Cutting Edge
Tuesday, December 21, 2004
The Catholic League's William Donahue is obsessed with anal sex
From the CATHOLIC LEAGUE for Religious and Civil Rights web site:
So William Donohue thinks inclusion means slamming Jews and African Americans. The next thing we'll hear about is the Catholic League suing for protection as an 'oppressed minority.' Why doesn't he conclude that the tacky Christmas cards are bad? Why doesn't he conclude that these major distributors of holiday cards know their market, and if there are rude Hannukah or Kwanzaa cards, then they are produced by smaller, independant companies?
Reading about William Donahue makes me wonder why he's so obsessed with anal sex. I can't think of a single Hollywood movie that features anal sex, yet he says that the 'secular anti-Christian Jews' that run Hollywood are fascinated by it.
Donahue needs to sit down with the Gospels and read the words of Jesus very carefully. Donahue is not speaking to people in the vernacular. He is complaining and being insulting using the lowest form of 'humor' we have: the insult. He is no better than Sam Kinneson, George Carlin, or Lenny Bruce. In fact, he's worse because he's not speaking any truths here at all. He's slandering and lying and preaching lies as truth. That is dangerous. That is what real Christians need to stand up against.
To be inclusive means we have to accept the rude holiday cards. It doesn't mean that we get to start insulting all of the other subcultures. Christ calls us to live by a higher standard. ¶ 12:03 PM 0 comments
Catholic League president William Donohue concludes: “Not to include any disrespectful holiday cards for Jews and African Americans does violence to the multicultural virtue of inclusion. How did this happen?
So William Donohue thinks inclusion means slamming Jews and African Americans. The next thing we'll hear about is the Catholic League suing for protection as an 'oppressed minority.' Why doesn't he conclude that the tacky Christmas cards are bad? Why doesn't he conclude that these major distributors of holiday cards know their market, and if there are rude Hannukah or Kwanzaa cards, then they are produced by smaller, independant companies?
Reading about William Donahue makes me wonder why he's so obsessed with anal sex. I can't think of a single Hollywood movie that features anal sex, yet he says that the 'secular anti-Christian Jews' that run Hollywood are fascinated by it.
Donahue needs to sit down with the Gospels and read the words of Jesus very carefully. Donahue is not speaking to people in the vernacular. He is complaining and being insulting using the lowest form of 'humor' we have: the insult. He is no better than Sam Kinneson, George Carlin, or Lenny Bruce. In fact, he's worse because he's not speaking any truths here at all. He's slandering and lying and preaching lies as truth. That is dangerous. That is what real Christians need to stand up against.
To be inclusive means we have to accept the rude holiday cards. It doesn't mean that we get to start insulting all of the other subcultures. Christ calls us to live by a higher standard. ¶ 12:03 PM 0 comments
Tuesday, December 14, 2004
Revelation 1:9-20
Rev 1:9-20 A Vision of Christ
John describes his situation on Patmos and states "I was in the spirit on the Lord's Day." In the spirit? In prayer or meditation, obviously. In his vision he is instructed by a voice 'like a trumpet' to write this vision down and send it to seven churches.
He sees seven golden lampstands surrounding one that looked like the 'Son of Man,' which is a title Jesus used frequently and it is a common belief that he was referring to himself as 'the Son of Man.' He is dressed in a long robe with a gloden sash. "His head and his hair were white as white wool, white as snow; his eyes were like a flame of fire, his feet were like burned bronze, refined as in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters." (v. 14-15)
A similar figure is described in Daniel 10:5-6 "I looked up and saw a man clothed in linen with a gold belt from Uphaz aroud his waist. His body was like beryl, his fase like lightning, his eyes like flaming torhchisn, his arms and legs like the gleam of burnished bronze, and the sound of his words like the roar of a multitude." This 'one who is like a human' was sent to Daniel to tell Daniel about future wars. It is also possible to read this as a foretelling of the End of Time.
The description of the voice is similar to the description of the voices of the four fantastic creatures that Ezekial saw, and the voice of 2 Esdras 6:17 that told of the end times.
Did Jesus go to Daniel in a vision? It may have been possible for John. Although there is debate about whether or not the author of the Revelation of John is the same John who wrote the Gospel attributed to John or the three epistles of John, I think that they at least came from the same tradition, and it is in the Gospel of John that Jesus, as the Christ, was made at the beginning of Time. It would be possible for Christ to be a messenger from God before Jesus was born.
Verse 16
"In his right hand he held seven stars, and form his mouth cam a sharp, two edged sword, and his face was like the sun shining with full force."
Verses 17-20
John cowers at this vision, just as Isiah, Ezekial, and Daniel had done. I find this interesting that Abraham talked openly to God and even haggled with him, but the prophets cower.
The speaker states that he is the 'first and the last'. This is a title God has used, not Christ, but the imagery is exactly the same as one who was sent to Daniel. This may seem odd, but the concept of Christ being God was developed by the writing of this book.
Christ explains that the sevel stars are the seven angels of the churches, and the lampstands are the churches. Did this mean that churches associated themselves with angels? Just how did the early church organize? It's common for a parish to be named after a saint, and thus have some patronage. Did the early churches in the cities of Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea have angelic patronage? I'll have to look into this.
What have we learned? John used imagery from Ezekial and Daniel. The line between God the Creator and God the Christ is blurred a bit. It's probably going to be difficult to understand the Revelation of John without understanding the prophets of the old testament and the deuterocanonical books. ¶ 1:06 PM 0 comments
John describes his situation on Patmos and states "I was in the spirit on the Lord's Day." In the spirit? In prayer or meditation, obviously. In his vision he is instructed by a voice 'like a trumpet' to write this vision down and send it to seven churches.
He sees seven golden lampstands surrounding one that looked like the 'Son of Man,' which is a title Jesus used frequently and it is a common belief that he was referring to himself as 'the Son of Man.' He is dressed in a long robe with a gloden sash. "His head and his hair were white as white wool, white as snow; his eyes were like a flame of fire, his feet were like burned bronze, refined as in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of many waters." (v. 14-15)
A similar figure is described in Daniel 10:5-6 "I looked up and saw a man clothed in linen with a gold belt from Uphaz aroud his waist. His body was like beryl, his fase like lightning, his eyes like flaming torhchisn, his arms and legs like the gleam of burnished bronze, and the sound of his words like the roar of a multitude." This 'one who is like a human' was sent to Daniel to tell Daniel about future wars. It is also possible to read this as a foretelling of the End of Time.
The description of the voice is similar to the description of the voices of the four fantastic creatures that Ezekial saw, and the voice of 2 Esdras 6:17 that told of the end times.
Did Jesus go to Daniel in a vision? It may have been possible for John. Although there is debate about whether or not the author of the Revelation of John is the same John who wrote the Gospel attributed to John or the three epistles of John, I think that they at least came from the same tradition, and it is in the Gospel of John that Jesus, as the Christ, was made at the beginning of Time. It would be possible for Christ to be a messenger from God before Jesus was born.
Verse 16
"In his right hand he held seven stars, and form his mouth cam a sharp, two edged sword, and his face was like the sun shining with full force."
Verses 17-20
John cowers at this vision, just as Isiah, Ezekial, and Daniel had done. I find this interesting that Abraham talked openly to God and even haggled with him, but the prophets cower.
The speaker states that he is the 'first and the last'. This is a title God has used, not Christ, but the imagery is exactly the same as one who was sent to Daniel. This may seem odd, but the concept of Christ being God was developed by the writing of this book.
Christ explains that the sevel stars are the seven angels of the churches, and the lampstands are the churches. Did this mean that churches associated themselves with angels? Just how did the early church organize? It's common for a parish to be named after a saint, and thus have some patronage. Did the early churches in the cities of Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea have angelic patronage? I'll have to look into this.
What have we learned? John used imagery from Ezekial and Daniel. The line between God the Creator and God the Christ is blurred a bit. It's probably going to be difficult to understand the Revelation of John without understanding the prophets of the old testament and the deuterocanonical books. ¶ 1:06 PM 0 comments
Monday, December 13, 2004
The Revelation of John
I've been thinking about this lately, and I decided to spend a little time going through the Revelation of John to figure out why this book fascinates so many Christians and how progressive cutting edge Christians can deal with this book, which is full of symbols and prophecies, and has caused a lot of trouble over the years.
Rev 1:1-3
Here is a good opening. It tells what John is writing about and blesses his audience.
Rev 1:4-8
In more detail, this is addressed to the 'seven churches of Asia.' He sends greeting from God, Christ, and 'the seven spirits who are before his throne.' Seven spirits before his throne is already jumping out at me. What seven spirits? The seven archangels? In Rev 4:5 there is a vision of seven torches which are the seven spirits of God. A footnote here links this to Ezekiel 1.13, which is part of the vision of Ezekiel, four great creatures of fantastic description, and among them "something that looked like coals of burning fire, like torches moving to and fro among the living creatures; the fire was bright, and lighting issued from the fire." So the seven spirits may be the seven archangels, or the seven angels mentioned in the Bible (Michael, Gabriel, Uriel, Raphael are almost certainly four of them).
Verse five clearly separates God, the seven angels, and Christ 'the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, the ruler of the kings of the earth.' Isiah 55.4 describes God's servant as a 'witness and leader for all people."
'To him who loves us and freed [washed] us from our sins by his blood, and made us to be a kingdom, priests serving [to] his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.' Here is a link to Psalm 89.27 ("I will make him the firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth.") But Psalm 89 seems to be talking about King David, not the Christ, for his line will be 'forever' (v. 29) and even if they stray from the law, God will punish them but not take away his steadfast love. Yes, the Psalm talks about the 'annointed', which is also translated as 'messiah' or 'christ' but v.20 states it's all about David ("I have found my servant David; with my holy oil have I annointed him").
I think that the message of Christ was that, even if not physically, spiritually we all belong to this line. God loves us even when he punishes us. This makes sense to me because I remember my mother, time and time again, telling me that she was punishing me because she didn't like my behavior, but she still loved me. Friends have said that this is a mixed message and probably not a wise thing for a parent to say. The same friends have had children, and understand that it is a very wise thing for a parent to say. It's a practical application of 'Hate the sin, Love the sinner.'
The reference to 'preists serving his God and Father' is linked to Exodus 19.6, part of the story of Moses taking his people to Sinai. Moses is instructed to tell the Isrealites that they 'shall be for me a priestly kingdom and a holy nation.' Revelation 5.10 expands this idea of being priests to all people to members of every race and nation.
Verse 7:
"Look! He his coming with the clouds; every eye will see him, even those who peirced him; and on his account all the tribes of the earth will wail. So it is to be, Amen."
Chapter 7 of the book of Daniel describes a vision with fantastic beasts and speaks of final judgement, where one who appears human was brought before 'the Ancient One' in the clouds of heaven. He is given authority by the Ancient One. Again, Christ and God are differentiated beings. The 'mini-Apocalypses' of Matthew (chapter 24), Mark (chapter 13), and Luke (chapter 21) use the same idea, and according to my translation, Jesus is quoting the passage from Daniel.
Finally, verse 8:
"I am the Alpha and the Omega" says the Lord God..."
This makes sense if the Greeks used 'alpha' for 'beginning' and 'omega' for 'ending.' John is simply translating the name of God (I AM WHO I AM, Exodus 3.14) into the vernacular.
So what have we learned? John is writing this prophesy and borrowing from the book of Daniel for some of the imagery. The author probably had access to non-cannonical books, such as the book of Enoch. ¶ 11:56 AM 0 comments
Rev 1:1-3
Here is a good opening. It tells what John is writing about and blesses his audience.
Rev 1:4-8
In more detail, this is addressed to the 'seven churches of Asia.' He sends greeting from God, Christ, and 'the seven spirits who are before his throne.' Seven spirits before his throne is already jumping out at me. What seven spirits? The seven archangels? In Rev 4:5 there is a vision of seven torches which are the seven spirits of God. A footnote here links this to Ezekiel 1.13, which is part of the vision of Ezekiel, four great creatures of fantastic description, and among them "something that looked like coals of burning fire, like torches moving to and fro among the living creatures; the fire was bright, and lighting issued from the fire." So the seven spirits may be the seven archangels, or the seven angels mentioned in the Bible (Michael, Gabriel, Uriel, Raphael are almost certainly four of them).
Verse five clearly separates God, the seven angels, and Christ 'the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead, the ruler of the kings of the earth.' Isiah 55.4 describes God's servant as a 'witness and leader for all people."
'To him who loves us and freed [washed] us from our sins by his blood, and made us to be a kingdom, priests serving [to] his God and Father, to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.' Here is a link to Psalm 89.27 ("I will make him the firstborn, the highest of the kings of the earth.") But Psalm 89 seems to be talking about King David, not the Christ, for his line will be 'forever' (v. 29) and even if they stray from the law, God will punish them but not take away his steadfast love. Yes, the Psalm talks about the 'annointed', which is also translated as 'messiah' or 'christ' but v.20 states it's all about David ("I have found my servant David; with my holy oil have I annointed him").
I think that the message of Christ was that, even if not physically, spiritually we all belong to this line. God loves us even when he punishes us. This makes sense to me because I remember my mother, time and time again, telling me that she was punishing me because she didn't like my behavior, but she still loved me. Friends have said that this is a mixed message and probably not a wise thing for a parent to say. The same friends have had children, and understand that it is a very wise thing for a parent to say. It's a practical application of 'Hate the sin, Love the sinner.'
The reference to 'preists serving his God and Father' is linked to Exodus 19.6, part of the story of Moses taking his people to Sinai. Moses is instructed to tell the Isrealites that they 'shall be for me a priestly kingdom and a holy nation.' Revelation 5.10 expands this idea of being priests to all people to members of every race and nation.
Verse 7:
"Look! He his coming with the clouds; every eye will see him, even those who peirced him; and on his account all the tribes of the earth will wail. So it is to be, Amen."
Chapter 7 of the book of Daniel describes a vision with fantastic beasts and speaks of final judgement, where one who appears human was brought before 'the Ancient One' in the clouds of heaven. He is given authority by the Ancient One. Again, Christ and God are differentiated beings. The 'mini-Apocalypses' of Matthew (chapter 24), Mark (chapter 13), and Luke (chapter 21) use the same idea, and according to my translation, Jesus is quoting the passage from Daniel.
Finally, verse 8:
"I am the Alpha and the Omega" says the Lord God..."
This makes sense if the Greeks used 'alpha' for 'beginning' and 'omega' for 'ending.' John is simply translating the name of God (I AM WHO I AM, Exodus 3.14) into the vernacular.
So what have we learned? John is writing this prophesy and borrowing from the book of Daniel for some of the imagery. The author probably had access to non-cannonical books, such as the book of Enoch. ¶ 11:56 AM 0 comments
Monday, December 06, 2004
Left Behind
Months ago I heard an interview on NPR's Fresh Air with Terry Gross about the "Left Behind" series. A few nights ago we finally managed to track the interview down and listen to it. Gershom Gorenberg described what he believes is the real source of the "Left Behind" series and the 'Rapture' theology that has created a new cult in some some Christian churches. Gerhardt Goeken describes this as 'dispensationalism.'
It all started, according to these sourcs, by a 19th century British preacher named Charles Darby, who created the idea of the "Rapture" and the "Tribulation." To people who follow this belief, it is necessary to believe that it is taken from a literal reading of the Revelation of John, otherwise it all falls apart.
This came back since some ofhte recent readings in church have been about the 'Little apocalypse of Matthew' and the idea that Advent is a preparation for the Second coming. I did a double take. Perhaps this is something that I'd forgotten over the years. Advent, as I've understood it, is preparation for the Birth of Christ and by extension the reaffirmation that Creation is Good and that there is Hope in the world. ¶ 11:56 AM 0 comments
It all started, according to these sourcs, by a 19th century British preacher named Charles Darby, who created the idea of the "Rapture" and the "Tribulation." To people who follow this belief, it is necessary to believe that it is taken from a literal reading of the Revelation of John, otherwise it all falls apart.
This came back since some ofhte recent readings in church have been about the 'Little apocalypse of Matthew' and the idea that Advent is a preparation for the Second coming. I did a double take. Perhaps this is something that I'd forgotten over the years. Advent, as I've understood it, is preparation for the Birth of Christ and by extension the reaffirmation that Creation is Good and that there is Hope in the world. ¶ 11:56 AM 0 comments
Wednesday, December 01, 2004
Is this a good Christian thought?
I don't normally read David Horowitz' FrontPageMag.com site, but there was an article about this site on Media Matters for America. The article that caught my eye is Dennis Prager's Is it Wrong to Hope Arafat is in Hell? The article continues by trying to answer three questions:
I believe that it is wrong to ask such a question. The fate of other people is not a Christians' concern. When someone in our parish or family dies, we pray that they are in heaven, that God has 'welcomed them home.' When our 'enemies' die, why is it acceptable to pray that they are in eternal torment?
To justify the belief in Hell, Prager starts with "Among those who pride themselves in being what is deemed sophisticated in our time, the notion of hell is either absurd, immoral or both." Why this attack on a 'cultural elite'? I have no idea. There seems to be a backlash agaisnt education in America right now. When the Morning Sedition has reports from the 'War on Brains' they are being satirical, but there is a buried truth in it: The neo-conservatives seem to have this belief that education and intelligence is a bad thng.
There is also an artifact of the Liberal-Progressive/Conservative-Tradtional conflict that defines 'good Biblical scholarship' as 'what agrees with my belief.' Both sides are at fault on this one, but I digress. Prager continues his argument for belief in Hell with: "For if there is a just God, it is inconceivable that those who do evil and those who do good have identical fates." I have no problem stating that God is a Just God (capitalization is important here) but we might not understand God's definition of Justice. God may use a greater and superior definition of Justice than any human has come up with. Even by our best human understanding of the concept, Prager is right. If everyone goes to heaven despite how they lived, then what prevents people from being evil now? It's not the best argument, and it really doesn't hold up to my core belief that God created everything as Good.
But I will allow that I belief that there are different fates for the afterlife: how we live our lives has some influence on what happens to us after death. Why does the afterlife of the 'evil' have to be eternal punishment? I have felt that if, after I die, I am found lacking and sent to Hell, I will praise God as I go because it will finally be the proof I'm unfortutately looking for that everything I know to be True is factual as well. I am more of the belief that, unless reincarnation is part of the plan, those who are unrepetantly evil are not punished in eternal hellfire. Their souls are simply extinguished, but even this gives me problems because everything about the ministry of Jesus was turning our lives towards God. How many chances do we get? As many as it takes. I'm still working this one out.
As far as his second question, I think his review of Arafat's life misses a crucial detail. I will be the first to admit that I have not given Yassar Arafat a close look, like I have with my own father, but I seem to remember Arafat going to a lot of meetings with a rifle in one hand and an olive branch in the other, and Isreal always chose the rifle. Peace, to John Lennon's chagrin, was never given a chance between Israel and Palestine.
Prager finishes with
A decent human being, one who followed the teaching of Christ, would want the cruelest of people to turn back to God's way. Prager is trying to use some odd standard of decency to justify his hate of another human being. Didn't Jesus tell us that this was behavior to be avoided? ¶ 9:35 AM 0 comments
First, is there a hell? Can rational people believe in such a thing?
Second, if there is a hell, does Arafat merit going there? And can any of us mortals judge a person worthy of hell?
Third, if there is a hell, is it acceptable to hope someone who we believe merits it goes there?
I believe that it is wrong to ask such a question. The fate of other people is not a Christians' concern. When someone in our parish or family dies, we pray that they are in heaven, that God has 'welcomed them home.' When our 'enemies' die, why is it acceptable to pray that they are in eternal torment?
To justify the belief in Hell, Prager starts with "Among those who pride themselves in being what is deemed sophisticated in our time, the notion of hell is either absurd, immoral or both." Why this attack on a 'cultural elite'? I have no idea. There seems to be a backlash agaisnt education in America right now. When the Morning Sedition has reports from the 'War on Brains' they are being satirical, but there is a buried truth in it: The neo-conservatives seem to have this belief that education and intelligence is a bad thng.
There is also an artifact of the Liberal-Progressive/Conservative-Tradtional conflict that defines 'good Biblical scholarship' as 'what agrees with my belief.' Both sides are at fault on this one, but I digress. Prager continues his argument for belief in Hell with: "For if there is a just God, it is inconceivable that those who do evil and those who do good have identical fates." I have no problem stating that God is a Just God (capitalization is important here) but we might not understand God's definition of Justice. God may use a greater and superior definition of Justice than any human has come up with. Even by our best human understanding of the concept, Prager is right. If everyone goes to heaven despite how they lived, then what prevents people from being evil now? It's not the best argument, and it really doesn't hold up to my core belief that God created everything as Good.
But I will allow that I belief that there are different fates for the afterlife: how we live our lives has some influence on what happens to us after death. Why does the afterlife of the 'evil' have to be eternal punishment? I have felt that if, after I die, I am found lacking and sent to Hell, I will praise God as I go because it will finally be the proof I'm unfortutately looking for that everything I know to be True is factual as well. I am more of the belief that, unless reincarnation is part of the plan, those who are unrepetantly evil are not punished in eternal hellfire. Their souls are simply extinguished, but even this gives me problems because everything about the ministry of Jesus was turning our lives towards God. How many chances do we get? As many as it takes. I'm still working this one out.
As far as his second question, I think his review of Arafat's life misses a crucial detail. I will be the first to admit that I have not given Yassar Arafat a close look, like I have with my own father, but I seem to remember Arafat going to a lot of meetings with a rifle in one hand and an olive branch in the other, and Isreal always chose the rifle. Peace, to John Lennon's chagrin, was never given a chance between Israel and Palestine.
Prager finishes with
Just as any decent human being would want good people to be rewarded in whatever existence there is after this life, they would want the cruelest of people to be punished.
So, of course, I hope Yasser Arafat is in hell. It means that a just God rules the universe. If you think that is hard-hearted, consider the alternative, that one of the most corrupt and cruel human beings of the past half-century is resting in peace. Whoever isn't bothered by that is the one with the hard heart.
A decent human being, one who followed the teaching of Christ, would want the cruelest of people to turn back to God's way. Prager is trying to use some odd standard of decency to justify his hate of another human being. Didn't Jesus tell us that this was behavior to be avoided? ¶ 9:35 AM 0 comments
