Quote Mined Theology

**This is an organized collection of inspirational quotes I've shared via Facebook over the past year. These are some of the people that have influenced my thinking as of late.**

Come up with a very wise quote and you will be remembered forever.
~ Anonymous

Chaos is found in greatest abundance wherever order is being sought. It always defeats order, because it is better organized.
~ Ly Tin Wheedle

You must translate every bit of your Theology into the vernacular...if you cannot...then your thoughts were confused.
~ C. S. Lewis

Don't be in such a hurry to condemn a person because he doesn't do what you do, or think as you think. There was a time when you didn't know what you know today.
~ Malcom X

It is better not to judge. To live in the fear of God means to be afraid to judge someone else in a sinful way, and not as God would judge them.
~ Elder Sophrony

I really only love God as much as I love the person I love the least.
~ Dorothy Day

Knowing your own darkness is the best method for dealing with the darknesses of other people.
~ Carl Jung

I dare you to trust that I love you just as you are, and not as you should be.
~ Jesus, in the words of Brennan Manning

When a difficult past is your only framework for the future, it might be time to re-imagine your present.
~ Kurt Willems

May all your expectations be frustrated. May all your plans be thwarted. May all of your desires be withered into nothingness. That you may experience the powerlessness and poverty of a child and sing and dance in the love of God the Father, the Son, and the Spirit.
~ Jean Vanier

Perhaps the most dangerous temptation to Christianity is to get itself officialized in some version by a government, following pretty exactly the pattern the chief priest and his crowd at the trial of Jesus. For want of a Pilate of their own, some Christians would accept a Constantine or whomever might be the current incarnation of Caesar.
~ Wendell Berry

Confound authority with creativity. You'll get away with it. Over and over again.
~ Aivan Levy

Every presenter has the potential to be great; every presentation is high stakes; and every audience deserves the absolute best.
~ Nancy Duarte

People who are not creative may not value creativity, even if they can identify it.
~ John Cleese

The fact is that politicians do make decisions based on the information they have at hand and these can result in unintended consequences. Politicians remember stories because they are visual and if the story is centered on an issue in their riding, they are even more likely to be sensitive to the issue.
~ Murray Porteous

The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common, they don’t alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views.
~ Dr. Who

Enforced uniformity confounds civil and religious liberty and denies the principles of Christianity and civility.
~ Roger Williams

The best teachers are those who show you where to look, but don't tell you what to see.
~ Alexandra K. Trenfor

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
~ Aristotle

At times the Bible endorses values we should reject, praises acts we must condemn, and portrays God in ways we cannot accept. Rather than seeing this as a sign of disrespect, we should regard engaging in an ethical and theological critique of what we read in the Bible as an act of profound faithfulness.
~ Peter Enns

There are biblical justifications for violence that claim God desires violence. And yet, the Bible also critiques those justifications.
~ Bruxy Cavey

No one is to be called an enemy, all are your benefactors, and no one does you harm. You have no enemy except yourselves.
~ Francis of Assisi

Some believe it is only great power that can hold evil in check. But that is not what I have found. I have found that it is the small everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keep the darkness at bay. Small acts of kindness and love.
~ Gandalf

From afar I thought it was a monster, closer I realized he was human, face to face I realized he was my brother.
~ African Proverb

Most of us undergo evolving into a human being at such an early age that we feel this transformation is innate. But North Korea reminds us that it's not.
~ John Green

Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves.
~ Apostle Paul

It is not the strongest nor most intelligent species that survives, but the one most adaptable to change.
~ Charles Darwin

If all insects on Earth disappeared, within 50 years all life on Earth would end. If all human beings disappeared from the Earth, within 50 years all forms of life would flourish.
~ Jonas Salk

We're in a time when human beings have become so powerful—we are such an abundant animal now. We've got technology that amplifies our impact on the planet at consumptive demand, a global economy that has made us so powerful that we're altering the physical, chemical, and biological properties of the planet on a geological scale. That's why scientists call this the 'Anthropocene Epoch'.
~ David Suzuki

There can never be any real opposition between religion and science; for one is the complement of the other.  Every serious and reflective person realizes, I think, that the religious element in his nature must be recognized and cultivated if all the powers of the human soul are to act together in perfect balance and harmony.  And indeed it was not by accident that the greatest thinkers of all ages were deeply religious souls.
~ Max Planck

Under the present brutal and primitive conditions on this planet, every person you meet should be regarded as one of the walking wounded. we have never seen a man or woman not slightly deranged by either anxiety or grief. we have never seen a totally sane human being.

~ Robert Anton Wilson

There is a long tradition of Christian thinkers who assume that salvation is the goal of all religions and then argue that only Christians can achieve this goal.
~ Stephen Prothero

The real question is not whether life exists after death. The real question is whether you are alive before death.
~ Osho

A carefully cultivated heart will, assisted by the grace of God, foresee, forestall, or transform most of the painful situations before which others stand like helpless children saying “Why?”
~ Dallas Willard

Moral relativism is the sort of thing one talks about once the room has cleared of anyone whose morals are not ready to be embraced.
~ Anonymous

Why do you call me good? Only God is truly good.
~ Jesus

Hegel was right when he said that we learn from history that men never learn anything from history.
~ George Bernard Shaw

Planetary Self-Defence

When I was in high school, I got addicted to an Internet tick-based game called Planetarion. For me, this was the beginning of Online Gaming. In the wake of the Year 2000 Problem, Elite Commander Zirconus was spending all day and night combing the galaxy, forming alliances with neighbouring planets to defend Arsentium against militant aliens looking to deplete my,  ahem, *his resources and steal his orbiting asteroid mines.

To a human, this probably looked more like staring blankly at a chart on a 12" monitor waiting for the next hourly tick to go by so I could buy another eon gun...

Twelve years later, there is now talk of low earth-orbit transit systems attainable by using existing magnetic-levitation technology.

Maglev passenger trains have carried passengers at nearly 600 kilometers per hour (373 mph) - spacecraft have to be some 50 times faster, but the physics and much of the engineering is the same.
-Brian Dodson

With our eyes fixed on the stars, we start to imagine even greater possibilities. Interplanetary travel? Alien life? Earth 2.0? Jedi Academy? Ok, now I'm getting carried away...

Trains would shoot to orbit in seconds in an 80-mile sealed tube – and the scientists behind the $60 billion proposal claim it could revolutionize industry, allowing for cheap space-based solar power and generating unimaginable wealth from mines on asteroids.
-James J. Williams

I don't know about you, but I find this exciting. Slowly but surely, my high school alter-ego, Zirconus of Arsentium, is shaping up to become a reality...


But with technology pushing us beyond the limits of our humanity, so the anticipated challenges come.
End Times prophecies are even more popular than ever among date-setters, and Hollywood has even capitalized on the paranoia. With so many people fixated on the annihilation of our world, it's questionable whether channeling the energy required to save it is worth our time.

And time, apparently, is of the essence.

A rock, which is quarter of a mile across, will pass between our planet and the moon in November 2012 and will be visible with small telescopes. Passing by at a distance of just 201,000 miles, the asteroid will be the largest object ever to approach the earth so close.
-Martin Evans

Discover Magazine predicted the 10 most probable ways the world will end. Rather grim study, I must say. Odds being 1 in 700,000, asteroid impact is the only one nearly 100% preventable (as opposed to unpreventable for the rest).

What could be seen as a demonstration of God's glorious power, instead instills fear to most who describe it as nothing less than a swing and a miss.

The universe is trying to kill us.
-Phil Plait

Perversely, some Christians cry for the riddance of our home in pursuit of something greater in an after life. Was this what God intended?

The LORD smelled the pleasing scent, and the LORD thought to himself, I will not curse the fertile land anymore because of human beings since the ideas of the human mind are evil from their youth. I will never again destroy every living thing as I have done.
As long as the earth exists,
seedtime and harvest,
cold and hot,
summer and autumn,
day and night
will not cease.
-Genesis 8:21-22

Some Christians finish that sentence differently. To them, God's promise is about a flood, and therefore, we should not rule out fire and brimstone. We needn't really take Him seriously. But the way I read it, the earth is meant to continue to exist unharmed. God promises that it will not end in destruction. It will not cease.

Side Note:
The confusion comes from this passage:

By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.
-2 Peter 3:6-7

Which is in reference to refinement, as opposed to annihilation.

My question is, if our world is in danger, should we be prepared to defend it?

In 1995, a politically unstable South Africa came together to celebrate the victory of a rugby World Cup championship. If a common adversary in sport is enough to unite a country facing civil war, even for a moment, what would be required to unite our planet?

If you want to make peace with your enemy, you have to work with your enemy. Then he becomes your partner.
-Nelson Mandela

It seems ironic to me that, for many Christians, world peace is not a goal but rather something to be feared. In light of end times prophecies, they seek war with each other as a means to an end. But what kind of God desires that?

Could it be that our God is feverishly trying to unite us?

Supposing our solar system lasts as long, scientists say that within the next 5 to 7 billion years, gravity will force the sun to collapse into its core which will ratchet up the heat on the remaining hydrogen and cause the sun to expand into a red giant. Currently, Plait labels this catastrophe "unpreventable".

So, we've got about 5 billion years, give or take, to figure out where science could lead us, before the sun implodes (*insert tongue in cheek). Is pursuing peace in our world a fruitless task? I believe one day, Jesus will return. And when he does, we will welcome him to reign in his kingdom here.

God sent his Son into the world not to judge the world, but to save the world through him.
-John 3:17

Could the Saviour of our world be the Saviour of our universe?

Due Diligence

This blog post is my response to a series of questions my friend raised regarding my criticism of Creationism. I felt this would be a better fit for my answers than the platform of our original conversation. 

1. Why do you think the debate regarding creationism (and its offshoots and various understandings - which according to your earlier blog about offshoots being at a point closest to true revelation, there seem to be more offshoots from creationist thought than evolutionist thought (perhaps unity of a theory/belief represents truth more?) - and evolution, continues today?

Firstly, I think Christian creationism is better contrasted to Non-Christian creationism (to explain how variance equates closer truth in this case), rather than evolution. Eg., Who is the creator god, Yahweh or Brahma, and how did creation come about?

I found a great summary of the varied offshoots of Creationism, which does an excellent job of explaining this further. Understanding this, we can see that Christianity has been more reluctant to drop biblical allegories in favor of evolution, and has in effect, retrofitted evolutionary explanations into biblical fundamentals to create the various offshoots we see present.

I think the debate continues to happen when we eisegete scripture, taking liberties based on its presupposed inerrancy. The debate is unfruitful, not because discussion about our origins shouldn't happen, but because we enter the discussion from an unfounded reverence for the prooftexts. I believe the Bible is a collection of books, supernaturally infallible for the purpose of pointing us to Jesus. If someone wants to make it a textbook of science, which it was never intended to be, we have warnings against such practice and should not be so ignorant.


2. Does which side one person falls on matter?

Yes, but I think this is better understood in a different way.

• Creation and evolution are not a dichotomy, but ends of a continuum (see figure above), and most creationist and evolutionist positions may be fit along this continuum. The successive steps labelled in the figure are described below.
• 
  
• CREATION
  • Flat Earthers
  • Geocentrists
  • Young Earth Creationists
    • (Omphalos)
  • Old Earth Creationists
    • (Gap Creationism)
    • (Day-Age Creationism)
    • (Progressive Creationism)
    • (Intelligent Design Creationism)
  • Evolutionary Creationists
  • Theistic Evolutionists
  • Methodological Materialistic Evolutionists
  • Philosophical Materialistic Evolutionists
• EVOLUTION

3. If yes, why?

Watch out for false prophets! They dress up like sheep, but inside they are wolves who have come to attack you.
- Matthew 7:15

Looking at the continuum, I think it is evident where Young Earth Creationists fail to contribute to any discussion on the matter of Origin. Eg.,You will never get a Philosophical Materialistic Evolutionist to consider the earth as flat, or the centre of our galaxy, so why would they consider it to be 6,000 years old? Besides the recession of logic, this does not expound any scientific mystery.

The following are held by members of the Board of Answers in Genesis to be either consistent with Scripture or implied by Scripture:

• Scripture teaches a recent origin for man and the whole creation, spanning approximately 4,000 years from creation to Christ.
• The days in Genesis do not correspond to geologic ages, but are six [6] consecutive twenty-four [24] hour days of creation.
• The Noachian Flood was a significant geological event and much (but not all) fossiliferous sediment originated at that time.
• The gap theory has no basis in Scripture.
• The view, commonly used to evade the implications or the authority of biblical teaching, that knowledge and/or truth may be divided into secular and religious, is rejected.
• By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record. Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information.

Young Earth Creation apologists believe the Origin of Life is narrated in Genesis, and any evidence must fit into the narrative to be considered valid. This is a classic example of a doctrine as the central ideal fallacy, and is also the reason why discerning bad theology matters. Christianity has to reflect reality—not the other way around.

4. Why do you think non-christians bring this matter up? Do they really care or is it just to justify not believing?

Invoking the supernatural is the dead-end to further inquiry.
- Anonymous

I think non-christians do care for the most part, otherwise they wouldn't ask. Creationism is not an easy (or necessary) hurdle, and there are more important things at stake if Jesus is who he says he is. But to the seeker who asks for evidence of 6 day creation, I would rather answer "No, I don't believe the Bible was written to be a book of science." If they have any more questions, they'll ask.

5. How do you think a creationist world view versus an evolutionist world view (or Big Bang theorist's view) affects [a Christian's] own narrrative framework for interpretting life? (more sucinctly: What does a belief in creationism or evolution look like through the eyes of [a Christian] interpreting life...do they really differ in perspective enough for this view to matter?)

I think Theistic Evolutionists have a better worldview than Young Earth Creationists for two reasons:

1. Their faith is informed by the reality around them, which permeates everything from the way they read scripture to how they respond to scepticism, ultimately leading to a fuller appreciation for God's creation.
2. They do not get overwhelmed by defending Old Testament paradoxes; they generally get asked better questions by non-christians.

St. Anselm described theology as "Faith seeking understanding" and theistic evolutionists believe that this search for understanding extends to scientific understanding. 'Young Earthers' also make this claim, but they are either lying (to themselves), or they don't understand the process.

I am sending you like lambs into a pack of wolves. So be as wise as snakes and as innocent as doves.
- Matthew 10:16

6. If the debate was to be settled, what do you hope it looks like? Where do you think this should lead? What are you hoping changes/stays the same in Christianity with respect to the interpretation and application of Genesis? (What does your vision of the future of Christianity look like?)

I think the only way to settle the debate is to concede that if you look around, creation itself tells us the universe is more than 6,000 years old.

It should lead to repentance, thus producing a change in the handling of scripture. Presupposition is not welcome, and is never helpful for theology or apologetics.

In short, I think the future of Christianity needs to drop the presupposition of Biblical inerrancy.

7. We can point out flaws better than most I think, but can we imagine something better? 

When I came to you, brothers and sisters, I didn’t come preaching God’s secrets to you like I was an expert in speech or wisdom.  I had made up my mind not to think about anything while I was with you except Jesus Christ, and to preach him as crucified.
- 1 Corinthians 2:1-2

Ultimately, we should not claim anything at all. Science and scripture inform our worldview, but Jesus is the essence of our worldview. However, claiming nothing cannot be our true contrition if we maintain a Young Earth perspective, if you concede that the stars are visible, for example.

That said, I imagine a kind of Christianity where Jesus is the only controversy worth talking about, debating over, or dying for. I want nothing less to be a hinderance for a questioning mind.

8. This is the heart of my questions...what can/should the church of tomorrow look like? 

I think my purpose (and the purpose of this blog) is to inspire the church to keep asking that very question.

Some of the questions I have for the "church of tomorrow" are:

• Can we find God in a Methodological or Philosophical Materialistic worldview?
• Should we study and explain the natural world, without assuming the existence or nonexistence of the supernatural?
• Could science lead us to a greater understanding and appreciation for our creator?
• When does God interact with creation, and can we define these interactions as supernatural?
• What are the problems for anti-theists?
• What can we learn from Progressive-Christianity (questioning traditions) and Christian Existentialism (choice constitutes your existence)?
• Are we using proof-texts to support any other theology? Are there other ways we misuse scripture?
• How is social media best used as a platform for discussion?
• What are the fruits (good or bad) of memes, rage comics, or trolling?
• Do we need to keep repeating the mistakes of our past in order to engage culture appropriately?

9. What is the potential good that can occur/be achieved (in church and in the world)?

I found that Young Earth Creationism (even when I never talked about it publicly) limited my ability to test scripture against the reality it claimed to have relevance for. Giving up this presupposition allowed me to ask myself the questions that really troubled me, and allowed me to discover the answers that exist in reality, and not just believe them because the Bible told me so. It helped my faith.

10. I ask these because I'm curious. There is a lot of pointing of fingers, labeling, disagreements, etc. but repeatedly I find myself frustrated because while we point, we do little to imagine (or if we do, to explain) a different way / a better way... The Bible says that without vision the people perish... Where is the vision?.... What's your vision?

No-one is asking which god created the universe anymore, and the world has bigger questions than how God did it. So turning a stumbling block into a stepping stone is, in my opinion, the best use of our time.

What did Paul learn from the pagans in Mars Hill? The pagans worshipped an unknown god, by making sacrifices to idols of gold and silver. Paul taught them that God made us in His image, so these things have no resemblance. Today, our challenge is humanism (go figure). Science worships the unknown, but they have dropped the god.

My vision is to see Christianity cater to this mystery.

I think the Gospel needs to be presented the way Jesus presented it, as a hidden pearl: easily trampled, often overlooked—but, once found, worth selling everything you own.
- Matthew 7:6, 13:45-46

The Existential Compass

In the world of science, a paradigm is used to understand concepts. Paradigms are found anywhere a concept is unclear or requires greater understanding. Democracy, for example, is a paradigm that allows us to best understand governance, but there are many ways to govern. Perfection of government has long been an interest for humanity. How do we measure potential perfection? One tool in use today is the "political compass".

The political compass is a multi-axis model, used to label or organize political thought on two dimensions. This helps us grasp the "centrist's" idealistic goal as we navigate the extremes, and see what is needed to bring correction.

Economic and Personal Liberties vs Securities are being measured in this example. It is how we determine where political thought falls in relation to the centrist, or the ideal. Of course, there are different opinions about what the ideal looks like, and there have been both great and terrible leaders representing all walks of life. But I think the closer we are to the centre, the better our leaders tend to be. In trying to achieve that, the recursive action we take is to vote counter to the political norm, swinging the pendulum the opposite way. The political compass can help us measure and possibly predict the outcome for the counterbalance. I am sure you can find other scenarios where this compass could be useful.

To SIN means "to miss the mark". What is this mark? What is the centrist's ideal that we define sin according to? What are the axis on this compass? What are the extremes?

In the pursuit of bringing people to truth, the ongoing discussion revolves around what we believe to be true. But we are bound to come across people with a difference of opinion, perhaps even a polarizing conflict. Mapping this typology on a compass should help us determine what side we err on, but I think we attempt this by placing doctrine as the ideal, because this is the paradigm by which we understand truth.

The biggest reason why this compass isn't helpful is because it doesn't help us understand where Republicans are in the reality paradigm, as much as it helps you understand where realities are in relation to the Republican. This is the definition of 'relative truth', and this is what defines denominations. I believe that recognizing this flaw is central to understanding the diversity that is Christianity.

When a deviation from a common rule is found to be true, we call this an Anomaly. Enough of these can throw our paradigm into a state of crisis, which in turn produces a Paradigm shift. In a Christian context, this is known as a denominational divide. But the reasons that divide us are bigger than doctrine alone. For instance, the Great Schism was a political and cultural issue; it had nothing to do with faith or practice. Alternatively, the Reformation was a doctrinal divide, but it could only gain legs because of the recent common language translation of the Bible. This puts culture into perspective for us; ie., the society that influences how we appropriate truth is varied.

Paradigm shifts should not be associated with a theory of relativism. The idea is not that truth is changing, but that further study is changing our understanding of truth.- Donald Miller, When Truth is the Enemy of Truth

Further study of truth changes our understanding of truth. That is, truth is not relative to a greater experience, so much as experiences are relative to a greater truth.

Science offers us an explanation of how complexity (the difficult) arose out of simplicity (the easy). The hypothesis of God offers no worthwhile explanation for anything, for it simply postulates what we are trying to explain.- Richard Dawkins

Our existential compass has the way of attaining the meaning of life or "The Way of True Life" as the centrist's ideal when we are trying to find purpose beyond ourselves, or such an elusive character as God. We find purpose on a spiritual level and on a cultural level, and express meaning by living liberally or confiding in security. To hold this in perfect balance would mean to have a significant understanding of how our universe works, and how we can partner with, and perpetuate it further. So I think that by studying where cultural and spiritual securities and liberties intersect, we can map which experiences are less healthy and which are more beneficial to discovering meaning. In theory, more anomalies within the central sphere should reflect thought that holistically brings us closer to understanding the universal meaning of life.

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but through me."
John 14:6

There is a vast difference in opinion/experience within the Christian faith, and I believe it is the result of being closer to the greatest complexity that the world is trying to understand.


If the compass could be used for securities and liberties being measured spiritually and culturally, with "The Way of True Life" being the ideal, this is what I think it would look like:

"The Existential Compass"

The way I would interpret this is that the 'Way of True Life ideal' incorporates all of spiritual and cultural liberty and security to the fullest. I've placed some things on the compass, do you agree with my interpretation? Would you change the axis?

The questions I ask myself to determine how I place thought on these axes:

• What is the spiritual posture toward cultural engagement?
• What is the cultural posture toward spiritual engagement?
• Are you seeking to engage in culture or spirituality?
• Do you seek to be influential in secular or religious circles?
• Do you achieve this in a primarily passive or aggressive tone?
• What are your extremes or preferences?

Learning Christianese

* I must confess, I began this post as a rant of sorts, but I've restructured it to be more helpful to conversation.

Defining Christianese
Christianese is an in-group jargon used most notably by members of “low” Church denominations—usually Charismatics and Evangelicals. David Martin defines this discourse as “a lens for concentrating a particular angle of vision” (9). Like any in-group language, Christianese developed out of prolonged contact between people who subscribed to similar beliefs. It is characterized by the common usage of certain words, theological terms, and catchphrases. These words and phrases are usually found in standard English but with different meanings; without an understanding of the Bible or evangelical culture, the listener has no context to understand what is being said. For example, a Christianese phrase like, “set me on fire” is a request for God to renew religious passion. However, without an understanding of common Christian metaphor which equates God’s power with fire, this statement could seem like a suicidal request.

You may have heard or seen some Christian slogans in your lifetime.............. They are often created as jpeg images, T-shirts, billboards, or bumper stickers. A common trend has been to alter popular logos and trademarks by changing the wording to reflect a cryptic message referencing God, grace, and the like. Capitalizing on the successes of large corporations—often at the risk of federal trademark infringement, can seem rather dangerous for a small organization such as a church, IMO.

To be fair, Christians aren't the only ones doing this. It's an easy way for small businesses or activist groups to gain attention as well. But Christian culture rips off anything; even if the reference isn't clear or relevant. Paired with using Christianese, it's become an inside joke, really. These become the T-shirts that stay in our closets, only to come out for a church gathering.

Christian slogans are designed objectively to implement the 'Great Reversal' of Jesus—that is, the reconciliation of secular culture. We are infatuated with the way Jesus communicates: the surprising morals of his stories, his unconventional healing ministry, his quick wit when chastising hypocrites. But the difference between hijacking trademarks and the message Jesus' intended is simple: we cannot expect anyone to find truth in a counterfeit.

Counterfeits are imitations of superior value. It's not difficult to see how this method of evangelism is confusing for people. Infringements aside, anything that causes people to question the integrity of the product you're pushing is a sin, regardless of a clever acronym. This transcends the lousy T-shirt; it has ineffectually created an entire culture of apathy.

South Park, S07 E09

The way Christians have infiltrated the music industry has been nothing short of embarrassing. Christianese lyrics carry double meaning or no meaning for most listeners, while maintaining an uncomfortably positive vibe throughout. On iTunes it dominates the Inspirational genre, while blurring the line of what it means to be inspirational. This is clear because of the negative way many talent-privy listeners (Christian and non-Christian) have reacted. When Christian music labels arent infamously employing musicians to play Top 40's cover songs, they're making worship music. This serves a purpose, I concede, but I'm criticizing the tendency to produce songs that celebrate an ideological standard versus honest reality.

The Christian film industry would be the same way, save for its non-existence. Films are expensive to make, so the most prevalent content that any Christian film companies produce is Sunday School curriculum and infomercials. Any feature films that do get produced are revolving around an exasperly overt 'rebirth' plot, thus preaching to the choir, as it were—and include homework. This is just more Sunday School curriculum.

Putting ourselves through self-inflicted persecution that has nothing to do with Jesus' message of grace is a dangerous mistake, which I believe should be taken very seriously.

The goal in multimedia creation should be nothing more than to simply start a dialogue with people who notice. This is done by connecting with them on a level of familiarity, yet subtly (or unsubtly) presenting an ideology to a potential spiritual seeker. Sociologically, it's possibly the most effective way of evangelism, but sadly, it's been poorly executed. Who is your target audience? Will only church-goers understand the obscure Jesus-connection and cultural references? The question is, how do we accomplish this goal without looking like turds?

Knowing you are good at something requires precisely the same skills you need to be good at it, so people who are horrible at something tend to have no idea they are horrible at all.
- John Cleese

The Dunning-Kruger Effect is a cross-cultural study that tends to focus on American subjects. It concludes that many of them, at least sometimes and under some conditions, have a tendency to inflate their worth.

Why is this important? Most Christian propaganda, paraphernalia and multimedia is produced in America, for starters. Secondly, the companies creating this content are structured so that their strategic focus is largely dictated by non-creatives (John Cleese also talks about this). Thirdly, scripture is misappropriated to reason away communication error.
E.g., this string of arguments:

For I am the Lord, I do not change.
- Malachi 3:6

And 

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever.
- Hebrews 13:8

Therefore, 

"When I am lifted up from the earth, I will draw all men to myself." - Jesus
- John 12:32

So we don't need to worry, because, 

We know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.
- Romans 8:28

Christians can use scripture to excuse their efforts in partnering with God to produce good work. Incidentally, the number of Christians in church communities who possess creative abilities but are disengaged is astronomical. The 'Church collective' is a resource for this very purpose.

Whatever you do, work heartily, as for the Lord and not for men
- Colossians 3:23

With regards to creating meaningful content, I think it is important to recognize the value of communication science. The human mind connects messages on a subliminal level that, if used properly, can communicate positive undertones combined with core values, etc. Of course, this can be manipulated. However, by not paying attention to these subliminal connection being made, you are more than likely sending a confusing, or worse, conflicting message. After all, living in the Information Age, we are doing Christ a disservice by not communicating to the highest level of our ability. Looking at early Christianity, it was evident that communication methodology was carefully considered when sharing the simplest of truths. I think we can especially draw from the parabolic method of Jesus.

E.g.
Foot Washing (leading by serving)
Workers in the Vineyard (unfair wages)
The Widow's Offering (giving what you don't have)
The Good Samaritan (loving people who hate you)

The list goes on.

Jesus was a revolutionary communicator, who used palatable concepts and universal language. Everything He said challenged the way we live our lives, and did nothing short of flip our world upside down to help us understand how backwards his message was. Above many things, I think what we can take from this as storytellers, artists and designers is one guiding principle: Your theme cannot be more important than how you communicate it. Whether that's a story, a song, or a bumper sticker, if you do not allow yourself time to be creative, and your screening process does not involve test subject criticism, you may not be the right person for the job, and you will never realize that.

Is Jesus The Enemy of Enlightenment?

There is a high amount of bitterness about the level of scientific advancement achieved thus far, namely due to Christianity.

The so-called Christian nations are the most enlightened and progressive...but in spite of their religion, not because of it. The Church has opposed every innovation and discovery from the day of Galileo down to our own time, when the use of anesthetic in childbirth was regarded as a sin because it avoided the biblical curse pronounced against Eve. And every step in astronomy and geology ever taken has been opposed by bigotry and superstition. The Greeks surpassed us in artistic culture and in architecture five hundred years before Christian religion was born.
- Mark Twain

This tragedy has left scientific minds questioning where we could have been by now if God hadn't held us back.

It's a fair question that deserves recognition. As I mentioned in my last blog post, I do believe God's desire is for us to advance in science. Unfortunately, the Dark Ages was a magnificent example of  manipulation of scripture to oppress the illiterate (fair summary?).

But today, Christians could be guilty on another level.

By correlating Darwinian Evolution Acceptance with the Percentage of Educated Religious People, we can see that the more educated people there are within a group, the more they tended to accept evolution as the best explanation of our origin. The three highest scoring were Buddhists, Jews, and Hindus. Besides being inclined to pursue higher education, they happen to be the oldest religions.

At the bottom of the spectrum, we have Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, and Evangelicals. It's also interesting to note which religions have less than 20% educated. This bunch is fully contributing to the bell curve.

Does Jesus have anything to do with this? Does Jesus prey on the uneducated? Or could this graph just prove the effects of the education system?

Let's take a look at what Creationism teaches.

cre·a·tion·ism

noun /krēˈāSHəˌnizəm/  The belief that the universe and living organisms originate from specific acts of divine creation, as in the biblical account, rather than by natural processes such as evolution

This is the common belief for most people who cannot accept evolution as fact.

Jewish views on evolution includes a continuum of views about evolution, creationism, and the origin of life. Today, many Jews accept the science of evolutionary theory and do not see it as incompatible with traditional Judaism, thus endorsing theistic evolution.

The vast majority of classical Rabbis hold that God created the world close to 6,000 years ago, and created Adam and Eve from clay. Modern Rabbis who came out of this view based their conclusions on verses in the Talmud or in the midrash. For example:

• Talmud Chaggiga 13b-14a states that there were 974 generations before God created Adam.

• The Midrash says: God created many worlds but was not satisfied, and left the world he was satisfied with.

• Rabbi Moshe Ben Nacman (1194–1270) writes: In the first day God created the energy (כח) "matter" (חומר) of all things, and then he was finished with the main creation. After that God created all other things from that energy.

• Some midrashim state that the "first week" of Creation lasted for extremely long periods of time. See Anafim on Rabbenu Bachya's Sefer Ikkarim 2:18; Midrash Bereshit Rabbah 9.

• In Psalms it says "A thousand years is like a day in Your sight" (Psalm 90:4)

- Wikipedia

My question is, if Jews find no qualm with evolution because it simply doesn't offer any problems for them morally, what are the obstacles for Christians? Is it problematic for Jesus? Why are we only interested in what Christians have to offer science? Is a God who created the universe in 6 days bigger than a God who took more time?

What you don't see with your eyes, don't invent with your mouth.
- Jewish Proverb

Where Did God Come From?

When I was in grade 12, I took a grade 10-level Auto Mechanics class. Just for fun. Our teacher gave us complete freedom to do whatever we wanted, and had a drawer full of manuals in case we desired to get our hands dirty. He supervised, while reading magazines. At the end of the semester, he held a 30% exam. Our objective? To design and present a new form of transportation.

I chose time-travel.

I must say, my presentation was by-far the most elaborate, compared to the other students'. Some of them had a problem with my transportation method, regardless of my thorough explanations and diagrams of worm-hole technology, combined with a nonconductive salad-spinner design.

Their problem lied within my definition of "transportation".

Since my grades relied on nothing else to pass this class, I challenged every question they had with dribble about string-theory, quantum mechanics, polar-reversal, you name it. I briefed the topics in preparation, betting that their monkey-brains wouldn't understand anything beyond a DeLorean on a train track.

I got an A+ on that project.

Ever wonder about where we came from? Where the universe came from? Before the big bang? I was milling around on YouTube when I came across this comment:

"There are actually a great number of reasons to believe that the universe is a computation and data storage substrate. Scientists don't generally go around putting it like that, but that's because every God-loving moron (incapable of understanding information theory or quantum theory) would ask "whose computer?" It must be God...my God. What annoys me is that religious people can't even understand easy science like evolution, but they think they are experts on reality."
- YouTube Comment by Snakepliskinist

The "data storage substrate" explanation is funny to me, but I've heard more bizarre things. I feel my stomach churn when I read the rest of that though–Christians wouldn't say that... would they? I Google-ed the question "Where did God come from?" and found a Christian site that offered this explanation:

The question is tricky because it sneaks in the false assumption that God came from somewhere and then asks where that might be. The answer is that the question does not even make sense. It is like asking, “What does blue smell like?” Blue is not in the category of things that have a smell, so the question itself is flawed. In the same way, God is not in the category of things that are created or caused. God is uncaused and uncreated—He simply exists.
- Gotquestions.org

{Facepalm}

I have to say, it's hard to pinpoint why I'm more infuriated by this than by the question left unanswered!

The question is flawed? Your argument is invalid??

Needless to say, I still needed to hear something more sane than that, and this video gave me some good insights about my natural curiosity:

"It has often and confidently been asserted, that man's origin can never be known: but ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."
- Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man (1871)

My problem with Gotquestions.org isn't their answer. My problem is with their smugness of ignorance, circling of reason, and hastiness of quick-wit. Yes that's right, I have a problem with their entire website.

What is the ultimate goal of the question? To satisfy our curiosity, right? What else would we do once we have the answer?

Change in perspective is the key to understanding this question, which is the key to being satisfied with not being able to know the answer.

What I mean is, instead of asking "Where did God come from?" We could ask a broader, less presumptuous question like, "What does God want me to know about him?" If God is ever going to give me any answer, it is going to be something I can grasp; or at least some portion of it that will fit inside my head. I think I would be satisfied with that.

Lofty scientific goals push us further than we are willing to think, which I am completely grateful for. But when we find the answer to this great life question, what will our discoveries have lead us to? Will there be a Christian there saying "I told you so?"

“The most beautiful and most profound emotion we can experience is the sensation of the mystical. It is the sower of all true science. He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead. That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior Reasoning Power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible Universe, forms my idea of God.”
- Albert Einstein, as cited in Libby Anfinsen (1995)

Where did God come from? The answer is simply too big for my monkey-brain, but Einstein seemed satisfied with the limits of his understanding enough to be able to appreciate the wonder. I believe there is great work to be done, and the best we can do is unitedly accept what God is showing our best minds through this worshipful adventure. God surely reveals himself through all creation, to everyone at some point. Let him take care of crafting the course of discovery, and let us allow it to happen.

Cosmology (in metaphysics) is the reflection on the totality of all phenomena; science will not cease until it has solved all mysteries. But the Sower of all true science is unravelling them as we speak.

“I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details.”
- Albert Einstein, as cited in Clark (1973)

The Jesus Conspiracy

Did Princess Diana fake her own death to escape the public eye? Or was she killed by a rogue element of the British secret service?

If you agree with one of these theories, there's a good chance you'll subscribe to both even though one suggests Princess Diana is alive, the other dead, a new study indicates.

It's known that people who believe one conspiracy theory are inclined to endorse others as well. But new research shows that conspiracy theorists aren't put off by contradictory theories and offers a reason why.

"They're explained by the overarching theory that there is some kind of cover-up, that authorities are withholding information from us," said Karen Douglas, a study researcher and reader in the school of psychology sciences at the University of Kent in the United Kingdom. "It's not that people are gullible or silly by having those beliefs. … It all fits into the same picture."
- Excerpt from Is This Article Part of a Conspiracy?

My question is, what are the implications for having multiple theories about Jesus? Could it be possible to believe multiple truths about him?

Did Jesus die on the cross and rise again three days later? Or did he fake his death and live a secret life?


Dan Brown's book ignited a conspiracal revolution surrounding the life of Jesus. Suddenly, it wasn't clear what was fact or fiction; Gnostic Gospels were surfacing, giving a notion that we had all been duped. The greatest fear for the entire future of Christianity was being realized. It was obvious what the implications were for believing he lived a secret life. But the question everybody had was, what are the implications if Jesus didn't actually die to begin with? And if so, did he give up his life willingly? To Christians, this is more important than his dying at all. So what are the implications? According to the Bible, he would be a fraud, and would never develop a following from anyone claiming the Bible as truth–certainly not to the extent of martyrdom as many experienced.


Was Jesus' death and resurrection a conspiracy theory?

A conspiracy theory is defined as a proposed plot by powerful people or organizations working together in secret to accomplish some (usually sinister) goal (Coady, 2006; Douglas & Sutton, 2008; Goertzel, 1994).
- Dead and Alive: Beliefs in Contradictory Conspiracy Theories

The obvious question based on this definition is whether or not Jesus was powerful, and if his goal was sinister. The following is an excerpt from Flavius Josephus, a 1st century Jewish historian, and his account of Jesus' crucifixion.

Flavius Josephus

Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named for him, are not extinct at this day.
- Jewish Antiquities by Flavius Josephus, Book 18, Ch.3, Par.3

The account seems to suggest that Jesus was wise and influential, and the principal men suggested that he deserved death by crucifixion. Assuming this account is true, the only ones to see him alive on the third day were those that loved him at first. He also mentions the tribe of Christians not being extinct. Early Christians believed that he said he would rise from the dead as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things.


Being that the Bible is arguably biased at best, I'm trying to go as far as I can to rationalize this without using it as a source (other than for Jewish/Christian tenet reference). It obviously corroborates everything Josephus said, even if parts of his account have been tampered with (another conspiracy theory).

Jesus Tried By Pilate

Let's go back to the principal men. Why did they suggest to Pilate that Jesus deserved death? Were they considered powerful? Could their goal have been sinister? Josephus seems to paint a pleasant picture of Jesus in that first sentence. What would he have done to deserve death? Could he have been a threat to the principal men?

Jesus was a Jewish teacher, this meant that he taught in the synagogues of Jerusalem. The principal men, or members of the Sanhedrin, legislated all aspects of Jewish religious and political life.

Josephus said that Jesus drew many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles to himself. It is a known fact that Jews had a low estimate of a Gentile's character. Conversely, they were admitted into synagogues if they kept all the rules (Isaiah 56:6-7).


I believe this is as far as I can go to draw any reasonable conclusions without a motive.


What would be the motive for Jesus and his followers?

What would be the motive for the Sanhedrin?

Who is more likely to need a cover-up?

Full Flannel Jacket

there is no such thing as fruitless ministry. only good fruit and bad fruit. what is not beneficial can only be harmful.

is it harmful to think in only black and white? i almost don't want to believe that my faith holds any power or authority. yet i sing about moving mountains and forget that Peter walked on water. i must admit, Christianity to its full extent is unfamiliar territory. i need discipleship. i need tougher meat to chew. i need to interact with God on a new level. i want to know how to get to that secret place. i rationalize the mystery of God and seek purpose behind His miracles. if it is not good to move a mountain, it must be bad.

i want to see someone make a Holy Spirit felt puppet. i want to know what that looks like. and use it to teach a lesson explaining the Trinity.

"In every encounter we either give life or we drain it. There is no neutral exchange." - Brennan Manning

Chokeslam

i find it annoyingly difficult how my "zero-sum-mind" will allow me to think i have a firm grasp on a given theological subject, but when asked a simple question, i draw a blank. even if i am well rehearsed in a complete answer. often i find myself combating this when i teach sunday school. a battle of intellect is much like a wrestling match. if i block, i am momentarily unguarded in another area. in this new position, my mind is very busy determining my next plausible move. considering my options, their outcomes, my advantages, my weaknesses, and an eventual goal in mind - to pin you into submission.

what is it like to hear God's voice?

do not despair. it's only as hard as you think. if you don't think it's hard, it's not; and if you think it's hard, it is.

i believe God is absolutely capable of having a relative relationship with us. if i say, "God is good", this is an absolute statement; if i say, "God is good to me", i have made the statement relative to me. both are true statements. one is not less true than the other. sometimes i struggle to think that God loves me as much as someone who is more successful, or happy.

i find it annoyingly difficult how my "zero-sum mind" will allow me to think i have a firm grasp on a given subject, but when asked a simple question, i draw a blank. (a zero-sum game has winners and losers. if you believe that in order to make $100, someone else needs to lose $100; that’s zero-sum.)

if i dwell on the question, my humanness struggles to come up with an answer. "I don't know" is not satisfying enough for me. but if i focus on the direction of conversation, where it is going, what my options will be when i get there, what i know to be true... i can pin you into submission.

i believe God speaks to me. i believe it is in my thoughts - it even sounds like me. i believe i am created in God's image. made complete, fully capable of living independantly. i believe God wants me to make decisions in life. i believe, in my humanness, i am fully capable of interacting with God. i believe God manipulates my compassion when i ask Him. i believe God has given me control over my life.

this is all relative truth. but God wants to speak to you too.

Irrational Grace

do not scoff when a logical mind questions your faith. his inability to see the rationale behind the sacrifice of Christ is due to an unappreciation for the unreasonable. surely your laughter is infused by your childlike faith. and for this you are blessed. but to dismiss the seeker of knowledge is to withhold the key to the Kingdom of Heaven, which was freely given to you.

Short and Sweet

when one accepts that ignorance is bliss, the possibilities and conclusions to be drawn are endless. in a state of bliss, one is not faced with obstacles, but has already overcome them. one does not contemplate but has already decided. it is a state of serenity. peace of mind. peace, coupled with joy. why the distinction? can i have peace without joy? or joy without peace? is either really an object of aspiration without a foretaste of the other?

if ignorance leads to complacency, when does this become bliss? is bliss a sinful desire? does God want us to have peace and joy?

okay, this is something i beleive i have already come to a realization on. God wants to divert our attention to Him, rather than our situation. so is God being the object of our distraction, thus promoting ignorance? are christians out of sync with the world because our focus is Christ? is this a good thing?

i think there is more to the equation. we are called to love the world, not ignore it. we are called to be a light, not to wear infared goggles.

is there an alternative to ignorance? if so, is there a higher cause and effect? once we validate Christ as a reason to harness this serendipity, the burden is lifted. bliss is not a sinful desire, but a precious need. ignorance is temporal bliss. Christ is eternal bliss.

My Embrace

i can't stand this. i feel like my life is on repeat. i keep asking the same questions over and over, trying to come to different conclusions... for the sole purpose of changing my mind again, and again. like repainting a canvas with all that old paint underneath. somehow it still shows through. not really sure what i'm trying to describe here, just my display of raw emotion. i am contending with apathy now. i want God to take everything away from me. beauty, pride, joy... take things that are dear to me. so i can relearn what it means to be thankful.

i try to represent Christ. but all that comes across is my self-consciousness. guarding my heart. analyzing myself. second-guessing my actions. analyzing myself again. it gives me a headache. advice says, "just be yourself." it proves rather frustrating when it's your self that you're trying to kill. kill this self-righteousness and pity. take away my better judgment so that i may learn to forgive and forget. kill my senses. let me become numb to the pain of reformation.

reason will only validate a need. my reason is Christ. i need morality. i need unconditional love. i need something to live for. i need acceptance. i need forgiveness. i need progression.

random thought: there are plenty of fish in the sea. but my lure is caught in the weeds of an irrigation pond.

i signed up to be on the worship team at church today. i don't know what this means for me. it's something i used to help my mom with. maybe i want to induce more discipline in my life. more restrictions. more commitments.

this oddity of joy proves rather amusing. need i say, my last sentence is redundant. i get stuck at a traffic light, and burst out laughing. excuse my pizzahut-lingo, but when there's 40 bills up and the make table is a sea of chaos, i am ecstatic. technical mistakes in music stimulate passion.

"when the Spirit meets the flesh, it is a beautiful collision" - David Crowder.

one thing i've been thinking a lot about lately is this metaphysical sensation: conjoining of the senses. for example, tasting red. seeing heat. hearing pain. when we worship, we have this interaction with God's Spirit. and it is coupled with overwhelming passion.

i have this burning desire to be able to read a book while i sing to music. being one-track minded, this is virtually impossible for me. i can't split my attention to share two sources of information exchange. it's like breathing in through your mouth, and out your nose simultaneously. they cancel eachother out, and you stop breathing. your lungs do not function, so the oxygen transfer is pointless.

now that you're experimenting with your nose and mouth, allow me to continue...

why do we worship? to glorify God. to interact with the Spirit. right. i don't want to poison your mind with my next comparison, so this is a forewarning: don't read too much into this.

God gave us marriage, to exemplify how we are to interact with Him. a relationship that is consummated by venerating eachother, showing the highest execution of love known to man. this may seem rather misplaced and awkward, when in conjunction with my last post displaying God as a father-figure. but our understanding of God is that He desires to be the ultimate satisfaction to every need. He is our be-all and end-all. He is our everything.

this upsets a lot of christians, because they don't want Jesus to be their boyfriend. they suggest that this image of God is too intimate, and that God is to be revered above all else. i'm not disqualifying that Christ wants to be revered, but the marriage scenario doesn't undermine this. at least, in a Biblical sense.

"In one blinding moment of salvific truth, Christianity became no longer merely a moral code, an ethic, or a philosophy of life, but a love affair." - Brennan Manning: Above All

i am thoroughly convinced that God desires an intimate relationship with us. and when we limit ourselves to lip-service, a good deed now and then, and a warm pew, we're missing out. surely, all that we can ever achieve is merely inadequate. but God is still exuberantly pleased. much like the delight a father has in a child's finger-painting, God not only knows our limitations, He embraces them.