Chinese authorities block Easter service in BeijingThat sucks.
I don't know anything about this particular congregation and its history, but if it wasn't a breeding ground for anti-government activity before the state is sure working to turn it into one.
The Chinese government, for mainly historical reasons, spends an inordinate amount of time trying to stamp out anything that that they perceive could ever potentially become an anti-government secret society.
Five myths about church and state in America
Washington Post just so you know the bias before going in.
Stuff Christian Culture Likes is a blog written by an apparently liberal christian who grew up in an evangelical milieu. Her own intro:
Hi. This is a scientific approach to highlight and explain stuff Christian culture likes. They are pretty predictable. I sort of consider myself an expert on Christian culture as I am a preacher's kid and I'm also married to a preacher's kid. At one point or another I've been a willing participant in almost all the things I talk about here. Christian culture is funny because it doesn't have much (if anything) to do with Christ himself.
It's a mix of fairly gentle humor and genuine WTF, which is also presented in a fairly gentle light. But mostly I get a kick out of the anthropological detachment. Sometimes she goes off on theological tears, which might be more interesting to others.
Five myths about church and state in America
Washington Post just so you know the bias before going in.
He fails to discuss the various reasons why church membership was low in the 1770s. His assumption seems to be that low offical membership must have meant a general lack of religious faith. He doesn't deal with other factors, such as shortages of trained ministers in certain denominations. To be 'unchurched' did not necessarily mean that one was an atheist, deist, or agnostic.
Still his main point here seems to have merit. If early Americans generally still had faith (and I'm sure almost all of them did - even today the number of actual Atheists in the US is vanishingly small) they did not demand that of their neighbors or their elected officials. The electorate could never pin George Washington down on his religious beliefs because he refused to divulge them. This was not a major block to his political career nor would it be to his contemporaries. President Lincoln was very good at quoting the Bible but its fairly doubtful that he was Christian in the way that it is commonly understood (he appears to not believe in heaven if what we can glean from his personal letters etc. is accurate) and he was never really forced by the electorate to prove his religious faith to be a contender in any election he participated in.
I've never even heard of half this stuff.What a bizarre blog.
I generally avoid evangelical types when I can, but I recognized a fair number from the time I did in a branch program of an evangelical university...especially on the part of the faculty they had come up from main campus. Others I've observed in my fundie cousin. This one was especially creepy.
People are weird.
Maybe I'm projecting it, but that blog reads really negatively. :/
I don't see it, but I suppose I wouldn't.
From the Osama thread:
Per my own beliefs, he [Osama bin Laden] will be spending his eternity in a place that the Bible calls Hell, followed by the Lake of Fire.
I am a little fuzzy on the timing of 'judgment'. Are we judge when we die or does everyone wait until judgment day? If everyone has to wait, is everyone given the opportunity at judgment day to recognize Jesus as their savior and ask for forgiveness? If so, does that mean Osama could repent and get into Heaven?
Do the answers to my questions depend on your particular branch of Christianity?
Do the answers to my questions depend on your particular branch of Christianity?
I think they probably do, but I try to stay clear of Christian eschatology.
|
Do the answers to my questions depend on your particular branch of Christianity?
Probably. Truth is that there really isn't all that much information on it. Some cryptic information in Revelation, a very little bit in 1 Peter I believe, some stuff from Jesus in largely parable form, and little bits and pieces elsewhere. But not much that is terrible specific.
I was brought up with the ideas that before Jesus died when people died they went to kind of a holding area -- purgatory? -- and that when Jesus died, at that time, all there were judged one way or the other. After that, I believe that judgement happens when we die. Also, "Judgement Day" I always took to basically mean the day of the 2nd coming when Jesus comes back to take believers to heaven with him. Maybe I'm wrong on that.
The thing is, there are things that make that sequence of events not quite right. I'm not going to go into it too much because I'm not sure I see why it would be important.
In the end, there seems to be very little Biblically that indicates that people will be given a second shot at this.
For me it is relevant because I do not think it is fair that Osama should get Heaven (should he repent) and someone who rejects Jesus as their Savior, but has led a non-murderous life gets Hell. Obviously, what I think matters little to an all powerful being, but just as you would not worship Zeus if he existed, I am not going to worship a Christian god if I think he is morally questionable.
I was brought up with the ideas that before Jesus died when people died they went to kind of a holding area -- purgatory? -- and that when Jesus died, at that time, all there were judged one way or the other. After that, I believe that judgement happens when we die. Also, "Judgement Day" I always took to basically mean the day of the 2nd coming when Jesus comes back to take believers to heaven with him. Maybe I'm wrong on that.
This sounds a little like the Harrowing of Hell, which, I believe, is a medieval Catholic myth extrapolated from one line somewhere in the Bible.
Story goes something like: Before Jesus died, everyone went to Hell. Those who didn't deserve Hell, such as holy Jewish prophets and whatnot, had to wait until Jesus died, when he descended into Hell, beat up a bunch of demons, rescued the righteous, and knocked some walls over.
Anyway, back to Court Fool's question: The way it was explained to me by people who took this stuff much more seriously than I was that, in fact, nobody is currently in Hell. With the second-coming of Jesus, all the souls of all the people who ever lived are going to be judged and those found wanting are THEN (and not before) to be cast into the Lake of Fire.
There are many different permutations on this storyline, as there isn't a real lot of hard info in The Bible. Spice according to taste, I guess.
|
|
For me it is relevant because I do not think it is fair that Osama should get Heaven (should he repent) and someone who rejects Jesus as their Savior, but has led a non-murderous life gets Hell. Obviously, what I think matters little to an all powerful being, but just as you would not worship Zeus if he existed, I am not going to worship a Christian god if I think he is morally questionable.
I am saying that there is not enough information to really know or understand what happens/will happen.
You seem to think that you have enough information based on some side comment on a message board to paint God as "morally questionable".
Right, because I base 40 some years of experience and belief on your single post. Really, Moff!
It seemed to me you were unsure of the answer, so that would leave it mostly an academic exercise. It also seemed to me you were open to the possibility you were wrong about the specifics here. Again, leaving this mostly an academic exercise.
I was merely pointing out why I thought it relevant to the thread. I think the answers do point to the morality of god whether we know the answers or not. I also accept that it could be possible god has a very good reason, which I also arrogantly believe he would not mind explaining to me before casting me into Hell for questioning him. Jesus forgave Thomas. I figured I am good.
|
|
Right, because I base 40 some years of experience and belief on your single post.
I wasn't talking about my post. You originally quoted a post from a different thread.
Maybe I've just become much more of a cynic (sp? I'm lazy right now). When there isn't enough information to accurately figure things out, we seem to tend to put ourselves on some kind of moral high ground and read into things that aren't there. This is one of those areas where you could spend many years trying to figure it out (and there are those who have) and still come up with the wrong answer.
Your "goal" with this exercise is to question God's morality. There's not enough information to do this. To which you then question God's morality based on the lack of information. And I get the impression that unless God's "morals" aligned exactly with yours, you would still find him objectionable.
Why are you (or anyone else) worried about whether or not Osama went to Heaven or Hell? It's not your choice. At this point, it's not something that you (or anyone else) can change. And you yourself won't know the outcome until you die. So what difference does it make arguing about what might be (or might not be)? You still won't know how "moral" God is.
So I guess that if it makes you feel better judging God about something that you (or anyone) knows nothing about -- fine.
Why can't we judge god? One of the reasons you reject the Book of Mormon is because god apparently forgot to put air holes in the boat. Aren't you judging god there?
This is just 'god works in mysterious ways'. That argument works equally well for any supernatural explanation.
So I guess that if it makes you feel better judging God about something that you (or anyone) knows nothing about -- fine.
I sense anger in your post. If I am wrong about that, I apologize. Why are you angry that I should judge god? God certainly would not care what I think. Is it that you think I am lying or misleading people about god? Is it that I am speaking ill about something you care deeply for?
Yeah, about that "Osama bin Laden repenting wouldn't be fair" thing... you should maybe careful about wanting God to be fair. If He/She/It was fair, we'd all be in deep doo-doo. I mean, I don't know anybody who even lives up to their own ethical standards, much less God's.
So a compassionate god is preferable to a just god? I think I could get behind that.
|
|
Why can't we judge god? One of the reasons you reject the Book of Mormon is because god apparently forgot to put air holes in the boat. Aren't you judging god there?
Please read what was written.
Judging anything/anyone on lack of information to me is a waste of time.
With regard to the Book of Mormon -- I am judging what was written. Not on what isn't written.
This is just 'god works in mysterious ways'. That argument works equally well for any supernatural explanation.
No, not really. "God works in mysterious ways" is generally used if you have an end product but don't know how we get there. In this case, we don't know the end result. Yet you still seem to want to make judgement calls on it. About the only thing that the Bible seems to say for sure is that Osama will be "judged" -- although even that leaves a lot to be interpreted. But I'm not sure why having an end "judge" is all that mysterious.
Does Osama deserve to make it into Heaven? No. But then neither do I deserve to make it into Heaven. Why are we so focused on comparing ourselves with other people? "Well at least I'm not as bad as that person." Because the Bible is very clear that we need to compare ourselves with others to make sure that we're not at the bottom. Right?
I really feel that we judge FAR more than God does.
|
|
So I guess that if it makes you feel better judging God about something that you (or anyone) knows nothing about -- fine.I sense anger in your post. If I am wrong about that, I apologize. Why are you angry that I should judge god? God certainly would not care what I think. Is it that you think I am lying or misleading people about god? Is it that I am speaking ill about something you care deeply for?
I'm not sure. I don't think it's a full moon.
I think I get really tired about questions when the question asked isn't the question sought. Your initial question was about the timing of judgement. But what it looks like you are looking for is yet another reason to question God's morality.
The Bible says -- "Why are you worried about the splinter in your brother's eye when you have a plank in your own."
In many ways, the church seems to be accused of being incredibly judgemental. And in many cases, it is. But then people seem to say that it's wrong for the church to be that way, but it's ok for me.
If you want to say that you find God "morally objectionable" because he told the ancient Hebrews to wipe out an entire town, I can understand that. (Although I still feel that there is so much more to those stories that we don't know or understand -- but you would be judging what was written.) On the other hand, finding God "morally objectionable" because Osama will be "judged" and the outcome will never be known seems to me to be a silly waste of time.
So a compassionate god is preferable to a just god? I think I could get behind that.
But how would you market a divinity that's not an action hero? :)
I've been thinking lately that gods are a lot like governments. Both are, or at least are supposed to be, repositories of great power far beyond the reach of any ordinary individual. I was stunned some years ago to discover a Jewish fellow of my acquaintance dismissed out of hand the notion that with great power ought to come great responsibility. Morally speaking, that's the very first thing that comes to mind when I think about power and its uses. There will always be people in positions of authority and power, and there's nothing inherently wrong with that. Rather the question is how that power and authority is being used and what safeguards are in place against its misuse.
I suppose he thought more in terms of sovereignty. Yahweh has it and who are you to question him? He's not accountable to anybody. I find that notion more horrific than most of the really awful stuff in the Bible, but I suppose it's the inescapable conclusion of divine command morality. The leading Christian apologist and professional debater agrees:
I think that a good start at this problem is to enunciate our ethical theory that underlies our moral judgements. According to the version of divine command ethics which I’ve defended, our moral duties are constituted by the commands of a holy and loving God. Since God doesn’t issue commands to Himself, He has no moral duties to fulfill. He is certainly not subject to the same moral obligations and prohibitions that we are. For example, I have no right to take an innocent life. For me to do so would be murder. But God has no such prohibition. He can give and take life as He chooses. We all recognize this when we accuse some authority who presumes to take life as “playing God.” Human authorities arrogate to themselves rights which belong only to God. God is under no obligation whatsoever to extend my life for another second. If He wanted to strike me dead right now, that’s His prerogative.What that implies is that God has the right to take the lives of the Canaanites when He sees fit. How long they live and when they die is up to Him.
So the problem isn’t that God ended the Canaanites’ lives. The problem is that He commanded the Israeli soldiers to end them. Isn’t that like commanding someone to commit murder? No, it’s not. Rather, since our moral duties are determined by God’s commands, it is commanding someone to do something which, in the absence of a divine command, would have been murder. The act was morally obligatory for the Israeli soldiers in virtue of God’s command, even though, had they undertaken it on their on initiative, it would have been wrong.
I am struck by how closely this power relationship maps to that of a slaveowner and his human property, and how where the two differ it makes slavery look good by comparison. I do think Craig's position is completely consistent with the kind of morality taught in the Bible, but that's not really something I'd go around bragging about. I mean, damn.
Judging anything/anyone on lack of information to me is a waste of time.
That statement is too broad for me to agree with. We can never know everything so there will always be a lack of information. Yet we make judgments every day.
With regard to the Book of Mormon -- I am judging what was written. Not on what isn't written.
I do not know all the reasons you reject the Book of Mormon, but your point about the holes in the boat seem to be exactly the same thing to me. You can not possibly know the reason god seemed to forget them, yet you make a judgment about it. At least that is how it appears to me.
No, not really. "God works in mysterious ways" is generally used if you have an end product but don't know how we get there.
I apologize for my ignorance then. I was pretty sure the consensus would be that Osama goes to hell. I thought we had an end product.
Why are we so focused on comparing ourselves with other people?
I do not know, but I am not convinced it is necessarily a bad thing. Christians compare themselves to Jesus.
I really feel that we judge FAR more than God does.
Entirely possible. I have heard plenty of people call him a 'just' god, so maybe it is due to the implications. And maybe that is why many of us are so concerned with comparing ourselves with others. No one wants to come up short on the list.
I think I get really tired about questions when the question asked isn't the question sought.
I am sorry that one thought leads to another. I do not really think there is much I can do about that. In my defense in this particular instance, I felt that you came back with a question of your own which seemed to be why my original question was relevant. That started an entirely different line of thinking for me.
The Bible says -- "Why are you worried about the splinter in your brother's eye when you have a plank in your own."
Compared to Osama, I am pretty sure mine is the splinter. Yes, I know…I am comparing myself again. But that can be constructive, can it not? I refuse to celebrate his death as I see that as making me a little like him.
In many ways, the church seems to be accused of being incredibly judgemental. And in many cases, it is. But then people seem to say that it's wrong for the church to be that way, but it's ok for me.
Yes. A bit hypocritical? Yes. But from my perspective, the church is using a thousand year old document written by questionable hands. It is horribly out of date. Yes, I question its judgment. And just for the record, I question my own as well.
If you want to say that you find God "morally objectionable" because he told the ancient Hebrews to wipe out an entire town, I can understand that.
Yes and other things. I do not even have to read the Bible to find things that make me question god's morality (the problem of evil). So for me, this becomes a mountain of circumstantial evidence all of which I find very relevant.
On the other hand, finding God "morally objectionable" because Osama will be "judged" and the outcome will never be known seems to me to be a silly waste of time.
Well there are two possibilities, right? Please correct me if I am wrong here because I do not understand purgatory very well at all. Osama goes to Heaven or he goes to Hell. Just like everyone else. I do find that morally questionable as I do not see the world as quite so black and white. Maybe Osama deserves Hell, but I do not think anyone who ever breaks a commandment should necessary go there too. And I do not think accepting Jesus is enough to wipe away murder.
I've been thinking lately that gods are a lot like governments.
Do as I say, not as I do? Not good enough. Does that make me arrogant? Maybe. But it seems this kind of unquestioning is what can lead to an Osama.
Do as I say, not as I do? Not good enough. Does that make me arrogant? Maybe. But it seems this kind of unquestioning is what can lead to an Osama.
I've been thinking lately that gods are a lot like governments.
Great power is great power. So for me it's not a matter of not questioning, but being required and obligated to question and make those judgments. Just as we should not blindly trust great power in the hands of governments, corporations, or religious organizations, we should not blindly trust it in the hands of a divinity. Even if I thought one existed I'd still see myself as obliged to scrutinize its acts very closely.
Craig, however, clearly thinks that doing as God says and not as God does is the soul of morality. The quote is from a longer piece that piles horror on top of horror. His soul commandment is very obviously blind obedience even unto genocide.
Certainly Craig doesn't speak for every Christian, but he is a rather influential apologist and theologian. One of the sorts of sophisticated theologians that people like me get slammed for ignoring sometimes. I think his position on genocide is very Biblical and logically coherent. If you grant his premises and believe in divine command morality, then Yahweh really could say Genocide is Good and that would make it Good and anti-genocide or obstructing genocide would consequently be Evil.
I suspect that most Christians don't actually think this way. Plenty of them don't know their own holy book, or like to treat Yahweh as an entirely different character in the Hebrew Bible from the Yahweh in their own. Others will make arguments about how Yahweh is good, so he must have had a good reason that's just not available to us, or that this was an extremely narrow circumstance never to be repeated. I don't hold with those, of course, but they at least acknowledge that an argument needs to be made and this is a problem that requires an answer. They believe that the good might have something to do with Yahweh, and even come from him, but also expect Yahweh to be good himself. That is to say, goodness has meaning independent of Yahweh.
Craig doesn't think so, which in a way puts me in the ironic position of thinking a bit better of Christians than a professional Christian does. :)
Two weeks remaining!Date of the Rapture confirmed!
The end of the world is nigh too...apparently...
*facepalm* Oh dear God. Well, I've already survived three 'End of the World's so I think I should be safe. Just in case, going to go finish Elder Scrolls: Oblivion....and wish my mother happy mother's day.
My daughter and I visited a Unitarian Universalist church Sunday. They had a visiting band that played several Beatles songs so I quite enjoyed it. My daughter said she wanted to go back.
They offer Tai Chi classes at the church. I have e-mailed for more information. My daughter expressed some interest after a couple uTube videos to try and explain what Tai Chi is.
They offer Tai Chi classes at the church. I have e-mailed for more information. My daughter expressed some interest after a couple uTube videos to try and explain what Tai Chi is.
I misread that as xTube for a second. It was a strange, beautiful second.
Anyway, she's into Avatar right? Tai Chi is waterbending. :)
Anyway, she's into Avatar right? Tai Chi is waterbending. :)
You know, that was the first thing I thought while watching the video. I know they modeled the bending after real world martial arts. I just did not know which were which.
Maybe if I tell her she can learn to be a water bender. :)
Anyway, she's into Avatar right? Tai Chi is waterbending. :)You know, that was the first thing I thought while watching the video. I know they modeled the bending after real world martial arts. I just did not know which were which.
Maybe if I tell her she can learn to be a water bender. :)
Love that show. Looking forward to the sequel.
I don't recall them all, but Waterbending was tai chi and Firebending was northern shao lin. All the script is real and apparently in appropriate styles for the contexts. Also a bender is Commonwealth (and rarely, American) English both binge drinking and drug sprees and a gay man. Sadly this caused the title to be changed to The Legend of Aang for international release.
...or maybe only I'm sad about that.
Fun coincidence: Your daughter is interested in taking Tai Chi at a church. My best friend takes Judo from evangelical Christians.
Uncle Iroh seemed the poster child for Taoism. I was not surprised he learned a bit of water bending.
Avatar was one show the daughter and I both enjoyed.
I had heard the binge drinking use of 'bender' but not the gay man one. I guess I need to spend more time in Turkish bath houses.
I had heard the binge drinking use of 'bender' but not the gay man one. I guess I need to spend more time in Turkish bath houses.
It's more of a UK usage. In a way that works with the show's premise, at least for the airbenders.
Date of the Rapture confirmed!
The end of the world is nigh too...apparently...
Huh. Well that IS a curious thing. Especially the part where she says that five months later, the earth will be consumed by fire. As an evangelical Christian, I have to say that that conveniently skips over the whole two witnesses, death and rebirth of the anti-Christ, seven-year Tribulation period thing.
This kind of writes its own puns: The severed head of the patron saint of venereal disease is up for auction.
The skull is allegedly that of St Vitalis of Assisi, an Italian Benedictine monk from the 14th century.
It belonged to an Anglo-Irish family from County Louth, and is housed in a Queen Anne case dating from the 17th century.
There has been no official verification of the claim.
Apparently someone picked this up during a grand tour. That was when the well-to-do young British subjects would go away to the Continent for a few years to learn culture, sample cuisine, and experience the higher-caliber sex shops and brothels of mainland Europe. So it's an especially apt souvenir.
Relics like this used to be common as dirt. The medievals thought every cathedral needed at least a few, and a piece of a relic was itself a relic so why not break 'em up and share the wealth? Surely it was a pure coincidence that relics attracted pilgrims (tourists) who made offerings (bought souvenirs) from the local businesses like taverns and inns (and cathedrals).
There were enough pieces of the True Cross (including one or two complete ones) to build a ship and probably enough sections of the holy prepuce to make its sails...which would probably be the holiest ship ever and also is an idea so awesome I'm strongly tempted to put it in a game. Tragically the last holy prepuce was stolen by thieves, putting an end to centuries of veneration...in 1983.
holy prepuce
rofl
The Search for the Historical Adam
I found the following statement from the comments section particularly disturbing,
I believe that Adam and Eve were the first two humans granted a God given spirit but they were certainly not the first two humans.
So which race should we dehumanize this week? Or is the en vogue phrase, 'not us'?
I found the following statement from the comments section particularly disturbing,
I believe that Adam and Eve were the first two humans granted a God given spirit but they were certainly not the first two humans.
So which race should we dehumanize this week? Or is the en vogue phrase, 'not us'?
My understanding is that something to that effect is the present Catholic dogma. The world is billions of years old, evolution happened in some Yahweh-involved way, and then at some point Yahweh intervened and staged the Garden of Eden business as a literal event.
You're right that the implication is disturbing, of course. I would happily agree that there are stages of human development and they are not all equally morally meaningful but the situation seems to be that anatomically modern, living, identically mature human beings (or in other words: people) are somehow meaningfully distinguished by this magic stuff.
I think it's dehumanizing all around, and I say that as a guy who doesn't really think that people differ from computers mostly in degree of complexity.
OK, so
do these factoids tie together in some way we can spin?
Yes. White people are the devil.
Yes. White people are the devil.
I knew I was the anti-Christ!
Ωφ,ε = Σp ∈ Ε|p↓ 2-len(p)
"All are Welcome" mass cancelled.
You can't just let anybody into these things.