblical areas of thought. Thus, general intellectual development can enrich life and contribute to Bible study and spiritual formation. #RandolphHarris 13 of 21

There is a closely related reason why intellectual development can enhance spiritual development: The mind forms habits and falls into ruts. One day at a chapel meeting, a missions professor showed a film clip of a foreign culture unfamiliar to most of us. He asked us to write down everything we noticed. He then showed the clip a second time and asked us to repeat the exercise. Everyone in the chapel meeting compared his or her first and second lists and, in every cause, they were virtually identical! The professor’s lesson: our minds get into ruts in which we tend to look for things we have already seen in order to validate our earlier perceptions. We seldom look at things from entirely fresh perspectives! If we are honest with ourselves, we have to admit that we get into ruts in our thinking and develop habits of thought that can grow stale after a while. This is where renewing the mind comes in. A life of study can give us a constant source of new categories and beliefs that will lead to fresh new insights and stave off intellectual boredom. Many people become bored with Bible precisely because their overall intellectual growth is stagnant. They cannot get new insights from Scripture because they bring the same old categories to Bible study and look to validate their old habits of thought. How does the mind interact with other parts of the person? Space forbids me to develop in depth the mind’s role in shaping our willing feeling, and desiring. #RandolphHarris 14 of 21

However, it should be easy to apply our discussion of the mind’s role in seeing to these other areas of human functioning. If I do not know what or how it works, I cannot choose to do something. If I do not believe it is good, valuable, and desirable, I cannot desire something. If my thoughts and beliefs about someone run in the opposite direction, I cannot feel tender toward that person. It is true that the other faculties of the soul affect the mind too. And an overall strategy for personal growth should work on developing and integrating every facet of human personality under Christ’s lordship. Still, I think the mind stands out for special emphasis because it is so neglected today by many Christians. The contemporary Christian mind is starved, and as a result we have small, impoverished souls. The hierarchy of basic needs is prepotent to the metaneeds. Basic needs and metaneeds are in the same hierarchical-integration, id est, on the same continuum, in the same realm of discourse. They have the same basic characteristic of being “needed” (necessary, good for the person) in the sense that their deprivation produces “illness” and diminution, and that their “ingestion” fosters growth toward full humanness, toward greater happiness and joy, toward psychological “success,” toward more peak-experiences, and in general toward living more often at the level of being. #RandolphHarris 15 of 21

That is, the metaneeds are all biologically desirable, and all foster biological success. And yet, they are also different in definable ways. First of all, it is clear that the whole hierarchy of the basic needs is prepotent to the metaneeds, or, to say it in another way, the metaneeds are postpotent (less urgent or demanding, weaker) to the basic needs. I intend this as a generalized statistical statement because I find some single individuals in whom a special-talent or a unique sensitivity makes truth or beauty or goodness, for that single person, more important and more pressing than some basic need. Secondly, the basic needs can be called deficiency-needs, having the various characteristics already described for deficiency-needs, while the metaneeds seems rather to have the special characteristics described for “growth-motivations.” The metaneeds are equally potent among themselves on the average—id est, I cannot detect a generalized hierarchy of prepotency. However, in any given individual, they may be and often are hierarchically arranged according to idiosyncratic talents and constitutional differences. The metaneeds (or B-values, or B-facts) so far as I can many out are not arranged in a hierarchy of prepotency, but seem, all of the, to be equally potent on the average. #RandolphHarris 16 of 21

Another way of saying this, a phrasing that is useful for other purposes, is that each individual seems to have one’s own priorities or hierarchy or prepotency, in accordance with one’s own talents temperament skills, capacities, et cetera. Beauty is more important than truth to one person, but for one’s brother it may be the other way about with equal statistical likelihood. It looks as if any intrinsic or B-value is fully defined by most or all of the other B-values. Perhaps they form a unity of some sort, with each specific B-value being simply the whole seen from another angle. That is, truth, to be fully and completely defined, must be beautiful, good, perfect, just, simple, orderly, lawful, alive, comprehensive, unitary, dichotomy-transcending, effortless, and amusing. (The formula, “The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth,” is certainly quite inadequate.) Beauty, fully defined, must be true, good perfect, alive, simple, et cetera. He it is who appears suddenly; he does not give me time to prepare. And how would I prepare, anyway, against one such as him? Nothing can withstand him, if that be his wish: he is the unconquered one, the victor, inexorably advancing. Lord of Radiance, I wait for you. I will not resist. #RandolphHarris 17 of 21

Come like a blasting wind; even then I will be here with mind open before you, even then I will be here with heart open before you, even then I will be here with hands open before you, awaiting your arrival. “Now it came to pass that after Amulek had made an end of these words, they withdraw themselves from the multitude and came over int the land in Jershon. Yea, and the rest of the brethren, after they had preached the word unto the Zoramites, also came over into the land of Jershon. And it came to pass that after the more popular part of the Zoramites had consulted together concerning the words which had been preached unto them, they were angry because of the word, for it did destroy their craft; therefore they would not hearken unto the words. And they sent and gathered together throughout all the land all the people, and consulted with them concerning the words which had been spoken. Now their rulers and their priests and their teachers did not let the people know concerning their desires; therefore they found out privily the minds of all the people. And it came to pass that after they had found out the minds of all the people, those who were in favour of the words which had been spoken by Alma and his brethren were cast out of the land; and they were many; and they came over also into the land of Jershon. #RandolphHarris 18 of 21

“And it came to pass that Alma and his brethren did minister unto them. Now the people of the Zoramites were angry with the people of Ammon who were in Jershon, and the chief ruler of the Zoramites, being a very wicked man, sent over unto the people of Ammon desiring them that they should cast out of their land all those who came over from them into their land. And he breathed out many threatenings against them. And now the people of Ammon did not fear their words; therefore they did not cast them out, but they did receive all the poor of the Zoramites that came over unto them; and they did nourish them, and did clothe them, and did give unto them lands for their inheritance; and they did administer unto them according to their wants. Now this did stir up the Zoramites to anger against the people of Ammon, and they began to mix with the Lamanites and to stir them up also to anger against them. And thus the Zoramites and the Lamanites began to make preparations for war against the people of Ammon, and also against the Nephites. And thus ended the seventeenth year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi. #RandolphHarris 19 of 21

And the people of Ammon departed out of the land of Jershon, and came over into the land of Melek, and gave place in the land of Melek, and gave place in the land of Jershon for the armies of the Nephites, that they might content with the armies of the Lamanites and the armies of the Zoramites; and thus commenced a war betwixt the Lamanites and the Nephites, in the eighteenth year of the reign of the judges over the people of Nephi. And the people of Ammon departed out of the land of Jershon, and came over into the land of Melek, and gave place in the land of Jershon for the armies of the Nephites, that they might contend with the armies of the Zoramites; and thus commenced a war betwixt the Lamanites and the Nephites, in the eighteenth year of the reign or the judges; and an account shall be given of their war hereafter. And Alma, and Ammon, and their brethren, and also the two sons of Alma returned to the land of Zarahemla, after having been instruments in the hands of God of brining many of the Zoramites to repentance; and as many as were brought to repentance were driven out of their land; but they have lands for their inheritance in the land of Jershon, and they have taken up arms to defend themselves, and their wives, and children, and their lands. #RandolphHarris 20 of 21

“Now Alma, being grieved for the iniquity of his people, yea for the wars, and the bloodsheds, and the contentions which were among them; and having been to declare the word, or sent to declare the word, among all the people in every city; and seeing that the hearts of the people began to wax hard, and that they began to be offended because of the strictness of the word, his heart was exceedingly sorrowful. Therefore, he caused that his sons should be gathered together, that he might give unto them every one his charge, separately, concerning the things pertaining unto righteousness. And we have an account of his commandments, which he gave unto them according to his own record,” reports Alma 35.1-17. You who created light, both human and divine. You accompanied by angels and the Holy Ghost: both powerful and spiritual. You who sit upon the threshold: both in and out. You are the Lord of Heavens and Earth, to you I pray. I am here, Lord, beneath your over-reaching dome, calling to you from the World so far below you. I send my words up to you, building a road on which you might descend. See them there, glowing in the air, the straight road leading to me. Come to me, I ask, guiding yourself by my prayer, come without error, and without delay, to me. Between us there is a bond, strengthened by the thread of my prayer. Come to me, who worship you. Come, answer my prayer. #RandolphHarris 21 of 21

Cresleigh Homes

Buying a home can be a confusing experience for many. Today’s blog tackles closing costs: what are they, and what can you do to make the process go as smoothly as possible. Check it out at the link in bio! https://cresleigh.com/blog/

Tell me, Lord what your message is for me. I have tried to decide for some time just what it is that you have to teach me. Now, at the end of my resources, I finally do what I should have done first: ask yourself. Please speak to me, Lord, and I will listen. https://cresleigh.com/mills-station/residence-4/virtual-tour/

#CresleighHomes