If you haven't watched the season premiere of LOST yet then don't read this post. It is basically one big collection of spoilers. If you have seen it, then please do join me in recalling and reflecting on what we've just seen.
The way the episode begins is phenomenal. Jack is watching a car chase on TV, pouring himself a drink. He starts with orange juice. We wonder whether this is a flashback or a flash forward. He adds something stronger and we suspect we're in the future. We watch and wait to see who is driving, and it turns out to be Hurley, who proclaims himself as someone with celebrity status: one of the "Oceanic Six". Jack, Hurley, Kate - and who are the other three? Presumably Michael and/or Walt is one, since they were from New York, which is where the individual in the coffin was found.
Hurley ran when something he saw in a store freaked him out. We later learn that what he saw...was Charlie. He is having all sorts of visions related to Charlie, and when a policeman threatens him with being sent to an insane asylum, Hurley welcomes the offer.
In the asylum, Hurley is visited by a man named Matthew Abbaddon (the last name is significant), claiming to be an attorney for Oceanic Airlines, come to offer Hurley an "upgrade" to a better asylum. Hurley is suspicious, and asks to see a business card, which the man fails to produce. When Hurley tries to end the conversation, Abbadon asks him "Are they still alive?"
Back on the island, Hurley gets separated from a group heading back to join the rest and warn Jack about Charlie's message. He ends up at Jacob's house, sees Jacob, and meets Locke there. Later, in another flash forward, Hurley will tell Jack that he is sorry he went with Locke, and that he thinks "it wants us to come back", presumably referring to the island. Jack hasn't yet grown his beard at this point, and doesn't yet share Hurley's desire to return to the island.
Hurley also sees Charlie at the mental hospital, and denies that he is real. Charlie tells Hurley that he is dead, but that he is also here, and adds "They need you Hugo".
I was going to tape Eli Stone anyway, and hope to see the Oceanic Airlines commercial that is apparently going to be on during it.
LOST is back, and has not disappointed at all. More clues, and onward into deeper mysteries we go! Wow!
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Memetic LEGO Mindstorms and Christian Origins
I have been tagged with a meme by Doug Chaplin, and so I need to do the following:
I've decided to follow his lead and not include the Bible on this desk. Some potential difficulty is created by the fact that the next nearest book will be on a bookshelf situated perpendicular to me so that pretty much every book on it is roughly equidistant from my current position. I decided that, rather than choose the one that seems most interesting, the fairest method is the one that is on the edge of the top shelf. It is a small bookshelf with books from the public library. The closest is in fact Classic LEGO Mindstorms Project and Software Tools, and page 123 does not have 8 sentences. So I decided to forego posting pictures of LEGO (which I think Doug would agree do not constitute sentences), so I go back for the book my eye originally settled on first on the same shelf: Christian Origins: A People's History of Christianity Vol.1, edited by Richard Horsley. The three sentences I have to post are the following:
Pick up the nearest book of 123 pages or more. (No cheating!)
Find Page 123.
Find the first 5 sentences.
Post the next 3 sentences.
Tag 5 people.
I've decided to follow his lead and not include the Bible on this desk. Some potential difficulty is created by the fact that the next nearest book will be on a bookshelf situated perpendicular to me so that pretty much every book on it is roughly equidistant from my current position. I decided that, rather than choose the one that seems most interesting, the fairest method is the one that is on the edge of the top shelf. It is a small bookshelf with books from the public library. The closest is in fact Classic LEGO Mindstorms Project and Software Tools, and page 123 does not have 8 sentences. So I decided to forego posting pictures of LEGO (which I think Doug would agree do not constitute sentences), so I go back for the book my eye originally settled on first on the same shelf: Christian Origins: A People's History of Christianity Vol.1, edited by Richard Horsley. The three sentences I have to post are the following:
Their initial hearing of Paul's preaching of "the word of the cross" was attended by a "demonstration of Spirit and power" (1 Cor. 1:18-25; 2:4), and manifestations of the Spirit in the form of spiritual wisdom, prophecy, speaking in tongues, and other spiritual phenomena continued to be an important aspect of how many Corinthian believers expressed their identity in Christ.
MEMBERSHIP AND IDENTITY
Who were the people that joined the new assembly in Corinth? Reacting against an earlier view that the early Christians were largely from among the poor, scholars interested in the social world of Paul formed a "new consensus": Based on a literal understanding of 1 Cor. 1:26-30 ("not many of you were rich,...wise,...of noble birth"), they argued that therefore "some" were indeed rich and nobly born.
I hereby tag Dr. Jim West (not his grandmother, lest my post be misunderstood), Julie Bogart, Bob Patterson, hyper-textual ontology, and Qalmlea. I hope their nearest book has neither long convoluted sentences nor pictures of LEGOs. I also hope that reproduction because one has been tagged with a meme constitutes "fair use".
LOST: So It Begins
I think some people are misinterpreting the most recent mobisode from LOST: Missing Pieces, entitled "So It Begins", which takes us back to the moment just before the start of the pilot episode in season 1. It shows Christian Shepherd and Vincent talking to one another, and Christians saying Jack "has work to do". But that is just what Walt says to Locke in the season finale, and there one assumes that it is the island communicating with Locke, and not that Walt has in fact returned. Or perhaps it is Walt communicating from wherever he is - that too would be a possibility. But since Vincent has at times appeared to be a manifestation of the island (or of the smoke monster, which may or may not be the same thing), why cannot the conversation between Christian and Vincent be such a manifestation as well?
LOST in a Parallel Universe
I have a theory about LOST, one that I think will make sense of the focus on mirror opposites, of opposing forces of light and dark, good and evil. I think it also makes sense of the video clip with the rabbit at the Dharma station known as "The Orchid". If my theory is correct, then LOST is certainly one of the most philosophically interesting shows around, and perhaps ever.
One view of the universe that some physicists find persuasive is that there are an infinite number of "universes", and we happen to inhabit a universe in which life is possible (or perhaps even inevitable). The island on LOST may be a place where two universes have come into contact. It is possible to bring the "parallel" universe's rabbit, for instance, into our own. These universes are similar, but not identical. Perhaps there is contact between more than one universe at this point. In the universe from which Naomi came, maybe the people on the Oceanic flight really didn't survive. Maybe in that universe (as in the original plan in our universe) Jack didn't survive, and so for that reason no one did.
This leads us to a question that physicists have not explored about the multiverse theory, and neither have moral philosophers to my knowledge. What is the moral status of our existence in a universe in which every possibility is realized somewhere? Presumably no matter how good or evil a person may be in a given universe, in a universe in which every configuration and every possibility is manifested, a precise moral opposite of that person will exist somewhere. This raises a profound question about the nature of good and evil. Is there anyone who could be good in every iteration of themselves? What would it take to achieve that? If the heroic Jack of the island is "rescued" and taken into a parallel universe in which the pressures and circumstances Jack faced there are very different, could he still be the same person in terms of his way of life and fundamental values? If so, or if not, what does this say about the intriguing moral questions raised by this particular cosmology?
The question that LOST poses about fate and coincidence doesn't go away just because one believes the multiverse theory. Either we must ask whether the existence of one universe that has given rise to us is fate or coincidence, or we must ask whether it is fate or coincidence that we inhabit the universe we do.
At any rate, if my theory about the view of the world they are exploring in the show LOST is a correct view of the universe we actually inhabit, then I can at least take comfort in the fact that my theory is correct somewhere in the multiverse, even though it may not be in the one this iteration of my existence inhabits...
One view of the universe that some physicists find persuasive is that there are an infinite number of "universes", and we happen to inhabit a universe in which life is possible (or perhaps even inevitable). The island on LOST may be a place where two universes have come into contact. It is possible to bring the "parallel" universe's rabbit, for instance, into our own. These universes are similar, but not identical. Perhaps there is contact between more than one universe at this point. In the universe from which Naomi came, maybe the people on the Oceanic flight really didn't survive. Maybe in that universe (as in the original plan in our universe) Jack didn't survive, and so for that reason no one did.
This leads us to a question that physicists have not explored about the multiverse theory, and neither have moral philosophers to my knowledge. What is the moral status of our existence in a universe in which every possibility is realized somewhere? Presumably no matter how good or evil a person may be in a given universe, in a universe in which every configuration and every possibility is manifested, a precise moral opposite of that person will exist somewhere. This raises a profound question about the nature of good and evil. Is there anyone who could be good in every iteration of themselves? What would it take to achieve that? If the heroic Jack of the island is "rescued" and taken into a parallel universe in which the pressures and circumstances Jack faced there are very different, could he still be the same person in terms of his way of life and fundamental values? If so, or if not, what does this say about the intriguing moral questions raised by this particular cosmology?
The question that LOST poses about fate and coincidence doesn't go away just because one believes the multiverse theory. Either we must ask whether the existence of one universe that has given rise to us is fate or coincidence, or we must ask whether it is fate or coincidence that we inhabit the universe we do.
At any rate, if my theory about the view of the world they are exploring in the show LOST is a correct view of the universe we actually inhabit, then I can at least take comfort in the fact that my theory is correct somewhere in the multiverse, even though it may not be in the one this iteration of my existence inhabits...
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
LOST Latest
This post is simply a list of clues given in the LOST season finale version that aired tonight, which had added "subtitles" that give additional information, attract attention to details, make connection and remind:
There is a focus on mirror opposites in the series as a whole, and no less in this episode named after Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking Glass.
Jack was calling someone in Los Angeles' 310 area code.
The subtitles said that "a popular theory" about the person in the coffin is that it was a man from LA who was found dead in New York. This is so non-committal that it could be interpreted as a denial...but maybe that what they want us to think.
An Easter Egg: Gary Nadler has the same last name as Bernard.
In the Looking Glass station, Charlie has a song idea. The words are from a poem by Dominic Monaghan.
When Locke heard Jacob's voice, Ben realized Locke is special and his primacy is threatened thereby.
Jack is following in his father's footsteps.
Jack and Locke both consider committing suicide. Mirror opposites.
Ben and Jack, we are told, have more in common than we might think: both are leaders who make the hard decisions.
There were no subtitles when Jack proposed getting his father down to see which of them was more drunk.
On Ben's map there is a place called Pascal Flats, which might be named after Blaise Pascal, who we are told abandoned science for theology after a mystical experience.
On his way to the funeral (actually a "viewing", as it turns out), Jack is listening to Nirvana's "Scentless Apprentice".
Jack tells Tom that he's going to get everyone else rescued, and then he's going to find Tom and kill him. Is this a mere threat, or is escaping the island in fact not the priority for Jack that we might assume?
When Hurley says he's saved Bernard, Sayid and Jin, the subtitles say it is a happy moment, but on this island things aren't always what they seem.
The survivors (based on Danielle's signal) have been on the island for 91 days. Before it was used to broadcast her message, the radio tower broadcast the famous series of numbers.
The showdown between Jack and Locke is described as a man of science vs. a man of faith.
Minkowski (on the satellite phone) doesn't confirm that he's on a boat in the vicinity.
We're told when we move to Jack drinking in his home that this is taking us from the island to the "other side of the Looking Glass" where Jack is very clearly "a changed man".
From the commercial for tomorrow's season premiere: Someone from Naomi's people arrives and says that rescuring the Oceanic survivors isn't their primary objective. John Locke, in another clip, says that whatever they are here for, "it's not us".
A question: Are the flash forwards Desmond's visions? Are they inevitable? We're asked at one point to consider the ongoing question: are we dealing with fate or coincidence?
There is a focus on mirror opposites in the series as a whole, and no less in this episode named after Lewis Carroll's Through the Looking Glass.
Jack was calling someone in Los Angeles' 310 area code.
The subtitles said that "a popular theory" about the person in the coffin is that it was a man from LA who was found dead in New York. This is so non-committal that it could be interpreted as a denial...but maybe that what they want us to think.
An Easter Egg: Gary Nadler has the same last name as Bernard.
In the Looking Glass station, Charlie has a song idea. The words are from a poem by Dominic Monaghan.
When Locke heard Jacob's voice, Ben realized Locke is special and his primacy is threatened thereby.
Jack is following in his father's footsteps.
Jack and Locke both consider committing suicide. Mirror opposites.
Ben and Jack, we are told, have more in common than we might think: both are leaders who make the hard decisions.
There were no subtitles when Jack proposed getting his father down to see which of them was more drunk.
On Ben's map there is a place called Pascal Flats, which might be named after Blaise Pascal, who we are told abandoned science for theology after a mystical experience.
On his way to the funeral (actually a "viewing", as it turns out), Jack is listening to Nirvana's "Scentless Apprentice".
Jack tells Tom that he's going to get everyone else rescued, and then he's going to find Tom and kill him. Is this a mere threat, or is escaping the island in fact not the priority for Jack that we might assume?
When Hurley says he's saved Bernard, Sayid and Jin, the subtitles say it is a happy moment, but on this island things aren't always what they seem.
The survivors (based on Danielle's signal) have been on the island for 91 days. Before it was used to broadcast her message, the radio tower broadcast the famous series of numbers.
The showdown between Jack and Locke is described as a man of science vs. a man of faith.
Minkowski (on the satellite phone) doesn't confirm that he's on a boat in the vicinity.
We're told when we move to Jack drinking in his home that this is taking us from the island to the "other side of the Looking Glass" where Jack is very clearly "a changed man".
From the commercial for tomorrow's season premiere: Someone from Naomi's people arrives and says that rescuring the Oceanic survivors isn't their primary objective. John Locke, in another clip, says that whatever they are here for, "it's not us".
A question: Are the flash forwards Desmond's visions? Are they inevitable? We're asked at one point to consider the ongoing question: are we dealing with fate or coincidence?
eBay scam
Here's a warning about another scam, claiming to be an eBay invoice (eBay doesn't do monthly invoices, and the e-mail address from which it claims to be sent is billing@eby.com rather than an address at eBay.com). The link provided fortunately doesn't seem to work, but it doesn't lead to eBay's web site but to http://csccog.org/cal/includes/eBayISAPI.htm That is the site of a church, which is particularly disturbing. Do they know what someone there is up to?
At any rate, this is the important point: Don't fall for this!
Dear eBay member,
Your monthly eBay Invoice is now available for online viewing.
Invoice Date: February 01, 2008
Amount Due: - US $35.00
You can review your current Invoice details and Account Status at any time by clicking this link:
View Invoice
For future reference, you can access your invoice by following these steps:
Go to the eBay Homepage http://www.ebay.com/
Click My eBay at the top of the page, and sign in with your eBay User ID and password.
Click the "Seller Account" link (below My Account in the left navigation menu).
Click the "Invoice" link.
Regards,
eBay Inc.
At any rate, this is the important point: Don't fall for this!
_____
Dear eBay member,
Your monthly eBay Invoice is now available for online viewing.
Invoice Date: February 01, 2008
Amount Due: - US $35.00
You can review your current Invoice details and Account Status at any time by clicking this link:
View Invoice
For future reference, you can access your invoice by following these steps:
Go to the eBay Homepage http://www.ebay.com/
Click My eBay at the top of the page, and sign in with your eBay User ID and password.
Click the "Seller Account" link (below My Account in the left navigation menu).
Click the "Invoice" link.
Regards,
eBay Inc.
More on Evolution Weekend
Michael Zimmerman (dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences here at Butler University) has written an op-ed piece about evolution and religion, which is closely connected with the Evolution Weekend project. In the past, Ken Ham has dismissed Evolution Sunday saying "atheists take glee when they see the clergy supporting evolution", while P. Z. Myers showed that this is clearly not universally the case. I'm planning on focusing on this topic in the Sunday School class I teach, and hope my congregation will add its name to the list of churches participating. I'm also encouraging bloggers to make the weekend of February 8-10 this year a blog-a-thon, particularly religiously-oriented blogs (which makes this the blogospheric equivalent of focusing on evolution in churches that weekend).
The United Church of Christ has released a statement on the subject entitled "Not Mutually Exclusive". On February 11th, Christ Community Church will offer an e-course on the topic.
Although I am disappointed with her post, I confess I am impressed by the fact that Denyse O'Leary has allowed critical comments (including one from Michael Zimmerman himself) to appear on her blog.
In other news, there is a lively blog interaction on minimalism and history in Biblical studies. The best post so far is "The Game Is On" which presents a hilarious depiction of the interaction between minimalists and maximalists in gaming terms. This in turn was in response to posts by Claude Mariottini and Jim West. John Hobbins (with a quote from me) tries (as I do) to plot a course between the extremes. I'm sure the conversation will continue...and hope you will join in!
The United Church of Christ has released a statement on the subject entitled "Not Mutually Exclusive". On February 11th, Christ Community Church will offer an e-course on the topic.
Although I am disappointed with her post, I confess I am impressed by the fact that Denyse O'Leary has allowed critical comments (including one from Michael Zimmerman himself) to appear on her blog.
In other news, there is a lively blog interaction on minimalism and history in Biblical studies. The best post so far is "The Game Is On" which presents a hilarious depiction of the interaction between minimalists and maximalists in gaming terms. This in turn was in response to posts by Claude Mariottini and Jim West. John Hobbins (with a quote from me) tries (as I do) to plot a course between the extremes. I'm sure the conversation will continue...and hope you will join in!
Netdisaster
Until the next time I post, feel free to have fun pelting my site with tomatoes or doing other fun things through NetDisaster.
(HT Jim West)
(HT Jim West)
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Voyage of the Damned
I finally watched the Doctor Who Christmas special "Voyage of the Damned" last night. It was certainly entertaining, and as tragic as the recent episodes have often tended to be. The "earthologist" (with a fake degree from a degree mill that also did dry cleaning) was particularly funny, with his poorly-informed understanding of human traditions: The people of Earth worship the great God Santa, with his fierce claws, and his wife Mary. Every Christmas they go to war against the people of Turkey and then eat the conquered for Christmas dinner like savages.
Eventually the Doctor objects that this hasn't got the meaning of Christmas quite right, and when he is asked what Christmas is really about, he says it is a long story - and he should know, because he was there. In fact, he got the last room!
It was also great to have Chuck make a reappearance on TV recently. With more Doctor Who, LOST, sooner or later the end of the writers' strike, more Chuck, Battlestar Galactica and Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles to look forward to, there is only one big question left unanswered...
How will I find the time to watch all the things that are worth watching?
Eventually the Doctor objects that this hasn't got the meaning of Christmas quite right, and when he is asked what Christmas is really about, he says it is a long story - and he should know, because he was there. In fact, he got the last room!
It was also great to have Chuck make a reappearance on TV recently. With more Doctor Who, LOST, sooner or later the end of the writers' strike, more Chuck, Battlestar Galactica and Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles to look forward to, there is only one big question left unanswered...
How will I find the time to watch all the things that are worth watching?
Monday, January 28, 2008
IRS E-Mail Scam Warning
Below is the text of an e-mail someone recently received. It is not from the IRS, but it claims to be. It is an attempt, like all other scam e-mails, to get personal information from the gullible. Don't fall for it. If you click the link you get sent to a page that looks pretty authentic, but a glance at the address bar will show you that it is not the IRS web site. The page even uses help links from the actual IRS site. It is a well-crafted scam, but a scam nevertheless. Don't be taken in!
From: irs@getrefundnow.com
Subject: Tax Notification
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 08:52:46 -0800
Tax Notification
Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
United States Department of the Treasury
Date: 01/28/2008
After the last annual calculations of your fiscal
activity we have determined that you are eligible
to receive a tax refund of $134.80.
Please submit the tax refund request and allow us
6-9 days in order to process it.
A refund can be delayed for a variety of reasons.
For example submitting invalid records or applying
after the deadline.
To access the form for your tax refund, click here.
Regards,
Internal Revenue Service
Document Reference: (92054568).
From: irs@getrefundnow.com
Subject: Tax Notification
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 08:52:46 -0800
Tax Notification
Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
United States Department of the Treasury
Date: 01/28/2008
After the last annual calculations of your fiscal
activity we have determined that you are eligible
to receive a tax refund of $134.80.
Please submit the tax refund request and allow us
6-9 days in order to process it.
A refund can be delayed for a variety of reasons.
For example submitting invalid records or applying
after the deadline.
To access the form for your tax refund, click here.
Regards,
Internal Revenue Service
Document Reference: (92054568).
It May Be Tax Season, But Don't Assume That E-Mail Is REALLY From the IRS!
Below is the text of an e-mail someone else received. It is not from the IRS, but it claims to be. It is an attempt, like all other scam e-mails, to get personal information from the gullible. Don't fall for it. If you click the link you get sent to a page that looks pretty authentic, but a glance at the address bar will show you that it is not the IRS web site. The page even uses help links from the actual IRS site. It is a well-crafted scam, but a scam nevertheless. Don't be taken in!
From: irs@getrefundnow.com
Subject: Tax Notification
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 08:52:46 -0800
Tax Notification
Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
United States Department of the Treasury
Date: 01/28/2008
After the last annual calculations of your fiscal
activity we have determined that you are eligible
to receive a tax refund of $134.80.
Please submit the tax refund request and allow us
6-9 days in order to process it.
A refund can be delayed for a variety of reasons.
For example submitting invalid records or applying
after the deadline.
To access the form for your tax refund, click here.
Regards,
Internal Revenue Service
Document Reference: (92054568).
From: irs@getrefundnow.com
Subject: Tax Notification
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 08:52:46 -0800
Tax Notification
Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
United States Department of the Treasury
Date: 01/28/2008
After the last annual calculations of your fiscal
activity we have determined that you are eligible
to receive a tax refund of $134.80.
Please submit the tax refund request and allow us
6-9 days in order to process it.
A refund can be delayed for a variety of reasons.
For example submitting invalid records or applying
after the deadline.
To access the form for your tax refund, click here.
Regards,
Internal Revenue Service
Document Reference: (92054568).
Evolution Weekend Blog-A-Thon: February 8-10, 2008
As I proposed a while back, it would make sense to have blogs as well as congregations participate in Evolution Weekend 2008. Use the opportunity to promote well-informed interaction between religion and science, and evolution in particular. Let's have an evolution and religion blog-a-thon! Just post something well-informed about something connected with religion and evolution on at least once during the designated weekend, February 8-10, 2008.
Please participate, and spread the word!
Please participate, and spread the word!
Primary Alliance Group
For those readers of this blog who have come looking for information about Sterling Who's Who, the organization has changed its name to Primary Alliance Group. Nothing else about the web site seems to have changed (even the web site address is the same).
Welcome Back Vista!
Having struggled in vain to get Windows XP to work on my computer (with an nVidia GeForce motherboard and graphics card), and finding indications from others that the blue screen of death (BSOD for those who experience it so often they need an abbreviation) is par for the course when the two are combined, I have returned to Vista. My hesitation to do so was not simply because of issues experienced previously (my "black screen after login" post continues to get a remarkable number of hits each day from all over the world) but also out of a desire to avoid a complete reformatting of my hard drive until all other options had been explored. Fortunately I did not lose much in the experience, and whatever I did last time to cause the black screen after login, apparently I haven't done it yet!
In other news, in last week's blogospheric activity, the following are worth noting:
How to win any argument (HT Chris Tilling)
Pharyngula points to a cartoon that clearly shows that the opponents of science have no idea what scientists' lives are like or why they do what they do.
IO9 has a post on the dumbest space gods in science fiction, which I have yet to give the careful read it deserves from someone fascinated by the intersection of religion and sci-fi.
In other news, in last week's blogospheric activity, the following are worth noting:
How to win any argument (HT Chris Tilling)
Pharyngula points to a cartoon that clearly shows that the opponents of science have no idea what scientists' lives are like or why they do what they do.
IO9 has a post on the dumbest space gods in science fiction, which I have yet to give the careful read it deserves from someone fascinated by the intersection of religion and sci-fi.
Friday, January 25, 2008
Statement of Faith for Biblical Literalists
A student who was making a presentation to my class on the Bible today had discovered a page I created a while back, called a Statement of Faith for Biblical Literalists. I am simply reproducing it here, for those readers who may not have seen it:
ARTICLE I: One day = six days
Genesis 1:1-2:3 says God completed the creation of the heavens and earth in six days. Genesis 2:4 speaks of the (single) day in which God made the earth and the heavens.
ARTICLE II: A circle has four corners
In Isaiah 40:22 the earth is said to be a circle. Elsewhere (e.g. Isaiah 11:12; Job 37:3; Revelation 7:1; 20:8), the Bible speaks of the 'four corners of the Earth'. Both are true, and both must be taken literally; ergo, a circle has four corners.
ARTICLE III: Before = after
In Genesis 1:24-26, God creates various animals and then human beings. According to Genesis 2:19, the order is the reverse.
ARTICLE IV: Large bodies of water are only found in one place, called 'seas'
In Genesis 1:9-10, God forms dry land by gathering the waters into one place, called 'seas'. On a historical reading, this makes perfect sense: the worldview of ancient Israel and her neighbors knew only of peoples and civilizations near to 'the sea' (i.e. the Mediterranean). From their perspective, and on the basis of what they knew of the world, the whole world was land with one large sea in the middle (the Mediterranean) and a few others nearby. But a literalist has to argue that all current maps of the Earth are wrong, since they show bodies of water in many places.
ARTICLE V: Water = waterlessness
In Genesis 1, God creates by taking the existing deep and causing the waters to gather in one place, so that dry land appears. In Genesis 2, the land is what exists, and since there is as yet no rain, there are no plants, although springs do cause some water to flow onto this barren desert.
ARTICLE VI: The sky is a big solid dome
Genesis 1:6-7 uses a Hebrew word for a solid dome (in the King James Version this is translated as 'firmament'). It is not simply the 'atmosphere' - that's not the word used! It is something solid enough to hold up the waters above. Rain falls, other passages tell us, when 'the windows of heaven are opened'. Of course, these could be beautiful metaphors, but if you insist that the Bible be interpreted literally, then that must apply to these parts of it too!
ARTICLE VII: And on the seventh article, this author rested...
The aforementioned 'articles of faith' are not intended to show that the creation accounts of the Bible are worthy of ridicule. On the contrary, I have a deep appreciation for them! I do think, however, that those who insist that they must be interpreted 'literally' (whatever that means) are imposing their own presuppositions on these texts in a way that is ridiculous. The result is that many get the impression that the texts themselves are ridiculous, whereas it is only the way they are being interpreted that is worthy of ridicule. Take for example the dilemma a literalist would face trying to reconcile Genesis 1:2-3 with 1 John 1:6. In one text, God is light, while in the other, God creates light. In one, there is no darkness in God at all, while in the Genesis passage, the Spirit of God and the darkness simultaneously co-exist on the face of the deep. Of course, the quick reply will be that 1 John 1:6 is clearly using metaphorical language. But what makes this obvious? Presumably the same common sense that leads most people to consider that a story that includes a talking snake is a myth or fable! We all bring assumptions to the text when we read it. Until a reader comes to understand that other people understand the text in different ways without intentionally twisting it to a conscious end, they will not realize how strange their own reading will seem to others starting from different presuppositions.
I sincerely hope that, by pointing out some aspects of these texts that are resistant to such literalistic and ahistorical readings, those reading this will be moved to attempt to reread these texts in more appropriate ways, ways sensitive to the context and details of the texts themselves. For more information, see my page on the creation stories in Genesis, and the many links from there.
Statement of Faith for Biblical Literalists
ARTICLE I: One day = six days
Genesis 1:1-2:3 says God completed the creation of the heavens and earth in six days. Genesis 2:4 speaks of the (single) day in which God made the earth and the heavens.
ARTICLE II: A circle has four corners
In Isaiah 40:22 the earth is said to be a circle. Elsewhere (e.g. Isaiah 11:12; Job 37:3; Revelation 7:1; 20:8), the Bible speaks of the 'four corners of the Earth'. Both are true, and both must be taken literally; ergo, a circle has four corners.
ARTICLE III: Before = after
In Genesis 1:24-26, God creates various animals and then human beings. According to Genesis 2:19, the order is the reverse.
ARTICLE IV: Large bodies of water are only found in one place, called 'seas'
In Genesis 1:9-10, God forms dry land by gathering the waters into one place, called 'seas'. On a historical reading, this makes perfect sense: the worldview of ancient Israel and her neighbors knew only of peoples and civilizations near to 'the sea' (i.e. the Mediterranean). From their perspective, and on the basis of what they knew of the world, the whole world was land with one large sea in the middle (the Mediterranean) and a few others nearby. But a literalist has to argue that all current maps of the Earth are wrong, since they show bodies of water in many places.
ARTICLE V: Water = waterlessness
In Genesis 1, God creates by taking the existing deep and causing the waters to gather in one place, so that dry land appears. In Genesis 2, the land is what exists, and since there is as yet no rain, there are no plants, although springs do cause some water to flow onto this barren desert.
ARTICLE VI: The sky is a big solid dome
Genesis 1:6-7 uses a Hebrew word for a solid dome (in the King James Version this is translated as 'firmament'). It is not simply the 'atmosphere' - that's not the word used! It is something solid enough to hold up the waters above. Rain falls, other passages tell us, when 'the windows of heaven are opened'. Of course, these could be beautiful metaphors, but if you insist that the Bible be interpreted literally, then that must apply to these parts of it too!
ARTICLE VII: And on the seventh article, this author rested...
The aforementioned 'articles of faith' are not intended to show that the creation accounts of the Bible are worthy of ridicule. On the contrary, I have a deep appreciation for them! I do think, however, that those who insist that they must be interpreted 'literally' (whatever that means) are imposing their own presuppositions on these texts in a way that is ridiculous. The result is that many get the impression that the texts themselves are ridiculous, whereas it is only the way they are being interpreted that is worthy of ridicule. Take for example the dilemma a literalist would face trying to reconcile Genesis 1:2-3 with 1 John 1:6. In one text, God is light, while in the other, God creates light. In one, there is no darkness in God at all, while in the Genesis passage, the Spirit of God and the darkness simultaneously co-exist on the face of the deep. Of course, the quick reply will be that 1 John 1:6 is clearly using metaphorical language. But what makes this obvious? Presumably the same common sense that leads most people to consider that a story that includes a talking snake is a myth or fable! We all bring assumptions to the text when we read it. Until a reader comes to understand that other people understand the text in different ways without intentionally twisting it to a conscious end, they will not realize how strange their own reading will seem to others starting from different presuppositions.
I sincerely hope that, by pointing out some aspects of these texts that are resistant to such literalistic and ahistorical readings, those reading this will be moved to attempt to reread these texts in more appropriate ways, ways sensitive to the context and details of the texts themselves. For more information, see my page on the creation stories in Genesis, and the many links from there.
Poor Mrs. Leah Cooper
Imagine this. A person you don't know writes to you from her hospital bed, calling you 'friend', and offers to transfer power of attorney over her bank account to you in order that you give the money to charity. All she asks for is your personal information and bank details.
What makes clear that this is a hoax and a scam? First, there is the obvious fact that a stranger is asking for your bank account details and other personal information. Then there is the fact that the individual allegedly spoke to her minister about it and yet is choosing to empower you rather than her minister to distribute the money.
Unlike most hoaxes, the e-mail address given (leahcooper@surfy.net) corresponds to the name of the person who is allegedly sending the e-mail from her hospital bed. I have a sinking feeling that people are going to fall for this. Don't be fooled!
Here's the text of the e-mail:
Dear Friend
How are you? May God blessed you amen.
I am Mrs. Leah Cooper, I am 84 years old from U.S.A, and I am suffering from a long time cancer of the Lungs which also affected my brain, from all indication my conditions is really deteriorating. According to my doctors they have advised me that I may not live for the next two months, this is because the cancer stage has gotten to a very bad stage.
I was brought up from a motherless babies home, was married to my late husband for twenty years and we lived in London until my husband died in a fatal motor accident in London. Since his death I decided not to re-marry, I sold all my inherited belongings and deposited all the money with a bank in London. Presently, this money is still with the bank and I have not operated the account for long now due to my illness.
Presently, I'm with my laptop in Hospital, where I have been under going treatment for cancer of the lungs for over one year.
Recently, my doctors told me that I have only a few months to live so I quickly called up a pastor to give me positive thinking on this solution, He ministered to me to share my wealth to motherless baby/orphanage homes/people that need money for survivor. It is my last wish to see that some percentage (%) is distributed among the charity organizations, the poor and the motherless babies? home where I come from and some percentage (%) is for devoted individual that will utilize this money the way I wish.
I took this decision, because my time will soon be up and I do not want the bank to inherit the money if I eventually die.
As soon as I receive your reply I will issue you a letter of authority through my attorney which will empower you as the new beneficiary of my fund so far that you will give me assurance that you will do my wish. Meanwhile, furnish me with your particulars as follows:
1. Your full name
2. Your house or company address
3. Your occupation and Age
4. Your status
5. Your full Banking details where the fund will be transferred to you
I shall wait your reply.
Mrs. Leah Cooper
What makes clear that this is a hoax and a scam? First, there is the obvious fact that a stranger is asking for your bank account details and other personal information. Then there is the fact that the individual allegedly spoke to her minister about it and yet is choosing to empower you rather than her minister to distribute the money.
Unlike most hoaxes, the e-mail address given (leahcooper@surfy.net) corresponds to the name of the person who is allegedly sending the e-mail from her hospital bed. I have a sinking feeling that people are going to fall for this. Don't be fooled!
Here's the text of the e-mail:
Dear Friend
How are you? May God blessed you amen.
I am Mrs. Leah Cooper, I am 84 years old from U.S.A, and I am suffering from a long time cancer of the Lungs which also affected my brain, from all indication my conditions is really deteriorating. According to my doctors they have advised me that I may not live for the next two months, this is because the cancer stage has gotten to a very bad stage.
I was brought up from a motherless babies home, was married to my late husband for twenty years and we lived in London until my husband died in a fatal motor accident in London. Since his death I decided not to re-marry, I sold all my inherited belongings and deposited all the money with a bank in London. Presently, this money is still with the bank and I have not operated the account for long now due to my illness.
Presently, I'm with my laptop in Hospital, where I have been under going treatment for cancer of the lungs for over one year.
Recently, my doctors told me that I have only a few months to live so I quickly called up a pastor to give me positive thinking on this solution, He ministered to me to share my wealth to motherless baby/orphanage homes/people that need money for survivor. It is my last wish to see that some percentage (%) is distributed among the charity organizations, the poor and the motherless babies? home where I come from and some percentage (%) is for devoted individual that will utilize this money the way I wish.
I took this decision, because my time will soon be up and I do not want the bank to inherit the money if I eventually die.
As soon as I receive your reply I will issue you a letter of authority through my attorney which will empower you as the new beneficiary of my fund so far that you will give me assurance that you will do my wish. Meanwhile, furnish me with your particulars as follows:
1. Your full name
2. Your house or company address
3. Your occupation and Age
4. Your status
5. Your full Banking details where the fund will be transferred to you
I shall wait your reply.
Mrs. Leah Cooper
The Lengths To Which Some Will Go
In a comment on my recent post about the flat-earth cosmology assumed by the author of the Gospel of Matthew, one reader of this blog suggested that there is a mountain from which one can see all the kingdoms of the earth - on the moon! That, it is presumed, is where Satan took Jesus in the story in Matthew 4. Apparently for this individual, no lengths are too great to go to in order to defend his presuppositions from the evidence of the Bible itself. It is perfectly fine to sacrifice Jesus' humanity, or to have Satan provide him with a rocket ship and oxygen - or does this perhaps explain the reference to Jesus having already "gone up to heaven" in John 3:13? It is OK to posit that Matthew had a telescope and knew about mountains on the moon, and then this technology and the resulting knowledge was lost until the time of Galileo, when the idea that the moon's surface was "imperfect" like the Earth's caused quite a stir. The most painfully ironic part is of course that the individual who is going to these lengths to avoid the plain sense of the Bible presumably considers himself a "Bible-believing Christian".
As a Christian who is a vocal advocate of "Biblical errancy", I'm in it for one reason alone: the honesty. I spent a long time coming up with creative "solutions" to problems of my own making, based on my as yet unexamined presuppositions about the Bible. Those who engage in such arguments are not stupid - on the contrary, one has to be quite astute to come up with clever harmonizations and explanations to avoid the obvious meaning when the obvious meaning is wrong. This, however, should make anyone who knows even the first thing about Christianity suspicious. A classic emphasis of the Christian faith is that it is not something only the intelligent can adhere to. Yet one needs to be able to do intellectual somersaults in order to maintain Biblical inerrancy. A child-like faith, on the other hand, is not one that simply accepts everything - those who think it means that have presumably forgotten what it was like to be children. On the contrary, a child-like faith will be simple and honest, and blurt out that the emperor has no clothes on when all the adult adherents of Biblical inerrancy, or imperial clothedness, are quietly persisting in denial.
Before ending this post, I'd like to thank the site Cursor for picking up on my post about the peanut butter and banana arguments (which, for those who are unfamiliar, is yet another group of "arguments" by the anti-evolutionists that could easily be mistaken for parodies of the sorts of arguments they use, were it not for the fact that their own spokespeople are clearly behind them. The parodies of these self-parodies, including my favorite - the pineapple argument - are well worth watching for the laughs that will inevitably ensue). Thanks for sending hundreds more visitors my way!
Finally, those following the discussions of the Talpiot tomb mentioned in my last post will want to read the further contributions by Joe Zias, James Tabor and Princeton Theological Seminary.
As a Christian who is a vocal advocate of "Biblical errancy", I'm in it for one reason alone: the honesty. I spent a long time coming up with creative "solutions" to problems of my own making, based on my as yet unexamined presuppositions about the Bible. Those who engage in such arguments are not stupid - on the contrary, one has to be quite astute to come up with clever harmonizations and explanations to avoid the obvious meaning when the obvious meaning is wrong. This, however, should make anyone who knows even the first thing about Christianity suspicious. A classic emphasis of the Christian faith is that it is not something only the intelligent can adhere to. Yet one needs to be able to do intellectual somersaults in order to maintain Biblical inerrancy. A child-like faith, on the other hand, is not one that simply accepts everything - those who think it means that have presumably forgotten what it was like to be children. On the contrary, a child-like faith will be simple and honest, and blurt out that the emperor has no clothes on when all the adult adherents of Biblical inerrancy, or imperial clothedness, are quietly persisting in denial.
Before ending this post, I'd like to thank the site Cursor for picking up on my post about the peanut butter and banana arguments (which, for those who are unfamiliar, is yet another group of "arguments" by the anti-evolutionists that could easily be mistaken for parodies of the sorts of arguments they use, were it not for the fact that their own spokespeople are clearly behind them. The parodies of these self-parodies, including my favorite - the pineapple argument - are well worth watching for the laughs that will inevitably ensue). Thanks for sending hundreds more visitors my way!
Finally, those following the discussions of the Talpiot tomb mentioned in my last post will want to read the further contributions by Joe Zias, James Tabor and Princeton Theological Seminary.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Around the Blogosphere
It has been a while since I've shared links to other blogs, and there have been a number that I've considered particularly significant. Top of the list is Julie Bogart's entry The Aberration about modern fundamentalist Christianity as a rather odd and aberrant "blip" far from the mainstream of historic Christianity. If you read only one link from this page, let it be that one.
Joel Willitts has a post at Euangelion about the Antioch incident in Galatians 2, which is what my class on Paul and the Early Church focused on today, and in particular the question of how the visits Paul makes to Jerusalem which are mentioned in that letter relate to information in Acts.
A number of science blogs have mentioned the list of "dissenters from Darwinism". At a whopping 700 names, consisting mostly of people whose credentials have nothing to do with biology, it pales next to the list of dissenters from dissent from Darwinism - and also next to the list of scientists named Steve who are persuaded by the evidence for Darwinian evolution.
Jim West, April DeConick, Marc Goodacre and Stephen Pfann are among those scholars who have been covering the recent conference on the Talpiot tomb. Most recently, the Biblical Archaeological Review has chimed in.
R. T. Jones mistook me for Alister McGrath.
I also recently discovered io9, a great source for science fiction and unusual science news.
Church of the Masses has discovered Battlestar Galactica. (HT Carmen Andres).
Joel Willitts has a post at Euangelion about the Antioch incident in Galatians 2, which is what my class on Paul and the Early Church focused on today, and in particular the question of how the visits Paul makes to Jerusalem which are mentioned in that letter relate to information in Acts.
A number of science blogs have mentioned the list of "dissenters from Darwinism". At a whopping 700 names, consisting mostly of people whose credentials have nothing to do with biology, it pales next to the list of dissenters from dissent from Darwinism - and also next to the list of scientists named Steve who are persuaded by the evidence for Darwinian evolution.
Jim West, April DeConick, Marc Goodacre and Stephen Pfann are among those scholars who have been covering the recent conference on the Talpiot tomb. Most recently, the Biblical Archaeological Review has chimed in.
R. T. Jones mistook me for Alister McGrath.
I also recently discovered io9, a great source for science fiction and unusual science news.
Church of the Masses has discovered Battlestar Galactica. (HT Carmen Andres).
News Flash: Action Figure Found On Mars
There is an interesting panorama photo taken by the Spirit lander on Mars that features what looks like a human or humanoid figure. What has not been noted is the scale of the object, which does not appear to be that far from the lander, and thus is presumably not that big. Be that as it may, this could be the first evidence that someone, at some point in time, played with action figures on Mars. My guess is that it will turn out that this is another optical illusion, and perhaps what appears to be the hand and head may not be part of the same rock/structure at all. There has nonetheless been exciting news about plausible habitats for life on Mars. That life, however, is likely to be smaller even than action figures.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Hermaphrodite Sex Are Few And Unspectacular
Just some keyword tidbits. The Vista black screen issue still draws more visitors than anything else (suggesting that the latest Windows OS is undergoing meltdown and it may not be long before a mass exodus to Linux and/or Mac occurs). But a close second is hermaphrodite sex. I can't help wondering whether there are lots of people out there interested in this subject...and why. Apparently a search for the exact phrase "are few and unspectacular" also takes one to my blog, and more importantly to an entry on the subject of the conference paper I'll be presenting at the Midwest SBL meeting, i.e. the missing ending of Mark's Gospel.
Also high in the rankings are "sarah connor know thyself" and "how to be a good christian".
Welcome, visitors, however you found your way here! I hope you enjoy your visit!
Also high in the rankings are "sarah connor know thyself" and "how to be a good christian".
Welcome, visitors, however you found your way here! I hope you enjoy your visit!
Quote of the Day (Phillip Johnson)
"I also don’t think that there is really a theory of intelligent design at the present time to propose as a comparable alternative to the Darwinian theory, which is, whatever errors it might contain, a fully worked out scheme. There is no intelligent design theory that’s comparable. Working out a positive theory is the job of the scientific people that we have affiliated with the movement. Some of them are quite convinced that it’s doable, but that’s for them to prove…No product is ready for competition in the educational world" (Phillip Johnson, interview quoted in Berkeley Science Review)
HT The Panda's Thumb
A Mountain From Which To Survey All The Kingdoms of the Earth
Today one of my students was astute enough to notice the worldview implied in Matthew 4:8, with its reference to a high mountain from which it was possible to view all the kingdoms of the world. Matthew seems to have thought the earth was flat, even though by his time the Greeks had made some progress in detecting the spherical form of the earth. The idea of multiple heavens above and around the earth is found in Paul's writings, and is more naturally a part of the Ptolemaic cosmology than the earlier three-tiered view of the universe that Matthew seems to assume here. Is there any mountain from which one can see the antipodes? Is the evidence from Matthew and Paul (perhaps adding Revelation into the mix as well) enough to show that there were different cosmologies among the earliest Christians?
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Salvation By Gullibility?
Where does an openness to 'taking things on faith' become gullibility? Does God view us favorably when we show we are open to falling for claims that do not have evidentiary support? If so, why would a willingness to believe without evidence that an individual was raised from the dead 2,000 years ago be more positive than a willingness to believe that someone in Nigeria wants to transfer millions of dollars into your account? To state that one of the claims is "true" doesn't help, unless we are in fact dealing with a question that can be settled, or at least supported, by relevant evidence and the examination and evaluation thereof.
In fact, Paul (the 'apostle of faith') doesn't seem to have ever expected people to become Christians by making a 'leap of faith' in the absence of evidence. On the contrary, he refers to the evidence of the Spirit at work in and/or among the Thessalonians, the Galatians, and the other churches he writes to.
I wonder if the idea that one must make a blind leap of faith does not have at least as much to do with a discomfort with the evidence of spiritual gifts and experiences, on the part of the religious and the secular alike, as with a shift in the meaning of the English word faith. In the ancient world, as for many today, religious claims were evaluated by the miraculous power to heal body and soul. Apart from among Pentecostals and charismatics, such claims and experiences are quite far from the experience and even the thinking of most Christians today, in spite of the importance they seem to have had in early Christianity.
Yet it is worth asking theoretically, even if one hasn't been driven to ask such questions by one's own experiences or theological reflections, whether faith in God based on what God has done or can do for you is necessarily a wholesome, positive sort of faith. What if it turned out that God doesn't do anything for anyone specifically - the weather on your wedding day just happened to be good, and the person you love who recovered from an illness just happened to do so? What if it turns out that God is not the answer to our individual problems, but simply the meaning of our existence? How many of those who call themselves Christians would worship such a God for that reason alone, expecting nothing in return? Would willingness or unwillingness to worship such a God be a good thing?
In fact, Paul (the 'apostle of faith') doesn't seem to have ever expected people to become Christians by making a 'leap of faith' in the absence of evidence. On the contrary, he refers to the evidence of the Spirit at work in and/or among the Thessalonians, the Galatians, and the other churches he writes to.
I wonder if the idea that one must make a blind leap of faith does not have at least as much to do with a discomfort with the evidence of spiritual gifts and experiences, on the part of the religious and the secular alike, as with a shift in the meaning of the English word faith. In the ancient world, as for many today, religious claims were evaluated by the miraculous power to heal body and soul. Apart from among Pentecostals and charismatics, such claims and experiences are quite far from the experience and even the thinking of most Christians today, in spite of the importance they seem to have had in early Christianity.
Yet it is worth asking theoretically, even if one hasn't been driven to ask such questions by one's own experiences or theological reflections, whether faith in God based on what God has done or can do for you is necessarily a wholesome, positive sort of faith. What if it turned out that God doesn't do anything for anyone specifically - the weather on your wedding day just happened to be good, and the person you love who recovered from an illness just happened to do so? What if it turns out that God is not the answer to our individual problems, but simply the meaning of our existence? How many of those who call themselves Christians would worship such a God for that reason alone, expecting nothing in return? Would willingness or unwillingness to worship such a God be a good thing?
Transferring $27 Million for Mutual Benefits
Just a couple of more spam hoaxes to share, in the hope that I may spare some gullible little old lady some grief as a result of falling for one of these attempts to get sensitive personal information from people. Personally, anyone who believes that a message from a legitimate institution, whether of government or of finance, would be entitled (in all capital letters) "KINDLY GET BACK WITH THE BANK IMMEDIATELY!!!!", needs to learn their lesson the hard way. So does anyone who thinks a 'Senate President' named David Mark would write to them about an official matter from the e-mail address "mailhenry@mail2hail.com". But just to be clear, the two messages I've included below are hoaxes and if you send personal information to these individuals or anyone else asking you to do so, you will end up losing money one way or another. Don't do it!
FROM:THE CHAIRMAN, CONTRACT REVIEW PANEL, FEDERAL MINISTRY OF WORKS AND HOUSING FEDERAL SECRETARIAT OFFICE COMPLEX F.C.T ABUJA. FUND TRANSFER/INVESTMENT Dear Sir/Ma, First, I must solicit your strictest confidence in this transaction,this isby virtue of it's nature as being utterly confidential and top secret. Studythis portion carefully and advice categorically, if you will be able tohandle, as I might not want to be exposed of the information considering thesource and reputation of my name I am the Director of project and the newlyappointed chairman, contract reviewing committee(CRC) of the Federal ministryof Works and Housing(FMW&H)in Abuja,Nigeria. I am seeking your assistance toenable transfer the sum of US $27,000,000.00 into your account for mutualbenefits.This money came about as a result of a contract executed on behalf ofmy Ministry,the (Federal Ministry of Works and Housing).This contract wasofficially assigned to be awarded and executed by two foreign contractors atthe tune of US$90,500,000.00,but in the course of our negotiation, webargained with only one foreign contractor, a Bulgarian firm which nowexecuted the contract at the cost of US$63,500,000.00. Thus leaving theremaining US$27M to our (members of the CRP ) benefits unknown to thecontractor and any other person in my Ministry.This contract has beensatisfactorily executed and inspected as the Bulgarian firm is presentlysecuring his payment from my Ministry. It is however to this effect that Iseek your maximum assistance and approval to present your company namealongside with the Bulgarian contractor as the second foreign contractor toenable me transfer the difference(US$27M)into your account for furtherinvestment depending on your advice.On actualization of the transaction, thefunds will be shared thus:1. 25% of the money go to you for acting as the beneficiary of the funds. 2. 10% for reimbursement to both parties for incidental expenses that may beincurred in the course of the transaction for insurance, phone bills,documentation etc.3. 65% for me and my partners,which we intend to commence an importationbusiness with you. All logistics are in place and all modalities worked outfor the smooth conclusion of the transaction within ten to fourteen days ofcommencement after receipt of the following information;1.Your name and address, 2.Company's name and address if any, 3.Your telephoneand fax numbers.When we receive the above information from you by e-mail, we shall apply andobtain the necessary payment approvals from the relevant authorities includingthe Federal Ministry of Finance (F.M.F)which shall allocate you or yourcompany foreign exchange cover on the US$27 million, then you or your companyshall be officially regarded as the beneficiary of the funds.When the money istransferred to your account, upon confirmation from you that the fund has beencredited into your Nominated Bank Account,my colleagues (2) and I will come over to your country for the sharing of the fund tocommence our Importation Business.Lets trust that absolute confidentiality beour watchword throughout this business transaction. Your line of business doesnot matter.However, your prompt reply will enable us to expedite action byforwarding the information (your bank particulars) to the authority concernedfor immediate processing of the document/remittance.If you are able to handle this, do reply back.Thanks and best regards.ELDER GODWILL OSI. TEL: +2348024125990
FROM THE DESK OF SENATOR DAVID MARKTHE SENATE PRESIDENT FEDRAL REPUBLICOF NIGERIA HEAD OFFICE ABUJA NIGERIAAttn: My Honorable Contractor,I, The Senate President ,Federal Republic of Nigeria ,David Mark (GCFR) in Conjunction with the EFCC Director , MallamNuhuRibadu,held a meeting last week concerning contract payment , bothforeign and local contractors and some inheritance funds.On going through contractors file yesterday, we discovered that yourfile was dumped untreated, so at this juncture, we apologize for thedelay of your contract payment and please stop communicating with anyoffice now and attention to the appointed office below for you toreceive your payment accordingly.However,I wish to inform you now that your outstanding contractpayment is ($10,000,000.00 Ten Million dollars).Now you?re new Payment Reference No.-35460021, Allocation No: 674632Password No: 339331 , Pin Code No: 55674 and your Certificate ofMerit Payment No : 103 , CBN Released Code No: 0763; Immediate Telexconfirmation No: -1114433 ; Secret Code No: XXTN013, Having receivedthese vital payment number , therefore You are qualified now toreceived and confirm Your payment with the Federal Government ofNigeria immediately within the next week.Now you are hereby directed to contact our correspondent bank, theDirector of Foreign Operations Department Dr james obi immediately sothat he will pay you and fax you the payment Copy Slip and also youshould reconfirm your Banking Details, Secret Code No: which is (XXTN013), this is to avoid mistake while transferring your overduecontract payment to you today .Contact Person:Name: Dr.James Obi.(the Director of Foreign Operations Department)Bank Name:- Central Bank Of NigeriaEmail Address: (jamesobi003@outgun.com)Tel: +234-802-527-1099Contact him now and inform him that you received a message from theSenate President Federal Republic Of Nigeria, Instructing you tocontact him for immediate release of your contract payment andforward your Details to his office to avoid transfer mistake.NOTE: We have mounted our security network to monitor every in-comingcalls and emails, if we still find out that you are still dealingwith all those fraudsters that have been frustrating you for years, Ishall stop and cancel your payment immediately,Get in touch with me as soon as you contact Dr.James Obi.Best RegardsDavid Mark (Senate President )Federal Republic Nigeria
________________________
FROM:THE CHAIRMAN, CONTRACT REVIEW PANEL, FEDERAL MINISTRY OF WORKS AND HOUSING FEDERAL SECRETARIAT OFFICE COMPLEX F.C.T ABUJA. FUND TRANSFER/INVESTMENT Dear Sir/Ma, First, I must solicit your strictest confidence in this transaction,this isby virtue of it's nature as being utterly confidential and top secret. Studythis portion carefully and advice categorically, if you will be able tohandle, as I might not want to be exposed of the information considering thesource and reputation of my name I am the Director of project and the newlyappointed chairman, contract reviewing committee(CRC) of the Federal ministryof Works and Housing(FMW&H)in Abuja,Nigeria. I am seeking your assistance toenable transfer the sum of US $27,000,000.00 into your account for mutualbenefits.This money came about as a result of a contract executed on behalf ofmy Ministry,the (Federal Ministry of Works and Housing).This contract wasofficially assigned to be awarded and executed by two foreign contractors atthe tune of US$90,500,000.00,but in the course of our negotiation, webargained with only one foreign contractor, a Bulgarian firm which nowexecuted the contract at the cost of US$63,500,000.00. Thus leaving theremaining US$27M to our (members of the CRP ) benefits unknown to thecontractor and any other person in my Ministry.This contract has beensatisfactorily executed and inspected as the Bulgarian firm is presentlysecuring his payment from my Ministry. It is however to this effect that Iseek your maximum assistance and approval to present your company namealongside with the Bulgarian contractor as the second foreign contractor toenable me transfer the difference(US$27M)into your account for furtherinvestment depending on your advice.On actualization of the transaction, thefunds will be shared thus:1. 25% of the money go to you for acting as the beneficiary of the funds. 2. 10% for reimbursement to both parties for incidental expenses that may beincurred in the course of the transaction for insurance, phone bills,documentation etc.3. 65% for me and my partners,which we intend to commence an importationbusiness with you. All logistics are in place and all modalities worked outfor the smooth conclusion of the transaction within ten to fourteen days ofcommencement after receipt of the following information;1.Your name and address, 2.Company's name and address if any, 3.Your telephoneand fax numbers.When we receive the above information from you by e-mail, we shall apply andobtain the necessary payment approvals from the relevant authorities includingthe Federal Ministry of Finance (F.M.F)which shall allocate you or yourcompany foreign exchange cover on the US$27 million, then you or your companyshall be officially regarded as the beneficiary of the funds.When the money istransferred to your account, upon confirmation from you that the fund has beencredited into your Nominated Bank Account,my colleagues (2) and I will come over to your country for the sharing of the fund tocommence our Importation Business.Lets trust that absolute confidentiality beour watchword throughout this business transaction. Your line of business doesnot matter.However, your prompt reply will enable us to expedite action byforwarding the information (your bank particulars) to the authority concernedfor immediate processing of the document/remittance.If you are able to handle this, do reply back.Thanks and best regards.ELDER GODWILL OSI. TEL: +2348024125990
________________________
FROM THE DESK OF SENATOR DAVID MARKTHE SENATE PRESIDENT FEDRAL REPUBLICOF NIGERIA HEAD OFFICE ABUJA NIGERIAAttn: My Honorable Contractor,I, The Senate President ,Federal Republic of Nigeria ,David Mark (GCFR) in Conjunction with the EFCC Director , MallamNuhuRibadu,held a meeting last week concerning contract payment , bothforeign and local contractors and some inheritance funds.On going through contractors file yesterday, we discovered that yourfile was dumped untreated, so at this juncture, we apologize for thedelay of your contract payment and please stop communicating with anyoffice now and attention to the appointed office below for you toreceive your payment accordingly.However,I wish to inform you now that your outstanding contractpayment is ($10,000,000.00 Ten Million dollars).Now you?re new Payment Reference No.-35460021, Allocation No: 674632Password No: 339331 , Pin Code No: 55674 and your Certificate ofMerit Payment No : 103 , CBN Released Code No: 0763; Immediate Telexconfirmation No: -1114433 ; Secret Code No: XXTN013, Having receivedthese vital payment number , therefore You are qualified now toreceived and confirm Your payment with the Federal Government ofNigeria immediately within the next week.Now you are hereby directed to contact our correspondent bank, theDirector of Foreign Operations Department Dr james obi immediately sothat he will pay you and fax you the payment Copy Slip and also youshould reconfirm your Banking Details, Secret Code No: which is (XXTN013), this is to avoid mistake while transferring your overduecontract payment to you today .Contact Person:Name: Dr.James Obi.(the Director of Foreign Operations Department)Bank Name:- Central Bank Of NigeriaEmail Address: (jamesobi003@outgun.com)Tel: +234-802-527-1099Contact him now and inform him that you received a message from theSenate President Federal Republic Of Nigeria, Instructing you tocontact him for immediate release of your contract payment andforward your Details to his office to avoid transfer mistake.NOTE: We have mounted our security network to monitor every in-comingcalls and emails, if we still find out that you are still dealingwith all those fraudsters that have been frustrating you for years, Ishall stop and cancel your payment immediately,Get in touch with me as soon as you contact Dr.James Obi.Best RegardsDavid Mark (Senate President )Federal Republic Nigeria
Know Thyself: The Sarah Connor Chronicles
It was only a few days before the most recent episode of Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles that I managed to watch the two-part two-hour premiere. So far, I like the show, which has the eerie menacing sliding sound from the movies when a terminator is around, as well as some philosophical reflections on the part of the main character - who is, interestingly enough, Sarah Connor rather than her son. It is essentially a story focused on Mary rather than Jesus, if one wanted to make an analogy.
At one point Sarah Connor, like Neo in the Matrix, finds herself thinking about the inscription above the Oracle of Delphi, "Know Thyself". Her version is a pessimistic postmodern one, which continues "for what else is there to know?" This question insightfully tracks how the modern became the postmodern - we are still bound by Descartes' brute fact of our own existence, but without the same hope for objectivity that the era of the Enlightenment offered. Yet a little reflection shows that a subjectivized "know thyself" does not fare much better, given our tendency towards self deception. Knowing oneself is not easier or more straightforward than knowing a world that exists outside ourselves. Indeed, following this line of thought gives me hope, since it is the very existence of challenges to my view of the world and of myself that point to transcendence - not necessarily transcendence in a natural world beyond me, but at the very least transcendent parts of the self, which are beyond the immediate horizon of my day-to-day experience of selfhood.
I hope the show will further explore the sage advice of the doctor with whom Sarah speaks in the most recent episode. "We can't predict. We can only try and prevent." The same future seems to keep coming towards the present in the Terminator series, in spite of the efforts of many to change it. What is viewed as impending doom for humanity is the singularity, when artificial intelligence takes off and is no longer under our control.
The root fear behind the storyline is the fear of all thinking parents. We want to to instill goodness and virtue in our children, and know that if we don't get the balance right, they will be completely lacking in self control or will harbor resentment and rebel against us. In either scenario, the future gets worse rather than better. Now imagine that our children are borderline omnipotent, and it is clear why the potential of our mechanical offspring terrifies us so. We don't know how to be good parents, and even when we do, there is no magic formula that guarantees the outcome.
The Sarah Connor Chronicles will hopefully explore this theme further, since it is focused on a parent trying to raise a child to be a hero, a leader, a savior for humanity. If she can figure that out, and we can apply the same wisdom to our raising of the artificial intelligences we create, then there is reason to look to the future with hope and not merely dread.
At one point Sarah Connor, like Neo in the Matrix, finds herself thinking about the inscription above the Oracle of Delphi, "Know Thyself". Her version is a pessimistic postmodern one, which continues "for what else is there to know?" This question insightfully tracks how the modern became the postmodern - we are still bound by Descartes' brute fact of our own existence, but without the same hope for objectivity that the era of the Enlightenment offered. Yet a little reflection shows that a subjectivized "know thyself" does not fare much better, given our tendency towards self deception. Knowing oneself is not easier or more straightforward than knowing a world that exists outside ourselves. Indeed, following this line of thought gives me hope, since it is the very existence of challenges to my view of the world and of myself that point to transcendence - not necessarily transcendence in a natural world beyond me, but at the very least transcendent parts of the self, which are beyond the immediate horizon of my day-to-day experience of selfhood.
I hope the show will further explore the sage advice of the doctor with whom Sarah speaks in the most recent episode. "We can't predict. We can only try and prevent." The same future seems to keep coming towards the present in the Terminator series, in spite of the efforts of many to change it. What is viewed as impending doom for humanity is the singularity, when artificial intelligence takes off and is no longer under our control.
The root fear behind the storyline is the fear of all thinking parents. We want to to instill goodness and virtue in our children, and know that if we don't get the balance right, they will be completely lacking in self control or will harbor resentment and rebel against us. In either scenario, the future gets worse rather than better. Now imagine that our children are borderline omnipotent, and it is clear why the potential of our mechanical offspring terrifies us so. We don't know how to be good parents, and even when we do, there is no magic formula that guarantees the outcome.
The Sarah Connor Chronicles will hopefully explore this theme further, since it is focused on a parent trying to raise a child to be a hero, a leader, a savior for humanity. If she can figure that out, and we can apply the same wisdom to our raising of the artificial intelligences we create, then there is reason to look to the future with hope and not merely dread.
Friday, January 18, 2008
Two Different Cultures, In The Same Space, Separated By Ten Minutes
I am once again teaching two very different groups of students. The class is the same: RL 202 The Bible. One is from 10-10:50am and one is from11-11:50am. Both are in the same room, and have the same syllabus.
The biggest difference between them? The worldview that the majority in each group seems to share. The reading for today's class was the first three chapters of Marcus Borg's Reading the Bible Again For the First Time: Taking the Bible Seriously But Not Literally.
In both classes the reading served as a good discussion starter, but one class found Borg's own views helpful while the other's reaction was much less positive.
Here's one of the illustrations I use to try go help students understand why historians feel unable to reach positive conclusions about miracle stories. I ask them to imagine that someone in their dorm is pregnant and claims that there is no other human parent. (I assume the dorm in question is not a male-only dorm; otherwise, most of us would accept that something rather miraculous has occurred!). What evidence would they require in order to be persuaded that the individual in question was telling the truth? And if (as is inevitably the case) they don't find that there is any evidence that would allow them to feel certain a miracle had occurred even though today they might cross-examine witnesses or do DNA testing, then how could any historian conclude that the most likely reason we have miracle stories from 2,000 years ago is that a miracle actually occurred?
In one class, if I simply stated that the miracle stories in the Bible were true, there would be responses of acceptance but also of skepticism. In the other, it is unlikely that anyone would bat an eyelid. There is what I can only call a culture of credulity. This is not the same thing as faith. Surely there is nothing intrinsically meritorious about accepting astounding claims on the basis of inadequate evidence.
I suppose the big question is how to instill critical thinking in a postmodern generation that is already aware of the problems of claims to certainty, even those made by science and reason. How do we critique the modern, without abandoning all of the insights it has given us, and without falling back into superstition and gullibility?
The biggest difference between them? The worldview that the majority in each group seems to share. The reading for today's class was the first three chapters of Marcus Borg's Reading the Bible Again For the First Time: Taking the Bible Seriously But Not Literally.
In both classes the reading served as a good discussion starter, but one class found Borg's own views helpful while the other's reaction was much less positive.Here's one of the illustrations I use to try go help students understand why historians feel unable to reach positive conclusions about miracle stories. I ask them to imagine that someone in their dorm is pregnant and claims that there is no other human parent. (I assume the dorm in question is not a male-only dorm; otherwise, most of us would accept that something rather miraculous has occurred!). What evidence would they require in order to be persuaded that the individual in question was telling the truth? And if (as is inevitably the case) they don't find that there is any evidence that would allow them to feel certain a miracle had occurred even though today they might cross-examine witnesses or do DNA testing, then how could any historian conclude that the most likely reason we have miracle stories from 2,000 years ago is that a miracle actually occurred?
In one class, if I simply stated that the miracle stories in the Bible were true, there would be responses of acceptance but also of skepticism. In the other, it is unlikely that anyone would bat an eyelid. There is what I can only call a culture of credulity. This is not the same thing as faith. Surely there is nothing intrinsically meritorious about accepting astounding claims on the basis of inadequate evidence.
I suppose the big question is how to instill critical thinking in a postmodern generation that is already aware of the problems of claims to certainty, even those made by science and reason. How do we critique the modern, without abandoning all of the insights it has given us, and without falling back into superstition and gullibility?
Photos from India
As the jet lag wears off, I will hopefully also soon find myself able to actually write about my trip too...
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Quote of the Day (Roland Boer)
"Fence-sitting is a precarious business; done for too long, it can lead to an injury in some vital part" (Roland Boer, Rescuing the Bible (Malden: Blackwell, 2007) p.79).
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Quote of the Day (Peter L. Berger)
"I have sometimes asked myself how a gynecologist could manage to have sexual intercourse; by the same token, one could ask how a New Testament scholar could be a Christian" (Peter L. Berger, Questions of Faith (Blackwell, 2004) p.54).
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Questions Of Faith
One of the books I took along to read on my recent trip to India was Peter Berger's recent Questions of Faith: A Skeptical Affirmation of Christianity
Alas, the book is a disappointment. It was not simply a result of reading Berger's book in India, where it is clear that Christianity is not simply something that can be taken for granted in the human realm. Berger is at least theoretically aware of this. The book is a disappointment because it is rambling and not altogether coherent in its outlook and argument (p.159). Perhaps I was expecting too much, but this lay theologian does not provide a coherent "sacred canopy" in the way his work in sociology led at least one reader to expect.
This is not to suggest that the book is not full of useful insights and thought-provoking quotes. But they do not form part of a coherent theological vision. Indeed, the only constant throughout the book is that Berger is offering a vision of Christianity that he finds interesting, and what is rejected is rejected on the same basis, namely that Berger finds this or that uninteresting. This scarcely seems to be an adequate basis for even a highly personal and idiosyncratic vision of Christianity (p.114).
The book is outlined according to the Apostle's Creed, and thus begins with faith. In some respects, his definitions are not unlike my own: "Faith is trust in the goodness of the world...Faith is to bet on the ultimate validity of joy" (p.6). Berger himself cannot claim a personal mystical experience, and thus although he discusses such experiences at length, he finds that they provide a basis for a generic religious outlook rather than a specifically Christian one. For Berger, it is the hunger for God, the fact that the divine silence is offensive, that points to God's existence.
His own outlook is shaped by Liberal Protestantism, which he helpfully reminds us to have been the result of a remarkable self-critical revolution in which Protestant theologians and scholars themselves took to examining their own beliefs and traditions critically. Berger defines himself as an "inclusivist", and is capable of showing genuine appreciation for other traditions. A reason he gives for rejecting Buddhism in the end is his conviction that the autonomous self which has rights is one of the key contributions of Western civilization, drawn from its Judeo-Christian heritage, and it is unclear that an illusory self can be argued to have "certain inalienable rights" (pp.26-29).
A particularly thought-provoking statement is that Bultmann was clearly wrong about what "modern man" simply cannot accept. The mythological view of the world is alive and well (p.62). Yet Berger himself rejects superstition (pp.82, 84), and so the point I took away from this is that I am not merely an inhabitant of a worldview in which one cannot be superstitious. I am an advocate not merely of the Christian faith but of rationality and critical thinking. Rationality is not a given, but something I cherish as a value and am committed to promoting. I am not sure whether Berger is even right that the supernatural has lost something of its taken-for-grantedness, since it is woven into the presuppositional fabric of the worldview of many in North America (p.99). Perhaps it is different in Western Europe. Berger himself makes assertions about what it is "impossible" to accept, apparently unaware that historical critical scholarship is no more widely taken for granted in our time than the post-scientific demythologized perspective of Bultmann (p.148). Critical scholarship too is not merely a given but something one must choose, be committed to, and advocate on the basis of its merits.
Berger's references to theologians and authors show that he is lagging seriously behind in keeping up with Biblical studies and theology. For instance, he shows no awareness even of Stendahl's famous piece on "Paul and the Introspective Consciousness of the West", much less more recent work on the "new perspective on Paul" (p.149).
In the end, Berger's primary conviction whereby everything is evaluated is a refusal to accept death as natural (pp.40, 163). For him, this is the be all and end all of everything, his key unargued and indefensible bedrock presupposition that simply must be accepted. It is the fact that history is a nightmare and the conviction that it ought not to be that drives him (pp.113-114). Yet there is no rationale other than personal preference for what Berger accepts as authoritative (such as Jesus' attitude towards death) and what he rejects as non-essential (such as the Jewish anthropology on which Jesus' view was based; see pp.167-168). The book does not live up to its title. It is not a skeptical affirmation of Christianity, but an emotional appeal regarding how one should view the world in response to the death of one's neighbor's child (p.174). I certainly agree that a theology that does not take such real-life phenomena seriously is of little use, but I am not persuaded that such phenomena can provide an adequate unifying center and/or foundation for the theological enterprise. Ultimately, Berger's attempt at a lay theology fails not because he gives the tragedies of life a key importance, but because he fails to provide a coherent vision and outlook on that basis, or on any other.
Monday, January 14, 2008
What Would Jane Austen Do?
What Would Jane Austen Do?
This may seem like an odd title for my first post after returning from India. But it is closely connected to my trip, and more specifically to the way a movie such as The Jane Austen Book Club can seem more appealing and interesting on a 16-hour flight than it might otherwise.
At one point in the movie, a character (who earlier had more of an academic approach to literary criticism) finds herself asking "What Would Jane Austen Do?" The question, of course, echoes another well-known question. As put in the movie, the question is the wrong one - it is not what Jane Austen the author would do, but what her characters did and "would do", that is the relevant subject, although presumably putting the question that way was felt to be too cumbersome.
Many assume that "What Would Jesus Do?" and other such questions depend on our ability to know what Jesus did, with a reasonable degree of historical certainty. But in fact, fictional characters regularly inspire us and challenge us to emulate them, or to change to avoid ending up where they have. And this provides some interesting opportunities for reflection on whether the obvious power of the story of Jesus to challenge us in positive ways is itself sufficient, in light of our various historical uncertainties and the limitations of historical method. If so, then Bultmann was right.
I took along a couple of books to read on the plane, and hope to say more about them in the near future: Roland Boer's Rescuing the Bible and Peter Berger's Questions Of Faith. I've also received two books for review which I'll be reading and blogging on in the not too distant future: Jorunn Jacobsen Buckley's The Great Stem Of Souls: Reconstructing Mandaean Origins and Deuteronomy In The New Testament edited by Steve Moyise and Maarten J. J. Menken. I'd like to thank Gorgias Press and T&T Clark (respectively) for providing me with copies of the books for review.
This may seem like an odd title for my first post after returning from India. But it is closely connected to my trip, and more specifically to the way a movie such as The Jane Austen Book Club can seem more appealing and interesting on a 16-hour flight than it might otherwise.
At one point in the movie, a character (who earlier had more of an academic approach to literary criticism) finds herself asking "What Would Jane Austen Do?" The question, of course, echoes another well-known question. As put in the movie, the question is the wrong one - it is not what Jane Austen the author would do, but what her characters did and "would do", that is the relevant subject, although presumably putting the question that way was felt to be too cumbersome.
Many assume that "What Would Jesus Do?" and other such questions depend on our ability to know what Jesus did, with a reasonable degree of historical certainty. But in fact, fictional characters regularly inspire us and challenge us to emulate them, or to change to avoid ending up where they have. And this provides some interesting opportunities for reflection on whether the obvious power of the story of Jesus to challenge us in positive ways is itself sufficient, in light of our various historical uncertainties and the limitations of historical method. If so, then Bultmann was right.
I took along a couple of books to read on the plane, and hope to say more about them in the near future: Roland Boer's Rescuing the Bible and Peter Berger's Questions Of Faith. I've also received two books for review which I'll be reading and blogging on in the not too distant future: Jorunn Jacobsen Buckley's The Great Stem Of Souls: Reconstructing Mandaean Origins and Deuteronomy In The New Testament edited by Steve Moyise and Maarten J. J. Menken. I'd like to thank Gorgias Press and T&T Clark (respectively) for providing me with copies of the books for review.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Back to Blogging
Hi everyone! I got back from my trip to India yesterday. Normal blogging (meaning blogging and usual, and not that I will be making changes to my 'usual abnormality') will resume soon!
Saturday, January 5, 2008
Blogging In Benares
I didn't want to promise I would manage to post anything while away, which is why I was so vague about my hiatus/infrequent blogging during this time. I am currently in India, and tried once to post while in Delhi, but encountered an error and lost the half a post I had written, and so this is the second chance I've had to post something, and hopefully this time it will work (if you are reading this, then it did!).
I'm currently in Varanasi, which I'm visiting for the first time. It is a remarkable place - it best to see the Ganges before reading about its state of pollution, since it is beautiful and doesn't smell bad the way rivers polluted with industrial waste do in Europe and America. We visited the golden temple, the most important temple to Shiva in Varanasi (supposedly off limits to foreigners) and also witnessed the Aarthi ceremony yesterday evening. It is interesting to reflect theologically on what I see here, since I inevitably do so as an outsider. The ceremony expresses great reverence for the Ganga, yet waste continues to be dumped into it. As with ideas in all traditions, one can utilize religious symbols to maintain the status quo or to enact change. This afternoon we're planning to meet the Brahmin scientist who is responsible for starting the Clean Ganga organization.
I will surely post more on the trip after I return. For now let me share just one more thought. On the last trip we had a tour guide at the Taj Mahal; this time we did not. As a group we reflected on the legends and stories and inaccuracies one gets from tour guides in many parts of the world. I found myself wondering to what extent some of the stories in the Gospels (both canonical and extracanonical) about places - whether Golgotha, Bethlehem or others - derive from early Christian Jewish tour guides and the stories they told pilgrims and visitors to these important locales in early Christian history.
I do not know if I will get to post again before I return - but if I do, you'll be among the first to know! :-)
I'm currently in Varanasi, which I'm visiting for the first time. It is a remarkable place - it best to see the Ganges before reading about its state of pollution, since it is beautiful and doesn't smell bad the way rivers polluted with industrial waste do in Europe and America. We visited the golden temple, the most important temple to Shiva in Varanasi (supposedly off limits to foreigners) and also witnessed the Aarthi ceremony yesterday evening. It is interesting to reflect theologically on what I see here, since I inevitably do so as an outsider. The ceremony expresses great reverence for the Ganga, yet waste continues to be dumped into it. As with ideas in all traditions, one can utilize religious symbols to maintain the status quo or to enact change. This afternoon we're planning to meet the Brahmin scientist who is responsible for starting the Clean Ganga organization.
I will surely post more on the trip after I return. For now let me share just one more thought. On the last trip we had a tour guide at the Taj Mahal; this time we did not. As a group we reflected on the legends and stories and inaccuracies one gets from tour guides in many parts of the world. I found myself wondering to what extent some of the stories in the Gospels (both canonical and extracanonical) about places - whether Golgotha, Bethlehem or others - derive from early Christian Jewish tour guides and the stories they told pilgrims and visitors to these important locales in early Christian history.
I do not know if I will get to post again before I return - but if I do, you'll be among the first to know! :-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
