If you are looking for lighter fare than what I generally put to paper on this blog, I have *very* recently (read: this morning) started writing reviews for Geek Culture site Guardians of Geek.
My first review is live here.
Anyway, if you like anime OR like fun, head on over and take a look.
The title says it all, but does need clarification.
Who was it that started the North American Otaku revolution? Who went to Japan, said “You know, these cartoons are amazing. I should hire some really bad voice actors, not learn any editing techniques, and then air them back in my home country!”?
Then, after this process began, bad voice acting included, who was it that was like “These bad voice actors, animation quality eclipsed by our animators in the 40s, the nearly nonsensical plots, these are what truly constitutes the pinnacle of art!”
Don’t get me wrong, I love anime. I have a premium subscription to Crunchy Roll ($8/mo, same price as Netflix, but specializes ONLY in anime). Storytelling is very different in Japan, which is about the most level headed review anyone can give it. It isn’t that it is a bad thing or a good thing, it is just that Hollywood (and almost all North American storytelling) follows a very tight “plot schedule”. You probably learned about it in Junior High or High School, you have your rising action, your climax, your denouement, your resolution. Japan saw that graph, decided it didn’t have NEARLY enough peaks and valleys (read: it had none), crumpled it up and used it as toilet paper, then went on to make stories that have a much wider emotional scope than your traditional western entertainment, with mighty peaks and valleys that may (at times) dip into Hades itself.
The funny thing is that there are many other countries that have produced some truly incredible entertainment. Among people who like art, you will be hard pressed to find anyone who hasn’t seen the 1957 Swedish masterpiece “The Seventh Seal”. I have watched it myself, and quite enjoyed it. But that’s it, that is the extent of Swedish entertainment I have seen. Obviously they know how to make a good movie; I’ve seen it.
How about Asterix and Obelix? They are made by the French company Gaumont, and are quite good. At best, though, they are considered a bit of a cult classic. That isn’t to say they aren’t good, as Asterix in Britain is still one of my favorite movies of all time; it isn’t purely nostalgia, either — When you watch something purely out of nostalgia, some of the magic fades, but the subtle (and sometimes overt) racism in that movie transcends time itself (It is made by the French, and takes so many pot shots at the British I’m surprised they didn’t declare war). I watch it frequently, and still laugh at the jokes about British weather (“Is it always foggy here?” “Oh, my, no! Only when it isn’t raining!”), or the jokes about how ridiculous a sport Rugby is. The constant ongoing dialogue about how gross (OR DELICIOUS!) warm beer is, and the idea that you can acquire a taste for anything if you have the stomach for it! (“Have some roasted boar covered in mint sauce! With a side of warm beer!”)
This is more a walk down the lane of one of my favorite movies, and I apologize for getting a little side tracked. The point is, the whole series is pretty funny, even down to the naming (The Great Druid Getafix [say his name slowly, hopefully you’ll get it faster than I did, because I maintain that I was barely functional when I was a child]). So why isn’t there a giant following of French entertainment? Why is there an Edmonton Animethon, a convention held at Grant MacEwan, attended by over 10,000 people, and yet if you talk about “Foreign Film Festival” herein Edmonton, you will have to go to the Garneau theater and sit as far as you can from any one of the other 30 hipsters who showed up to watch it?
What made Speed Racer, Astro Boy, and Kimba the White Lion stand out? (Kimba the White Lion was stolen WHOLESALE by Disney and turned into “The Lion King”. They never really bothered to hide it, as Kimba was remembered by approximately 4 people when the 90s rolled around) Those were the first three anime that were presented to English audiences. When I watch the original Speed Racer, I nearly go blind from how bad the animation quality is (its varied and numerous remakes are pretty cool, though).
Anyway, I just wanted to get that off my mind. *Shrug*
No point to this post, really. Just thinking out loud.
Another thing I’ve seen mentioned before, but thought very little of, is the mathematics of prophecy. I thought “Meh, it’s just a few people that even the more dogmatic people are like ‘Ehhhhh… I don’t know him.'” But as I looked into some more prophecy stuff for one of my posts last week, I came across it again, and I was left (suitably, I think) confused by the whole enterprise.
I’m using two sources for this article, but it doesn’t really matter which I use; the whole enterprise is silly in both cases.
http://www.lamblion.com/articles/articles_bible6.php
To really point out the fun times I had researching this, I am going to try to use only prophecies that are mentioned in both writings.
First, the book of Zechariah chapter 11; in this book, 30 pieces of silver are paid to Zechariah for his having tended a flock of sheep (literal sheep, near as I can tell, but perhaps they are people sheep). In any case, for some reason, someone paying Zechariah 30 pieces of silver (and with no mention of a future Messiah in the whole chapter) counts of prophecy (WHO KNEW?!). The first linked article has this prophecy being fulfilled as a 1 in 10^11 (that is, 1 in 100,000,000,000). Wow! So unlikely!
The other article, citing the same source (Zechariah 11:12-13) has that SAME prophecy as 1 in 1000. That’s… That’s quite a swing in estimates. Neither show work, so I can’t even really comment on which one is closer. WE MOVE ON!
The next common prophecy is the birth of the Messiah in Bethlehem. The first cites 1 in 10,000, the second 2.8 in 10,000. Well, they are pretty close there, though the historicity of Jesus having been born in Bethlehem is in doubt. If Joseph was actually there for a census, as the Bible states, one would think there would be a very strong record of Jesus of Nazareth being born there, but we are out of luck on that count (Jesus is not mentioned in the census primarily because A) That is not how censuses in Roman territories were conducted, and B) there is no evidence for a census having been taken at the time of Jesus’ birth. Biblical literalists have to do some fun gymnastics on this point, but we are talking about math here).
Here’s another fun one; Psalm 22:16 (frequently cited, and one I cited just recently). The Messiah will have his hands and feet pierced. The first cites a chance of 1 in 10^13 (10,000,000,000,000) as Crucifixion hadn’t been invented yet. The second cites 1 in 100,000. The weird thing is that this is cited as “clear evidence” that the prophets knew Jesus would be crucified. Well, that doesn’t sound like crucifixion to me, though it is odd that he would have had his hands and feet nailed to the cross as this was not standard procedure — but we have very little evidence stating that he was nailed there outside of the Gospels (read: no evidence at all). That being said, if you have full faith in the Gospels, I can see why you’d think it was a fulfillment of this prophecy… But here’s the thing; we can call that prophecy in hindsight, as we know how Jesus died… But if you were a Jew in, say, 15 CE (after Jesus’ birth, but before his ministry), what are the chances you would read the passage saying “his hands and feet will be pierced”, and think “Oh yeah, they’ll clearly nail him to a cross, even though crucifixion is generally performed by tying them to the cross. Makes perfect sense. I’ll watch for a Messiah that gets nailed to a cross.”
See, there is a reason that the Jewish people do not accept Jesus as the savior; he does not fit the prophecies. As much as Christian hindsight and wordplay say “he is the Messiah because prophecy,” they can really only connect those dots when they already have the answer (think of a connect the dots figure where the dots aren’t numbered, but someone has already drawn the picture). The prophecies are great, but only when you already have the answer.
One that is cited as prophecy (and one of the VERY FEW prophecies that actually claim to be prophecies (rather than about the writer himself)) is from the book of Daniel Chapter 9, verse 25-26. The odd thing is that the passage itself reads “69 ‘sevens’ will pass’, and for some reason this is supposed to be “years” according to … People? I guess? I read it as 69 weeks, but maybe I am, again, the crazy one.
Perhaps it is just my closed mind not understanding prophecy correctly.. But even the prophecy stating “He will ride into the city lowly, on a donkey,” also states that he will do it as the king of a kingdom that stretches from sea-to-sea. At the time of Jesus riding into the city, he was only known as an itinerant preacher. He sent his disciples on ahead of him to work up the crowds, and even then you would be hard pressed to stretch his reputation as far as to say “There is a king riding a donkey.” At best you’d have “Huh. It’s weird that a rabbi is riding a donkey, but everyone else seems excited, so I’m on board.”
In any case, and like I said, there are a few things that make these prophecies falter. First, pretty much everything quoted from Zechariah is out of context. The prophecy in Psalms is misrepresented. Malachi’s prophecy didn’t even come true (or, if it did, no history ever recorded it). Even with all that in mind, to even start to do the acrobatics required to make all of these puzzle pieces fit together, you have to assume that the Gospels record a literal history. After assuming the Gospels are literal history, you then have to make further jumps to connect the out of context passages (they don’t even claim to be prophecies) to the life of Jesus.
It’s a lot of work. Maybe it’s not the chances that Jesus would fulfill the prophecies that is 1 in 10^17… Maybe it was the chances that someone would look at the Old Testament and shoe horn it all together, then have billions of people believe it despite a stunning lack of evidence.
That makes more sense, at least to me.
So this video is 12 minutes and 15 seconds long, and shows a pregnancy from the moment of male ejaculation (don’t worry, you don’t see any grown up genitalia) until the moment of delivery. Creation Today says that this is an anti-evolution video, but I don’t see it. I am pretty sure science is perfectly willing to say “A baby is formed when a sperm meets an ovum, and 9 months later the woman will pass a watermelon through a golfball sized hole.”
So maybe I missed something. Maybe there is some subliminal message in the video?
If anyone understands why this video is “Anti-Evolution” please let me know?
In 5.4 billion years, the sun will exit its main sequence and expand rapidly into a red giant. This will (provided Earth is still intact and inhabited) sear the surface of the Earth killing any life remaining.
In roughly 4 billion years, the Andromeda Galaxy and the Milky Way Galaxy will pass through each other (often called a collision, but it is unlikely any actual matter will collide). This will cause the night sky to be incredibly dynamic and bright, dwarfing any celestial activity we currently observe.
At some point in the future, preceded by a period of peace, there will be some natural phenomenon, unrest, and the end of the world as we know it. It will be caused by a person who is a leader (or maybe not a leader) that everyone likes (at first) but then doesn’t like. This person might mark people.
***
Above, I have included three predictions about the future. Two of them have the year it will happen, the conditions of its happening, and the effects of its happening. The top two predictions were made by humans, using only information we are able to see with our eyes, today.
The third prediction is vague, the details unclear, the outcome foggy, and the cause relatively unknown. It was, if you are a believer, given to us by the inspiration of a Creator who can see the future as clearly as if it were a bright light in front of His eyes. The systems in effect obey his slightest whim, and everything is as He wants it.
So why are the predictions made by men, which are predicting events further in the future, more accurate and detailed than the predictions of an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent God?
How about something more specific? Predictions regarding global warming, and the causes of global warming, are incredibly detailed and well sourced. They have predicted changes from the 1950s to today, and are making increasingly accurate predictions for increasingly wide time scales. Currently, there are some very good predictions that are standing the test of time that project to 2100AD. It is worth noting that they are also region based, meaning that the delta temperature on Antarctica will be different than at the Equator (and located at several points in between).
“There are over 2400 prophecies in the Bible, of which 2000 have already come true.” You know, I have read this statement a ton of times recently, but I never really thought about what it means. Science has made thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of predictions, that have come true. Science is willing to admit mistakes, maybe that is why there are so many Christians who find it so easy to ignore the science they don’t like, agree with, or understand — never mind the fact that there are books and books dedicated to which prophecies in the Bible got major details wrong (or have never shown the slightest evidence of coming true)… There are also many books dedicated to the prophecies that the Bible got right, as well, so it’s tough to find the exact numbers (and certain factions saying “100% of all Bible prophecies are 100% true” really skews the numbers).
So my question is this… What’s the difference between what science says about the future, with clear details, clear outcomes, and clear causes, and what prophecy says about the future (often vague, no date given, and can be applied to many different situations)?
Why is science, which can show its work, considered by so many to be less reliable?
I don’t know, I was just thinking about it today.
How do you tell the difference between a Catholic and Protestant conspiracy theorist?
One thinks that the Pope is the antichrist, and one also thinks that but isn’t allowed to say it, so will tell you that the Pope is letting the antichrist into the Holy See.
I don’t know if you can see the difference at a glance, it is very subtle. Maybe an example will help. See if you can tell which type of conspiracy theorist this is:
PLOT TWIST! Pope Francis is the antichrist because he is such a nice guy! Who knew?!
I do not know why Islam is the religion of the Antichrist, and the article never seems to substantiate its claims (to this person, surely, the conclusion is too obvious to require evidence?). I know there is a lot of animosity towards Islam right now due to a small sect of its more militant supporters (as opposed to the guy who murdered an abortion doctor? He wasn’t militant, obviously!), but they do worship the same God you do, and they believe in the Prophet of God, Jesus Christ.
The only real difference is their picture of God is more in line with the book of Judges rather than the Gospel of Jesus Christ. That being said, that doesn’t make them Antichrists.
Let’s try another one, again see if you can spot which type of conspiracy theorist it is:
I like the approach of this one, probably better than any of the others. “Well, if Pope Francis isn’t the antichrist, HE SHOULD BE!” Like, if it turns out he is just a nice guy instead of the Antichrist (I am sure his imminent assassination will shorten the timeline a lot), he has actually DISAPPOINTED someone by not ending the world. How weird is that?
Now, this link also cites “Catholic Prophecy” which is weird to me. It’s actually a term I’ve heard before, but only in passing; it bore some looking into. It turns out this is all related to the Great Roman Monarch, the Last Emperor who will restore the Holy Roman Empire. It has no roots in the Bible, and it seems no one quite agrees on the details. It is related to the religion of Conclavism; it is a group of Christians who, whenever they disagree with a Pope, decide “That guy is an antipope. We will arbitrarily elect our own Pope, who the Catholics should worship.”
Clearly they are doing a good job, because I was raised by a staunchly Catholic household, and I’d never heard of them. Specifically, they stood against Benedict and Pope Francis in recent years, but I didn’t know that. They clearly need better PR. Now, like many Christians, they do point so some Biblical passages in the Gospel that indicate the end times are coming. Do you want to know what specific, minute details they cite that shows CLEARLY THE END IS HERE?! Wait for it, you will be stunned and shocked! You will be FORCED to believe in the end times, because the evidence is so clear!
Near the end times, there will be natural disasters, civil unrest, and cataclysm. THOSE THINGS HAVE NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE, SHEEPLE! Open your eyes and see the Antipope! (Oh yes, the antipope is a thing now.) Now, the practice of Islam did not begin until the 7th century, 300 years (give or take a dollar) after the first Catholic Pope. You can say that Peter was the Pope right in Jesus’ time, so I am talking out of my ass by saying there wasn’t a Pope until 313AD, but that is a very common imagination… Especially considering the Catholic Church wasn’t even a thing until the fourth century. Even if you consider the Christian Church prior to Catholicism to be valid as “Catholic History” you will find that there was basically no central leadership. There were as many versions of “Christianity” as there were “People who believe in Christ”. Who was the first leader of the Christian Church? Peter? No, he only became leader after the untimely execution of James who led the Church from Jerusalem. But that’s nether here nor there (aside from the fact that James very likely would have seen Peter as an antichrist, now that I think about it).
Be careful with this next link; reading it without eye protection may cause spontaneous bleeding from your eyes. Practice proper safety!
http://www.pacinst.com/antichri.htm
This one declares that the Pope is mentioned SPECIFICALLY in the Bible… Never mind that the Papal seat didn’t even exist when any of the records mentioned were written. Also, for some reason Hitler is involved with Pope Francis (an Argentinian Jesuit)? Maybe I am not crazy enough to see the lines that link the two. Oh well.
The point, more or less, is this. There are people, many people, possibly even the majority of people, who (on some level) want the end of days to be here. There are lots of reason that this would be; the rapture, where people are taken bodily to paradise, is a romantic notion. Even on Earth, after the Tribulation (seven years of hell on Earth) there will be 1000 years of peace and prosperity, wherein God rules all nations of Earth, and all accept Jesus as their Savior. Well, that sounds pretty nice, too.
The only problem is that whole tribulation thing. Most people will die, but that is OK. Killing people to make it through the haze into paradise is a totally Godly idea! It was there in the Old Testament, it is there in the New Testament, and it is there in the Qur’an and Hadith. People will die to make way for paradise, and the Godliest among us will be the ones tasked with casting the first stones. (I think it was Jesus who said stone thy neighbor who goes against God. That sounds about right, right?)
Long story short, this is another case of a theme that runs through human history; ours is a leader that loves ALL PEOPLE (but really mostly us. The rest of you can die, no biggie). This new Pope, being a harbinger of peace, tolerance, and love of your neighbor, who loves all people and wants to help all people, is secretly the Devil. GOD WOULD NOT TOLERATE POPE FRANCIS’ CRAZY IDEAS! Therefore, because I DON’T WANT TO HAVE TO LIKE MUSLIMS, he is the Antichrist. Q.E.D.
http://liveactionnews.org/mother-wins-case-to-kill-her-disabled-daughter/
http://www.itv.com/news/2014-10-26/mother-wins-right-to-end-disabled-daughters-life/
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/527851/Mother-heartbreak-allows-disabled-daughter-to-die
I was going to post about this as soon as I read it, but I felt like I needed alternate points of view. To me, it is almost open and shut; I do not like suffering. I’ve linked three different takes on the article. The first link is clearly designed to get you up in arms, because something something life is something something, you can’t kill someone. If you let the terminally ill just DIE when they want to, MURDER WILL SOON BE LEGAL IN THE UNITED STATES!
The right to end suffering should be enshrined in the law around the world. This little girl, depending on the article you read and the view of the author, spent much of her life in surgeries. Not too long prior to her death, a surgery went wrong and she was screaming in inconsolable pain. Not only that, but due to her condition, she would never have a pain free life. She would never be able to feed herself, or drink on her own. She would never be able to walk or care for herself. She would probably have regular surgeries for the rest of her life.
I don’t understand how people get so up in arms about this. The top article basically says (and I am exaggerating very little here) that allowing people to die is horribleness that borders on the Satanic. The case resonates with me because I am a strong, strong believer in the right to die. While Nancy, the young girl referenced in this landmark ruling, may not have been choosing her own death, it is hard to believe that (could she speak to us) she would have said “Yes, I love being in constant pain, needing constant surgeries, unable to communicate or understand anything around me, being unable to move, having to be moved just so I don’t die of bed sores. This life is amazing to me!”. The article, thankfully for my agenda (I’m not shy about it; why should I hide my intentions?), goes on to say that right to death organizations in the US are now rallying. There is a case of a terminal cancer patient referenced, who plans to kill herself on November 1st.
This is monstrous, according to the article. She should not be allowed to end her own suffering! Maybe there is someone out there who can enlighten me as to why your outrage trumps this woman’s suffering. Why does your idea that everyone *should* want to live completely overshadow the idea that this person *DOES NOT* want to live in constant pain, knowing death is coming slowly, but suffering the walk towards that sweet, sweet release?
“Her family will be sad!” That is something that actually drives me a little crazy.
“She should constantly suffer so that I can feel better that she is there!” If that is your idea of familial love, you and I have different ideas. Yes, they may feel bad, but if they love her they will understand that she is in constant pain right now, and will be until she dies.
So what is it? What is your excuse for wishing suffering on this person? This isn’t a suicide because “I feel bad.” Hers is not a pain that will just “Go away” with time. This is not a temporary sadness, and she will not be happier if she stays alive.
She is not disabled, she is not mentally incapacitated, her judgment is not affected… Unless you want to make the stale argument that the pain is blocking her ability to think clearly. If the pain is so strong that her brain isn’t working properly, and that her pain WILL ONLY CONTINUE TO GET WORSE, then your VACUOUS, TERRIBLE, OFFENSIVE argument is that “SHE SHOULD SUFFER UNIMAGINABLE PAIN FOR THE REST OF HER LIFE SO I FEEL BETTER.”
Sorry, I feel strongly about this. I won’t lie, if you wish this pain on this woman, I hate you. I’ll say it, I am comfortable using such a strong word. If you wish suffering on someone else so you can feel better, that makes you a bad person.
I know I’ve repeated the same idea over and over, but it is important to me. What about someone in pain ending their own suffering offends you? I can’t find any argument I find even remotely compelling.
If you are someone who thinks that right-to-die is morally wrong, please comment, I implore you. I will of course try to make you understand my side just as you make me try to understand yours. Please know I am not attacking you (you heartless jerk), but I do have a vested interest in making you understand my side.
So I was browsing the internet, as is my wont, when I came across an article of almost stunning disingenuity. Given the specificity of this written account, it almost certainly bears the markings of exaggeration. If it isn’t exaggerated, it certainly bears markings of someone who has an incredibly poor grasp of the Bible, rather than someone who (as the article seems to imply) is a well educated man of the LORD. I won’t link the article itself, it is very long, and the anecdote in question is very short. Please see the below excerpt for context, or scroll to the split for my analysis.
***
Dr. D. James Kennedy wrote of an encounter he had with a Jewish man who said he did not believe in Christ. Dr. Kennedy responded that he was sorry to hear that, and added “…Since He is the Messiah of the Jewish people who was promised in the Old Testament, you have rejected your own Messiah.” He then went on to share with the Jewish man a few verses of scripture:
“All who see me mock me; they hurl insults, shaking their heads: ‘He trusts in the LORD; let the LORD rescue him. Let him deliver him, since he delights in him (Ps 22:7-8)”
“But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed (Isa 53:5)”
“Even my close friend, whom I trusted, he who shared my bread, has lifted up his heel against me (Ps 41:9).”
“They have pierced my hands and my feet (Ps 22:16).”
“Therefore I will give him a portion among the great, and he will divide the spoils with the strong, because he poured out his life unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors. For he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors (Isa 53:12).”
“They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son (Zech 12:10).”
When Dr. Kennedy finished reading these scriptures to the Jewish man, he asked him to whom these verses were referring to. The man responded that “Obviously they are talking about Jesus… So what?”. Dr. Kennedy then pointed out that all the verses he had just read to him were from the Old Testament! The man was stunned and demanded to see the passages with his own eyes9.
***
The last paragraph is a lie; almost none of those passages refer to Jesus in context. Yes, if you take a single verse, and ignore that the author almost always specified a Non-Jesus person in the sentence directly previous, it is understandable that the Jewish man did not recognize the verses as referring to Jesus except when taken out of context.
The first reference, Psalm 22 is, like almost every Psalm, more… What is a good word? Masturbatory? Sorry, sorry… “Self pleasuring.”
Doesn’t sound like prophecy to me… But you know what? It could be. This one isn’t *obviously* false, even though it would have to be taken out of the context of the entire book of Psalms to be true. I’ll give them a half point. I mean, the whole thing is written in past tense, and to say “They pierced my hands and feet” is “Crucifixion in minute detail” is stretching my credulity quite thin.
Isaiah chapter 53 is legendary, both among the believers and among the unbelievers. I have read it more times than I can count. Hell, Wikipedia has an entry for Isaiah Chapter 53 specifically, and it isn’t a short entry.
Have you noticed how the quotes from the Bible are presented, by the way? I noticed a problem right away.
The writer WANTED to take context away, and he left obvious signs. He referenced Psalm 22 twice, and Isaiah 53 twice, but instead of putting the references sequentially, he split them apart. Psalm 22, Isaiah 53, Psalm 22, Isaiah 53. If that isn’t suspicious, I am a duck.
Right, so he quotes verse 5 and verse 12 specifically, but when you take context, things change a bit. The chapter, and the chapter preceding (Isaiah 52) refer to the suffering servant of God as the nation of Israel, rather than as a person. I mean, again, maybe God was speaking metaphorically, but I have often been told “God is not a God of confusion. He is clear in his meanings.”
So maybe he means something else when he says “My nation Israel”? Maybe he isn’t being clear? Iunno. And I hear Prophecy is often spoken in the past tense, as predicting the past is also difficult. Right.
The chapter referenced, Zechariah 10, speaks explicitly about “My people of Judah”, frequently and clearly. If it was meant to be a prophecy about Jesus, it seems Zechariah missed the point.
The point is this; if you are going to cherry pick verses, please don’t be an asshole about it. Don’t go up to a Jewish man and start telling him he doesn’t know his Tanakh; that is rude at the best of times, and cruel at any other time. It is disingenuous, especially when the verses in question don’t back you up.
Also, there are 39 BOOKS in the Old Testament. You just quoted 7 verses out of context and claimed the issue was closed.
No, sir. If you are going to say everything you just mentioned was explicit prophecy, you need to make a deep, detailed case, and you need to pick your verses more carefully.
There are many places in the Old Testament that said “And he will suffer.” JESUS SUFFERED, TOO! PROPHECY FULFILLED!
No. Here is my counter-prophecy, with equal specificity and minute detail. “It will rain in the near future.”
If you read this 2000 years from now, chances are that it rained shortly after I said it, even if it was 4 months away (DAMN YOU, WINTER!).
http://jonathanmerritt.religionnews.com/2014/10/24/david-gushee-lgbt-homosexuality-matters/
My focus has been largely negative, but I have to say, this article (published on Friday, and which slid across my desk this afternoon) really made me optimistic for the future.
The job title “Christian Ethicist” has in my mind many (sadly) negative connotations. The amount of suffering the LGBT community has suffered in the name of traditional ethics and morality cannot possibly be overstated, and those that grew up in the American Bible Belt have it bad in a way that I cannot even describe. The ostracism they face, from friends and family, if they come out of the closet to those closest to them has prompted many harrowing stories, documentaries, and nightmares.
The article speaks about David Gushee, a Christian Ethicist who has taught at many prestigious Bible Universities and Colleges (but he has not, ironically enough, been a Liberty University Professor at Liberty University. Liberty University.). While an interview with some of his former colleagues led to the rather discouraging comments such as “He’s now placed himself outside of employability at the previous institutions where he taught,” I still leave with hope. A man who grew up and was trained in Southern Traditional Christianity managed, through soul (and Bible) searching to come to the conclusion that LGBT people are not, in fact, the embodiment of Satan. Not a young one, either (the next generation of Southern Christians is proving far more liberal than their forebears), but Mr Gushee is 52 years old.
His coming out as being pro-LGBT (the word choice must be intentional) seems to have been prompted not by spontaneous soul-searching, mind you–his younger sister came out as lesbian. She is a single mother, a story that is too sad to possibly capture; she may have never wanted the sex that led to her pregnancy, and yet massive pressure from those closest to her (having an older brother who was a staunch traditional Christian Ethicist and all…) likely pushed her into it. I acknowledge that the previous statement is pure conjecture, but it is a story that has been told before, and will be told again.
Further, the same person who said he’d ruined his employability showed an almost stunning lack of empathy with the further statement that “David is not saying anything new. When you look at the figures who are making arguments for same-sex marriage and relationships, there is an expanding literature that is as much as 20 years old.”
You are right, he is practically rehashing old ideas. I mean, 20 is practically ANCIENT when you look at the tradition that dates back to the earliest pieces of human legend of hating the LGBT community! Why, compared to Sodom (after which the act of primary male homosexual intercourse was NAMED), 20 years is practically pre-history!
In any case, flippant marks aside, science and progressive thinking are coming to the fore in this debate, and it is getting harder and harder to ignore the consensus; being gay is not always a choice; it is often something you are born with (I won’t argue that every person who has ever shown homosexual tendency was born that way, but science is starting to see a picture that is difficult to ignore).
Thank you, David Gushee. While I won’t belittle the struggle of the LGBT community by comparing your upcoming trials with their ongoing history, I will say that standing up and speaking out in their favor, knowing that almost all of your prior colleagues will disown you… Well, that almost sounds like something Jesus said in the Bible.
“They will make you outcasts from the synagogue, but an hour is coming for everyone who kills you to think that he is offering service to God.” John 16:2
Alternate title: A word of caution.
I am a huge fan of Harry Potter, but not one of the crazy ones any more.
That is the important part, mind you; the part that says “Any More.” Imagine back to a time when there were still only six books in the series. We, that is to say, the fans, were waiting with an almost rabid curiosity (seriously, I would have bitten someone for more information) for the seventh book. We would go to any lengths for information, the speculation was rampant, and fan fiction writers were in their Pre-Twilight Golden Age. (Their next Golden Age would come plenty soon enough, though.)
As the release came closer, things started to get a little funny. People were trying to convince other people that their fanfiction was actually the legendary leak from the initial printing run. Some were obvious forgeries, with poor spelling, grammar, or formatting (the first page in a chapter might look off, or the margins would be wrong for a standard book from the English publisher).
Then one came out that had all the hallmarks of being the True Heir. The spelling and grammar were solid, it was written in the same tone of prose as Rowling would use, the jacket was leaked and had everything down to the legal disclaimers and fine print intact as you would expect it; the copyright information was valid…
Like thousands of other Potter fans, I flocked to this release; I thought I could reach out and touch the FUTURE (the leak released about six weeks prior to the scheduled release). I devoured it, starting with all the excitement of a child presented with their favorite food. As I got deeper in, though, a look of sourness spread over my face… Like the child who has finished their favorite part of the meal only to come face-to-face with the ugly reality that they still had broccoli to read.
There are those who knew me around this time, who will recall.
“The leak is a forgery,” I would tell them after I had read it but before the book released. “The relationships are done really poorly, I’ve read fanfics that did them better. And the story goes off on a tangent, and a third of the book is nothing but camping.
Don’t bother downloading it. It is a well done forgery, but a waste of your time nonetheless. JK Rowling would never do that to us, the fans. Never.”
Some weeks later, the book released. I was there at midnight, breathing heavily, sizing everyone up to see who I thought I could beat in a fight if there wasn’t enough stock of the book. I was also wearing a heavy jacket. Thinking back, I can see why people were wary of me… AS THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN.
Luckily (for them) there was enough stock to last until the third in line (I showed up at 7pm for the midnight release. Apparently normal people don’t camp out for Harry Potter. First, normal people suck. Second, I was glad to be so far forward in the line.). I exercised my weak willpower to its very limits to walk to the car and get it moving. I did not read on the drive home. I did not open the book. I did not even read the jacket. This was a hallowed moment, to be enjoyed in the fullness of time at home, with a lamp over my head, a drink by my side.
And so it was that I made it home without incident, and grabbed my drink, and turned on my reading lamp, and set the book gently down on my lap, admiring it. I then opened the cover, and read the jacket. It matched the jacket from the leak, but still I was not worried. You can leak a jacket with a cell phone camera; that will hardly allow you to leak a 600 page hardcover book. I flipped pages of legal information and dedications, until I arrived at chapter one. My eyes opened a little wider as I saw that the first page was written exactly as the leak had said. I was breathing a little shallower by now, nervousness creeping into my mind for the first time. “Maybe,” I thought with renewed optimism, “The author of that leak had actually seen the book at the publisher and was able to copy a page, or a few pages. Everything will be all right.”
And so I turned the page again, and again, and again, each time finding words, spacing, and events exactly as they had appeared in the leak. With the feeling of horror one can only experience once per life, I realized that the world truly is a cursed place, and that betrayal can come in the most surprising and profound ways.
The leak I had read was legitimate, and I had negatively criticized it to my friends.
I had said “JK Rowling would never do this to us!”
I now had to walk towards my own reckoning. I had to admit to those who I had spoken to with an almost religious fervor that I was mistaken. That JK Rowling WOULD do this to us. There are those who stood by her, and I stand by her still, but I have to admit that Harry Potter has six amazing books and one good book. I had to admit that I–was–wrong.
What is the point of this story, then? The point is that you should never make absolute statements about your idols. You must eat your own shame when you say “That could NEVER happen,” when that thing happens.
I wrote this specifically in response to a statement made by someone with whom I had a disagreement.
“God said His Creation was Good! That means there was no death, because if there was death and God said it was Good, that means He thinks death is Good! And God would NEVER say that!”
Be careful, friend. Believing as you believe with the faith that you have could leave you in a very awkward position if you claim to know the mind of God, and are incorrect. If you stand at Armageddon, and see the fullness of the book of Revelations, and there is still death… What will you say to those to whom you professed such strong beliefs?
Blog42: My Stream of (semi)Consciousness 