The Death of Faith and Hope!

"And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love." 1 Corinthians 13:13

Faith and hope will someday die, though. And frankly, folks, I can't wait.

Hold up, what? The death of faith and hope? What will we hold on to if faith and hope are gone?

Love.

Paul wrote one of his most oft quoted scriptures in 1 Corinthians 13:

4 Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. 6 Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. 7 It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. 8 Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. 11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. 12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known. 13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

So what about faith and hope do I have a problem with, then? Nothing. Right now, we need both of these. In the second definition of the word, faith is defined thusly by dictionary.com: "belief that is not based on proof." And the same dictionary.com, in the first definition, describes hope as, "the feeling that what is wanted can be had or that events will turn out for the best." You may already see where I am going with this, but I will explain it nonetheless.

As we live now, God is not someone I can call up on the phone, or go and visit. Sure, prayer is an amazing gift that allows me to talk to God when I want to, or need to, or just because I want to chat. And I truly believe He speaks to me all the time, but not in an auditory manner, nor in face to face interaction. I have not touched the robes of Jesus, except in a figurative sense. And I have not gazed upon His likeness, excepting of course seeing his presence in those around me who emulate His traits (or even just simply the least of these). I believe, nonetheless. This is faith. I believe in something unseen and unproven by the rigorous standards of the scientific method. Hebrews 11:1 says, "now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see." That about sums it up. Some find me crazy for doing so. Their unbelief, however, is irrelevant to my belief, and as I've heard said before, "I'd rather be judged a fool by man for this time, then by God for eternity." [I don't know who originally said this or if this is even an exact quote. Give me a heads up if you do.]

Hope is a different animal altogether, but it goes hand in hand with faith. We have hope about what is to come and only through what we have read in the scripture. Titus 3:7 says, ". . .having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life." This eternal life that we hope for is only possible through faith, and that is where they intertwine. But at first glance a word like "hope" looks a bit unsure. We hope that rain will not spoil our summer picnic. We hope that we will find a good job after we graduate from school. We hope that tomorrow will be better than today. None of this is assured or even possible to be so. But when it comes to something such as salvation, through faith we can be assured. It may rain on our picnic, and we may not get the job we want, and tomorrow the car may break down, but the hope that we are reconciled with God through Christ and therefore looking at a much brighter future, whether it be tomorrow or eternity, is grounded in faith alone.

So what about their deaths? I think Paul gives us the answer in 1 Corinthians 13 that I quoted earlier. Verse 12 states, "For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known." Right now we are in Plato's cave. We only see shadows of what reality truly is, and therefore must resort to faith and hope in what we believe to be true. Someday, however, we will know the truth with certainty. Someday we will be able to empirically prove that reality is what we had faith in all along. Because someday we will be face to face with the Creator. We will gaze upon God himself and walk with Jesus. And we will be able to reach out and touch Him and even embrace Him. (How much more empirical can you get?) Paul says in verse 10, "but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears." I believe this means that when faith and hope are dead, it is because we are with God in the flesh and there is no place for either. Completeness is love, and faith and hope are just parts in which we cling to at this moment out of necessity. Because, taking into account the rest of this passage, what need are prophecies when they have been fulfilled? What need are tongues to confess when experience can do the job. And what need is knowledge, (from a man's point of view) when all knowledge is granted from on high?

So faith and hope will be dead. For where is the need for faith when you are walking beside your God? And where is the need for hope when you are in the presence of the Creator of the universe in heaven? But there is always the need for love. Love transcends everything. Love is what this is all about. If you have any doubt, reread the Gospels. And not just the Gospels, Romans 5:8 says, "But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us." Wow.

I welcome a day when faith and hope are dead. When I am someday physically walking with God and asking him mundane questions that He finds quaint. I will be in the element I was intended to be in. And I will say a prayer over the graves of faith and hope. But I will never give up love. Love is what will get us to that place. Love is what reconciles ourselves to God. Love is what caused Jesus Christ to die for a poor and undeserved sinner like myself. And love is what I would like to feel for eternity, and will!

So for now, the three remain. Faith, hope, and love. But I long for the death of faith and hope, for the greatest of these, that will remain and reign forever, is Love!

[All verses quoted in this post are from the NIV. It is not the only translation, however, and given the fact that I do not know Greek, I can't speak to their veracity as direct translations. However, having surveyed numerous translations, the only one that seems to contradict my basic premise is the New Living Translation. It states the verse as following: "Three things will last forever--faith, hope, and love--and the greatest of these is love." Although I respect and appreciate various translations of the Bible (with all their individual probities and caveats), I find this particularly translated verse to be a bit dubious. Let me first say that I am not railing against the New Living Translation, nor did I have any ambition in defaming it in mind before I started researching this concept. My main objective is to talk about the death of faith and hope. The NLT may give some amazing insights to many things, but I take issue with this particular verse and no others (as I have not researched them). You have, no doubt, seen why. Either way, I believe the Gospels, as I have read them, and general logic seems to bear me out as far as what I am able to interpret. Correct me (with references) if you believe me to be in error.]

Too Young to Know. . .

To begin, let me say that I look younger than I actually am. I'm 33, but I look more like 23 (at least that's what many people tell me). And I understand that it is generally held that the younger you are, the less you tend to be concerned with anything other than what is within your particular sphere of influence, which tends to narrow as one's age declines. This, however true it may be for a large percentage, is a gross generalization and clearly does not apply to all people all the time. Case in point: musical knowledge and taste (specifically mine). I grew up listening to a large amount of Gospel music mixed with a bit of what my older sisters were into (think Duran Duran, Pet Shop Boys, Morrissey and other 80s and early 90s bands). I was, however, somewhat sheltered in my musical lexicon and for what I now consider to be good reason. I recall having my Cypress Hill - Temples of Boom CD requisitioned by my parents for reasons I just didn't get at the time. I don't pay attention to the lyrics, Mom, I just like the music! Yeah, right. But I digress. . .

Later, upon establishing myself in a freshman dormitory at college I was introduced to a range of musical tastes I could only have dreamed of previously, had I thought to do so. My roommate was enamored by all things psychedelic. My neighbor across the hall was hip to any Rap coming "straight from ATL." My friend down the hall touted the glory of Bluegrass and a large dosage of Led Zepplin and their contemporaries. I, myself, must also point out that as a child I would steal my mom's Simon & Garfunkel and The Doors records and play them on my Fisher Price record player and later my dad's phono (once he finally allowed me to touch it). I guess I wasn't as sheltered as I thought.

*For the kids out there, yes, I did just say record player. As in LPs. Vinyl. Not to be confused with 8 tracks, cassette tapes, CDs, or even MP3s -- which had yet to be invented, but would be soon. If you still don't know what I'm talking about Google it.*

What this brings me to is this: I have listened to and appreciated a wide range of music spanning decades and even centuries. "Great," you may be saying, "you've listened to some music. So what?" The "so what?" in this is that for years now I have noticed that people of a certain age seem to relish in saying, "you're too young to know this song." First of all, I am (as I mentioned before) older than I look. Secondly, this statement is simply ignorant and just plain rude. And while many may not mean it with the self-satisfied and smug glint in their eyes that I, more often than not, tend to perceive within this comment, many do. Let's discuss why this is wrong.

First, though, let me say that perhaps I am being overly sensitive and I will readily admit this could be a distinct possibility. But after mentioning the idea for this blog topic to a person who's opinion I respect and who is also quite a bit younger than myself expressed a strong interest in it I felt compelled to make it a reality. Either way, I am not the only person who has experienced this. And that makes this relevant, in my opinion, overly sensitive or not. Whatever. Now it's on the internet and that makes it true, right? Just a little joke. Let's continue.

I can look at my contemporaries who have children and recognize that I have NO idea what having a child is all about. I can see a fighter pilot drop bombs during a time of war in a video on YouTube and have no idea how he may feel (much less the people he is bombing). And I can even make sense of the fact that I never went to a Jimi Hendrix concert and passed joints across the aisle, relishing in an amazing show of drug-fueled, free-love-embracing, tuning-in-and-turning-off, hippie love-fests. None of this applies to basic music, though (Hendrix reference notwithstanding). And I may not know what it was like to watch Pink Floyd play live at Pompeii, but I love that set in ways I can't describe because I heard it. I have a recording of it. And it was before my time. Quite a bit so.

Wait. Hold on. You're telling me that there are these things called "recordings" that are made and that despite the fact that the band is not physically there, plugged in and in front of the mic with the PA blasting and fans cheering I can actually hear what they are playing and singing anytime I want to? Yes. You can. And you all know this and this is exactly why saying. "You're too young to know this song," is belittling to me and yourself. (Not that you have ever said this. This is for those who do. Not you, right?)

Folks, I've listened to Motzart and Bethoveen and I don't know anyone alive who held up a lighter at one of their shows. So what is it about The Eagles, The Beatles, Led Zepplin and even The Partridge Family that elicit such reactions? Could it be that we think we are super cool when we live through and experience something that a younger generation hasn't? "I was there when the Magna Carta was signed. You only oversaw the signing of the Constitution of the United States of America. I'm cooler than you. . ." We all are born, have a childhood, an adulthood, latter years and then succumb to the dust from which we came. The fact that I was born later than one and earlier than another has no bearing on anything other than fate or God's will.

I didn't choose when I was born. Did you? On the other hand I do choose what music I listen to, and that happens to be the category entitled "eclectic." I don't weigh my hand too heavily in any particular camp. To tell you the truth, I like a little bit from here and a little bit from there. I like some Rap (not gangsta!), I like some Gospel, I like a bit from Rock, Jazz, Blues, Soul, Psychedelic, Electronica, Classic Rock, a smidgen of Pop and yes, even some *gasp* Country, and this is not even an exhaustive list. Clearly "eclectic" is a good place to start when it comes to my tastes. And I get this from having come into contact with a lot of people who have turned me on to good music new and old.

I like music and I have sought out music that I would like and it has taken many forms. I guess some people will only ever listen to what they grew up with, but I have never wanted to limit myself in this way (other than staying away from what I personally find offensive and lyrics that are a bit, shall we say, salty?). I guess this is why it bugs me when I'm singing a song at work (a decidedly unconventional grocery store) and someone says to me, "You're too young to know this song." NO, I'm not! I like music of all types from all times. I like a lot of music you will never hear on the radio or Muzak, but we are listening to (and singing along to) Muzak at my store here, people. This is not some obscure DJ spinning LPs of bygone eras. This is music that is and for the foreseeable future will continue to be in constant rotation. So beside the fact that I seek out music both legitimately new as well as new to me, when I am singing a song that is playing on the PA at work it is clearly a song that I have heard before because, and let me make this perfectly clear, THEY ARE STILL PLAYING IT!

Sorry. Didn't mean to yell. But seriously, whatever music is playing when you walk into a store or restaurant, unless you are in an independent record store, cafe or something of that nature, it is safe to say that the personnel there to assist you in whatever fashion have heard it over and over ad nauseum for however long they have worked there. Long enough to learn a few lyrics and if they're crazy like me, to sing along (even perhaps with a bit of falsetto thrown in, à la Bee Gees).

So I guess what my rant really boils down to is this. If I pull an obscurity out of my rear end and begin singing something that one could only have heard if he was actually there at a show (that didn't include live recording) more than thirty some years ago, and you are one of the lucky ones to have attended, I guess the whole, "You're too young to know this," might apply. But if I'm heartily singing along to something anyone can hear on the local classic rock station, over the PA at work, or even through the love of music and diligent personal searches and recommendations from like-minded friends, and you tell me I'm "too young to know this". . .

I just might have to hand you my iPod.