Cybermen, Christian Purity Culture, Suburbia, and Newt

May 13, 2013 by 2 Comments

Here are some of the more interesting readings from last week.

The Triumph of Suburbia Suburbia gets a bum rap, but ultimately people choose to live there more often than not. This article looks at the naysayers and the data.

Elizabeth Smart and the Psychology of the Christian Purity Culture Turns out (as nearly anyone who has grown up in it can tell you) Christian Purity Culture is actually pretty damaging and degrading to women (and to men). This article explores the ins and outs of it. If you want more on this topic, check out Elizabeth Esther’s discussions on the topic of Christian Purity Culture.

Neil Gaiman gives Doctor Who’s Cybermen what they need: a new legend The Cybermen haven’t been all that terrifying lately (esp. vs how terrifying they were in the 60′s version of the show). Gaiman fixes all of that in Nightmare in Silver while doing great work with the other characters.

We’re Really Puzzled Newt Gingrich honestly does not know what to call a smartphone, asks the internet for suggestions. Youtube commenters troll hard for great justice while purveyors of Gingrich Productions honestly and earnestly try really hard to figure out a new name.

Iron Man 3 or: Tony Stark Grows Up My man JR Forasteros gives a great analysis of Tony Stark’s hero’s journey and looks at how he’s now gone through an ever-widening hero’s journey that concludes with Iron Man 3.

  1. Iron Man how to be a individual hero in his personal sphere of influence
  2. Avengers how to be a hero among heroes [that introduces a wider, wilder sphere]
  3. Iron Man 3 how to be a limited but healthy hero who in a “world with aliens and gods”

JR shows how Iron Man’s Phase 1 and first movie of Phase 2 have been one long origin story for Tony Stark (not Iron Man). Check it out.

Filed Under: Entertainment, Ethics, Gender, News, Religious Studies, Science, Theology

An Evil, Bi-Polar God

May 11, 2013 by 6 Comments

I’m reposting this because we’ve had several discussions about this topic IRL in our small group. I brought this up orally off the top of my head and a couple of people wanted more explanation, so I’m dusting it off. Please add other options below.

Keith Ward, in chapter 6 of Is Religion Dangerous?, deals with the issue of morality and the Bible.  He addresses the charge that religious morality is based on an unthinking acceptance of old religious laws.  As his example, he brings up one of the most notorious of religious injunctions – Deuteronomy 20:15-18.

“But these instructions apply only to distant towns, not to the towns of the nations in the land you will enter. 16 In those towns that the Lord your God is giving you as a special possession, destroy every living thing. You must completely destroy the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, just as the Lord your God has commanded you.  This will prevent the people of the land from teaching you to imitate their detestable customs in the worship of their gods, which would cause you to sin deeply against the Lord your God.

Geno-what did you say?  Isn’t that the very piece of evidence that we use to indict the Nazi’s, their attempted genocide of the Jews?  If we are to be morally consistent, shouldn’t we reject this piece of the Old Testament and anything/anyone that relies on this passage/the book/the collection of books that uses it.  Any religion that accepts this as part of their canon (read: Jews and Christians) are guilty of blindly basing their morality on old and outdated religious laws. 

Concerning this, Greg Boyd says that

What intensifies this problem even more is that it’s not like Psalms 137 is an isolated case of celebrated violence in the Old Testament.

It’s found all over the place!

The worst episodes happened when the Israelites enter the promised land. As they approached certain cities, the Israelites were commanded — by God — to slaughter men, women, children and even the animals! Yahweh is aiming at complete genocide of the Canaanite people. Could anything be more antithetical to what we learn about God in Jesus Christ?

Honestly (we’ve got to be honest here, even if it hurts) doesn’t this depiction of God look more like the God of Osama Bin Laden than the Father of Jesus Christ?

In my opinion, this is the most challenging objection to the Christian faith and most difficult theological question of the Christian faith.

There are three ways that Ward says Christian and Jewish adherents have approached this problem. I’ll add another that I’ve heard. Please add your own in the comments or talk about which of the ways you favor (and why).

[Read more...]

Filed Under: Biblical Studies, Ethics, Philosophy, Religious Studies, Theology

Looking Back at our Empire

May 8, 2013 by Leave a Comment

This is one of my favorite post-colonial songs.

Filed Under: Ethics

Remixing Jesus

May 6, 2013 by Leave a Comment

I am fascinated by the remix. I love the creation of new modes of thought and ways of viewing the world that can be build upon remixing old modes and old views. In this post, I want to look briefly at remixing and then highlight an example of a religious remix.

What’s in a Remix?

One of the lost arts in the West is the remix. To explain the cultural significance of the remix, listen to Once Upon a Past by Wax Tailor:

Note, the important discussion about "remix" are at the start and end of the song.

Taking the idea that the remix is a localization of cultural creation and negotiation, we turn to the competing Muslim and Christian ideas of Jesus.

Isa and Yeshua

Christianity sees Jesus of Nazareth as God in human flesh, one of the members of the Trinity1 He is the savior of humanity and the Cosmos itself and the Bible says that all things are being reconciled to him.

Islam, on the other hand, sees the Christian scriptures as things corrupted by the meddling of humans. From the Muslim point of view, Christians have taken an authentic prophet of God, Jesus, and made him into something he was not and corrupted his teachings.

Islam sees Jesus as a mere man, a forerunner of Muḥammad, prophet of God. It is blasphemy to say that Jesus was somehow God as Islam holds a strict monotheism (instead of the “soft” monotheism of Christianity).

Kanye West – Jesus Walks

And back to Kanye West. While not a poster boy for Orthodox Christianity by any stretch of the imagination, in 2004 released Jesus Walks. The song itself is a remix and sampling of several other overtly Christian songs.

This is the radio edit – you can search around if you want the album version.

The song’s been used in a myriad of ways by nonChristian and Christian alike and according to internet lore it is the most requested song’s of Kanye’s at his concerts. One of the more interesting takes on the song is by the young Muslim rapper Lupe Fiasco.

Lupe Fiasco – Jesus Walks

Lupe Fiasco (wiki bio) is a sometimes controversial Muslim rapper who often raps on themes of peace and social justice. In 2006 Lupe Fiasco released Fahrenheit 1/15 which contained an earlier mix-tape remix of Kanye West’s Jesus Walks.

Lupe’s “Jesus Walks” is a powerful way of positioning himself as a young, Muslim rapper in the middle of “worldly” rap scene in the middle of an unofficial Christian nation. He is able to build upon and modify the work of others in such a way to negotiate his particular cultural space.

In what ways do you create or participate in remixes?

What examples of remixing have you found particularly powerful or interesting?

  1. Father, Logos, and Paraclete [↩]
Filed Under: Entertainment, Religious Studies

Out there – truth and the world

May 6, 2013 by Leave a Comment

We need to make a distinction between the claim that the world is out there and the claim that truth is out there.

To say that the world is out there, that it is not our creation, is to say, with common sense, that most things in space and time are the effects of causes which do not include human mental states.

To say that truth is not out there is simply to say that where there are no sentences there is no truth, that sentences are elements of human languages, and that human languages are human creations.

Truth cannot be out there – cannot exist independently of the human mind – because sentences cannot so exist, or be out there.

The world is out there, but descriptions of the world are not. Only descriptions of the world can be true or false. The world on its own – unaided by the describing activities of human beings –cannot.

- Richard Rorty. Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity (Kindle Locations 131-136). Kindle Edition.

Is Rorty right here?

What might be the consequences of such a view?

Filed Under: Philosophy
«Older Posts