Brother,
I have seen you call a few times, and I imagine you are getting the impression that I'm avoiding you. The truth is: I am. I find that most days, I tire of the energy required to speak with you. Instead of continuing to hide, I decided to share my honest thoughts and feelings and see where it lands for you. Perhaps you'll pray on my observations and see some truth in them; Perhaps you'll reject my perspective. How you receive this is yours to own.
I get the feeling that you have a desire to open up some discussion on Jesus and Christianity. I must express that your intention is not aligned with my desires given the state of our current relationship. There are foundational elements that need to change in the event you truly want to have the opportunity to have these types of conversations. I have identified three types of conversations relating to this topic and the requirements (as I see them) to safely engage in each. Perhaps this rubric would apply to others in your life also.
The first type of conversation would be a discussion whereupon one desires to discuss their beliefs, with the end goal of clarifying what they see as truth, or to create a personal relationship with God. Faith and belief are deeply personal topics - and they are imbued with intense emotions... To discuss or advise on matters of the soul, one must meet the other in a space of authenticity and vulnerability, and most times, humility and empathy. These discussions are generally speaking personally led, with one doing more self-discovery, and the other coming from a place of curiosity and support in their replies (as opposed to guidance) as in the end, the result is about the main person's desire to create a personal relationship or belief about God; The secondary person is acting more as a sounding board. These conversations can range in subject from a struggle with the elements of life (ranging from an argument with a colleague - a question of moral authority perhaps, to a shattering event - such as the loss of a child) and lead to questions of faith and existence in it's broader context. In order for one to secure any further understanding of their own beliefs, they must be met with a person who holds emotionally safe space for them to reflect back upon their own thoughts. These conversations are had between friends, or perhaps those on a similar life path with equal footing to one another. More often than not, a relationship or dynamic built on trust is required. The only input and feedback that is helpful in these conversations are questions and comments made without threat or judgement; while each party will naturally have their own agenda - as we all do - it is understood that self-reflection and discovery is the baseline of this type of conversation.
The second type of conversation around faith is one generally characterized by some type of debate. This conversation is based in knowledge and history, facts and details. These conversations are led by and engaged in by intellectuals desiring to either refute or affirm their beliefs. Generally, both parties have respect for each others' position, or at the very least, believe the other has the intellectual ability to understand the theological concepts being spoken about. These discussions do not necessarily involve emotions, but can easily cross into emotional territory depending on the conviction (and/or fears) of the parties involved. These conversations should be engaged in readily and wholeheartedly by both parties, not with one having been persuaded by another to engage. In order for any party to learn from the other, they must see the logic of their arguments in order to be convinced of any new viewpoint. These conversations are more about religious or spiritual 'knowledge'. Conversations like these should be cautiously continued once they turn emotional, and conscious note should be made if they do, as perhaps the conversation should turn to the previous type at that point, one of refining one's beliefs. It may not be possible to further engage with the same person if the conversation type has changed, as the emotional vulnerability required in the first type of conversation may not be available with one whom an intellectual conversation is being had.
The third type of conversation is one of instruction; This would be a conversation one might have with a pastor. In this conversation, one might seek out the spiritual instruction of the other, one whom the first sees as a leader or example to emulate. This dynamic requires that the leader must embody the virtues and qualities they espouse to be an expert on, and the person seeking instruction should agree that the other has these qualities, and also that these qualities are admirable. In contrast to someone with spiritual 'knowledge', this person would also be known to have spiritual 'maturity' (or perhaps even widsom). This is the only type of conversation where it would be appropriate for one to advise the other or call judgement upon the primary person's actions. It is only in this dynamic where instruction would be effectively received, as the logical basis for instruction would be the known example of the life of the leader, and the assumed admiration from the student. To expand that reasoning, logically, guidance must come from either admiration of the way in which life is being lived (living by example of admirable qualities agreed upon by both parties) or scripture (the belief in the divinity or authenticity of such being a prerequisite, therefore needing to be intuitively known or having been previously debated and now convinced of). Advice is not what is sought in the intellectual conversation, and should not be given in that scenario. What is appropriate intellectually is feedback and theory, and it should be backed by logic. Advice would generally (and naturally) be unwelcome, unless the conversation being had is one founded on the agreement of guidance and admiration.
I've spent a great deal of time thinking about our dynamic, and I've realized many things... perhaps why I've spent a few hours editing this message. Over the past several years, it feels like you are trying to engage in some sort of instruction or debate on the topic of religion and faith... at times a steam roller with no ability to see (or have respect for) what it will squash in it's way. Your communication on this topic can become unyielding, severe, and impatient. I often feel I am being dragged into a conversation against my will, with no way out without being judged and shamed. In the end, I finally realized what's actually occurring is a form of entrapment, but it took me years to see this and be able to respond from a place of love and logic.
As rarely as we speak, it seems that conversations generally only follow your timeline or direction. While the conversation may begin in a jolly fashion, it wuickly seems to diminish if the conversation doesn’t follow your prescribed path. There is little room for dialogue, unless it expressly falls into your premeditated position. Additionally, on just about every occasion that we've interacted in the past few years (many specific incidents come to mind) you react with anger and aggression, resort to name calling, engage in judgment rather than attempting to understand, show a total lack of empathy or ability to communicate in a loving way whatsoever, and often you seem to embody a sense of entitlement or self righteousness.
At times, once things have ended, you might apologize... only for the behavior to be on repeat for the next occasion, thus leaving one to feel that the apology is in vain, or worse, a learned tactic to continue a cycle of toxicity (if the latter, I do not believe the behavior to be conscious - I want to be clear that while at times I have been astounded at your actions, I no longer ever assume you to be malicious by intent - and even if you were, it wouldn't be my business to make the judgement. It's much more believable to me that you truly feel remorse and that you simply haven't found the way for a change in behavior to sink in). So, as perhaps you can understand, based on the way it seems you live, and the manner in which you treat people, I am not desiring instruction from you, as I do not admire the way you conduct yourself. Based purely on your actions that I witness, we do not seem to share similar values.
True that we can never know what is within ones heart, but your visible character is difficult for me to reckon with at times. Your zealous nature causes me to question even my own knowledge of the Bible, as your words, actions, energy, and life can be such a direct contradiction to the Holy words. I don't say these things to upset you; on the contrary, being someone who is deeply concerned with my faith - confused, and at times truly tormented by the questions in my mind - it's disappointing to have someone so close, with such a desire to share this faith, and such a depth of knowledge... whom I have utterly zero desire to communicate with on this topic. From experience, I feel very little emotional safety when speaking with you and little (if any at all) love coming from you. I feel your ego, your judgement, your righteousness... but no, not love.
No one, even a teacher, knows the entire essence or truth of any message, unless they themselves were the author. You continually steer dialogue to debate while not a professor; and even if you were, I have not enrolled in your class. You're not a preacher where I'm in your congregation. And while you're technically my brother, you've sown almost no relationship with me for over a decade, shown no interest in my life (aside from passing judgement here or there on a group text) and historically, you call only when you need something. Your actions show a perspective of self interest. Plainly, you've not earned the right to instruct me, as you don't exhibit qualities befitting of a leader whom I admire, and you've not shown any desire to be a part of my life as a brother. I am almost through healing myself from these wounds and I have let go of my anger towards you. But I do engage discernment with you.
For reasons similar to the ones I've outlined above, I imagine this is also why so many people historically find it difficult to communicate with you. I have love in my heart for you - humanly love; and I can see many good qualities in you, but it is the blind spots we need help seeing, not the admirable qualities. And to be clear, I am actually not wanting to instruct you here... rather I am positing a hypothesis as to why your desire to lead is not coming to fruition, and some potential steps that could cause your proselytising to be more effective. I see that you have a deep desire to evangelize, and I desire to see you grow into, and be recognized for, the man who embodies the biblical qualities you preach. The obstacles for this goal are clear - your life must become less of a contradiction.
I imagine you are trying to live a good life. Me too. I am, however, tired of making excuses for why I don't answer. If you want a relationship with me, I am not looking for a professor or a pastor, you can start by being a brother, that is the role offered at this time.
With hope and encouragement for our growth,
Your sister
