Transforming the Intrinsic Mind
(Brook, Peter. “Lord of the Flies.” Lord of the Flies, The Criterion Collection, http://www.criterion.com/films/563-lord-of-the-flies.)
William Golding’s Lord of the Flies revealed the innate immorality and savagery present in all human beings.
Humans are simply not perfect. Despite our understanding of the morals and ideals that constitute a “flawless” individual in modern-day society, antagonistic, corrupt thoughts resides in each one of us. This is perhaps best seen in William Golding’s well-known novel Lord of the Flies: an ongoing conflict between abiding to established constructs and committing transgressions inherently exists in all humans. Although the extent to which we express the latter varies per individual, we are all guilty of sin.
In his October 23rd lecture on St. Paul’s 1st Letter to the Corinthians, Dr. Frisina deconstructed the concept of sin from the perspective of Paul, a self-announced apostle and advocate of Jesus’ philosophy. Dr. Frisina put it best, stating “Sin is something that Paul believes all human beings are born into” (Frisina, “St. Paul’s 1st Letter to the Corinthians” 10/23/18). Expanding on this, Dr. Frisina articulated Paul’s stance on how to reign in human behavior in order to avoid sin. In the eyes of Paul, the crucifixion and the symbolic significance of the cross are the central elements to Jesus’ salvific ability. Paul writes “but to us being saved it [the cross] is the power of God,” (Paul, Chapter 1) asserting that the all-mighty cross is saving us from something. Yet what do we need to be rescued from, you may ask? It is our excessive pride, belief in self-importance, and inclination to overstate our capabilities: the building blocks of sin. Jesus’ defeat by the cross accentuates his vulnerability, which in turn serves as a reminder for us not to think too highly of ourselves. Ultimately, the crucifixion is the key to control our sinful mindset, or as Dr. Frisina stated, “Jesus’ weakness… is part of the remedy to the core problem that humans suffer from” (Frisina, “St. Paul’s 1st Letter to the Corinthians” 10/23/18).
However, is Jesus’ death really the remedy? My thoughts on the matter differ: without their savior and supreme entity, individuals will lose the driving force they need to work towards remaining righteous. The motivation to stray away from the path of sin and “promote good order and unhindered devotion to the Lord” (Paul, Chapter 7) will be lost. How can one be expected to please the Lord and adhere to the principles of his/her faith when its central figure has perished? The importance of Jesus’ presence can be closely connected to leadership. We are all well-aware of the monumental impact idolized leaders, such as Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr., can have on introducing new philosophies, mobilizing a community, and spearheading positive change. Such figures give people something to work towards and a reason to remain moral and virtuous. As a result, I believe that the loss of Christ overshadows the ability of the crucifixion to influence one’s line of thinking for the better.
(Handy, Delores. “Martin Luther King Jr. Addresses a Crowd with a Bullhorn in Roxbury on April 22, 1965.” 45 Years Later, Boston Remembers MLK Jr.’s Death, WBUR News, 4 Apr. 2013, http://www.wbur.org/news/2013/04/04/mlk-death-boston.)
Martin Luther King Jr. mobilizes a crowd for a civil rights march in Boston on April 22, 1965.
In my eyes, the true power lies not in the crucifixion; rather, the resurrection serves as the ultimate message for humans to avoid sinful thoughts or actions. Christ rising from the dead does more than simply signify his arrival – it dramatizes and magnifies Christ as a central figure. The resurrection is awe-inspiring, eliciting feelings of admiration and reverence from us. It is the ideal event to stimulate mankind, propelling individuals to follow a path of righteousness and avoid sin in an attempt to live up to the great Christ.
Ironically, the effect of the resurrection is derived from the crucifixion itself: the former is a result of the latter taking place. This relationship goes to show just how critical an all-important figure can be in altering thoughts that are supposedly ingrained in individuals.
Works Cited:
Brook, Peter. “Lord of the Flies.” Lord of the Flies, The Criterion Collection, http://www.criterion.com/films/563-lord-of-the-flies.
Frisina, Warren. “St. Paul’s 1st Letter to the Corinthians.” Culture & Expression. St. Paul’s 1st Letter to the Corinthians, 23 Oct. 2018.
Handy, Delores. “Martin Luther King Jr. Addresses a Crowd with a Bullhorn in Roxbury on April 22, 1965.” 45 Years Later, Boston Remembers MLK Jr.’s Death, WBUR News, 4 Apr. 2013, http://www.wbur.org/news/2013/04/04/mlk-death-boston.
“The First Letter Of Paul To The Corinthians.”
Borderless Butterfly 
Really strong intro! Grabs the readers’ attention and immediately presents a main idea. I like the fact that you state a differing opinion rather than an agreeing one. The fact that you also used less of an arguementative tone and more a factual tone is also really cool.
LikeLike
One of my favorite things about this blog post is its structure: it begins with the general idea of sin and the imperfect nature of humanity and then uses opera like Lord of the Flies and Paul’s letter to the Corinthians in an attempt to better understand this dynamic. In addition, sin is also used as a contextual lens through which Jesus’ resurrection is to be analyzed, which I certainly weened to be sufficiently true to the source material and indicative of a very paramount aspect of Christian theology. In addition, the analysis of the quotations in this post was very well-executed, in that the quotes were topical, relevant and insightful. One thing that I would work on in this post would be the logical sequence betwixt the idea that Jesus was resurrected and the inspiration to act righteously; it felt as though this piece of the paragraph broke an otherwise omnipresent logical flow that made the work quite easy to read and understand. As a whole, I very much enjoyed this piece’s analyzation of Christian theology in the context of human nature, and some small alterations could make it a very powerful statement about overcoming our inclinations.
LikeLike
Manav- I really liked your argument on the impact of important figures on the actions and morals of humans in today’s society. Your thesis seemed to be that humans are heavily influenced by those they look up to, which determines the efficacy of societal structure. It was memorable how you utilized many outside sources to provide evidence for your argument, and I will try to incorporate this into my own posts in the future. However, I think you do this more effectively in some places than others. For example, the MLKJ/Ghandi reference elicited my understanding of your point and helped connect central ideas of your thesis. On the other hand, the “Lord of the Flies” reference was distracting from your point and did not help to clarify your argument. Overall, I enjoyed your progression of thought from stating that humans are sinful to explaining why, and the influences that affect our actions.
LikeLike
This is by farther best post I’ve had the pleasure of reading to date. One thing that really sparked my interest was your comparison of Jesus to historical martyrs. This was exemplary of great critical thinking and differentiated your writing from several other posts I’ve read. I really can’t say that I would change anything about this post. I’m very impressed!
LikeLike
Interesting read! I really enjoyed following your progression of thoughts. It is true that the crucifixion would be nothing without the resurrection. I just wanted to add to your thoughts on sin and the cross by highlighting the parallel between Adam and Jesus. Jesus is sometimes referred to as “the new Adam” because while Adam brought sin into the world, Jesus rid the world of it. Additionally, Adam was tempted to eat from the “tree” which caused sin, while Jesus dies on a “tree” (wooden cross) to save the world.
The only flaw in logic that I see is your description “Jesus’ defeat by the cross accentuates his vulnerability, which in turn serves as a reminder for us not to think too highly of ourselves.” Christians, like me, would argue that Jesus wasn’t defeated when he died on the cross. Jesus, both human and God, could have easily destroyed the Jews who were crucifying him and saved himself. Instead he purposely chooses to endure humiliation, suffer physically, and die on the cross to save humanity. So it does not remind people “not to think too highly of ourselves” but instead that we should carry our own crosses joyfully, and sacrifice for others.
LikeLike