The Descartes fallacy- like soup w/o a spoon.

Well here I am. Or am I here? The paradox of existence, ah. And yet, I know that I am. But what part of me "is" & whose is it? and for how long & to what extent?

I mean, Am I here 100% occupied in whatever I do.. or am I divided in allegiances constantly.. even w/o admitting it? I should surely hope not, Christ did say that a house divided against itself could never stand!

I will say that this is tricky to even begin to talk about.. because we could get into the realm of walking in the flesh vs. walking in the spirit.. which could further break down. I don't want to do that now. I just want to examine one particular secular notion that is kind of relative to this whole idea. (but if you want to read on flesh vs. spirit-- look at Romans 7 & 8.. or at the Galatians 5 passage on the Fruit of the spirit.. or Colossians 3.. or Philippians 2 & 3.. that should paint some kind of picture for you)


I belong to Christ, 100%. And yet, I don't always live up to the quote: "I think, therefore I am." No offense to Descartes, but I find his quote disheartening. It doesn't finish well. Just because I think on love doesn't mean I love. Just because I doubt my own validity in the universe doesn't mean that the implied personal nature of that doubt proves my existence. Just because I think.. that doesn't do anything. The concept is really a fallacy to me. It doesn't finish well. If I had to compare its mode of thought to anything.. I would compare it to a big bowl of soup without a spoon. It looks really good, but you can't take it all in. You want to take it all in, because it seems tasty.. but you realize that without the spoon.. it is incomplete and will end up spilling on you and leaving you burned in the end.

Christ commands me to finish well, so I have to rework Descartes fallacy of thought process here. I would say, for the Christian: "I love, therefore I am."

In fact, I would take it even a step further and just say all of this--

You have heard the saying "I think, therefore I am." This is not enough. I now say to you "I love, therefore I am." If one wonders whether or not they truly exist.. their wondering alone is not proof of true existence. You have heard that it is, but it is not. Proof of true living is love, for this is what the Father seeks.


and then I would take it even farther by adding this--
Those who worship must worship in spirit & in truth. I tell you this-- Apart from love, your Father in heaven does not even exist.. for such is his very being.



Now Go read 1st John and then read John 4 and tell me that what I'm saying doesn't line up with scripture. I dare you. I want you to be like the Acts 17:10-11 people. Go examine my words. I don't speak of my own initiative, but of the Father. Even as it is written, why would a man seek his own perishable glory when he could seek the imperishable glory of the Father? Therefore, I speak of the imperishable glory that is of the Father.. that I might also partake of that divine glory (in due time).

P.S. -- The first few chapters of Colossians tend to speak really well on this idea as well.