Thursday, February 21, 2008

Overcoming media

My wife and I were talking last night about how the media's perception of Hilary Clinton has changed significantly over the last two months. At that time, she was the darling and could do no wrong. Now they're mostly just tolerating her and saying, "Look at her trying desperately to gain the upper hand. What a quaint has-been!" A coworker said he thinks the media just go with who's popular at the moment. I think I probably agree with that assessment.

What's interesting is that makes it a lot harder for an underdog to come out on top. Obama was definitely the underdog for a while, but he skillfully wheedled out some primary victories. Now that the tide has turned, he can do no wrong. I'm sure it's mostly luck, but it's a testament to a person's perseverance when they can hang on long enough to swing voters despite negative media coverage. Either that, or the candidate has to hope that they have a large stable of loyal supporters who don't pay attention to the media who can win them some primaries.

Corollary: Does this mean that the media's main function in America is to persuade the less opinionated to have the opinion of the opinionated?

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

Did you mean "slaves"?

I was discussing a translation point with a co-worker when I ran across a fascinating tidbit in my Greek lexicon. In the entry for the Greek "doulos," it says the English translation is "slave" with the following caveat: " 'servant' for 'slave' is largely confined to Biblical translation and early American times; in normal usage at the present time the two words are carefully distinguished." So what you're saying is, we're softening the meaning of our position in relation to God because of a political agenda? Still? It made perfect sense to translate "doulos" as "servant" before the 1860s in order to mute the glaring hypocrisy. But now that that's over, why are we still translating it as "servant"? The lexicon states that the two words are carefully distinguished. But why? Isn't it about time we all realized that in some ways God calls us friends; in others, children; in still others, slaves? More importantly, we must realize that in each case he means it.

Saturday, February 16, 2008

Gnosticism?

I was reminded yesterday of a comment a reviewer made about a Bible without chapters and verses that has spacing breaks to indicate apparent literary structure (called The Books of The Bible). The reviewer said that this concept was a terrible idea because it requires a sort of special gnosis to understand the biblical text. More to the point, they thought it betrayed an inherent lack of trust in Scripture's ability to be understood by anyone who picks it up (for the sake of discussion, leaving out the Spirit's illumination). Put another way, is the publication of this Bible stating that if a person with no exposure to the Bible picks up a New Testament in the format that's been traditional for 500 years, will they be left in the dark because they don't hold the special key of knowledge? Conversely, if they pick up the format without chapters and verses, is that the key that allows them to understand?

I think it's a bit of a silly discussion. I don't think there's any secret knowledge going on anywhere. But if I were pressed to opine about which format is more gnostic, I would definitely go with the versified format. All the new believer materials that take themselves seriously will offer a key on how to read the Bible. "It's one book, but many. When you see 'John 3:16', that means book of John, chapter 3 (the big number in the text), verse 16 (the little numbers that appear every couple of sentences or so)." If a person picks up a New Testament with no knowledge of what it is (that is, no childhood exposure, no catechism, no exposure whatsoever, which does happen) they will be tremendously confused by this weird system of numbers. They need a special key or knowledge to understand. If they pick up a Bible without chapters and verses, they can start reading from the beginning, and at least make a little sense of it. Which format is more gnostic? I'm afraid it's the one that's been popular for the last half millennium.

Sunday, February 10, 2008

Your coffee

For reasons I won't explain, I was reminded the other day of a fact I'd heard at a conference in San Diego a few years ago. With the pitched rise in coffee consumption in the area, a lot more caffeine was entering the waterways after being consumed and processed by drinkers. Big deal, huh? Well, after the appropriate amount of waste water processing, the water enters the bay, and it puts marine life on a fairly permanent caffeine high. I'm not sure exactly what that looks like, but it definitely changes their behavior, and probably not for the better.

It might be good for us to think through the consequences of our actions.

Friday, February 8, 2008

We must be doing something right

As an immediate follow-up to the preceding, mostly pagan, worldview which says that this person did this evil and is now dead because of it, I thought I would address a quote I've heard far too often from Christians: We must be doing something right. I've heard it in my workplace and I've heard it from a number of other Christians.

The really funny thing about where I've heard this is the context. Once I heard it applied to the fact that my company had a great sales quarter or donation income quarter (or both together). Another time, an employee of a religious activist organization said it because the media was blasting them. Wait. One Christian says we're doing right because we're raking in money (with no controversy). Another says it because their organization is generating controversy for the sake of controversy—that is, what they believe is right, but isn't sanctioned by the Bible (which definitely leads to donation income).

I'm sick and tired of people in general, and my brothers and sisters in Christ in particular (because they should be better discipled than this), making up divine approbation for themselves. There will come a time for vindication, but it's not necessarily now. And it's definitely not to be apportioned by oneself. Jesus, for example, had to wait about forty years to be vindicated concerning his prophecies about Jerusalem. He anticipated his vindication, but he never went around saying, "Look at me! Vindicated! Oh yeah!" He spent forty days after the vindication of his resurrection quietly discipling his disciples. Then he equally quietly left the scene to let them do what he told them to do. He didn't spend any effort priming the praise pump for being the last and greatest prophet. Within one generation (but still forty years) he had people saying, "Yep. Jesus was right. I'm glad he told us to flee when we saw the Roman standards." Once they caught their breath, of course.

We should be listening to what Jesus taught. We should go about our lives with firm conviction that he called us to restore his creation by loving and serving those around us. We probably don't even need to call down and upbraid the self-righteous (oopsdarnitmybad), since Jesus will do that at the appropriate time. We will humbly correct according to Scripture and Spirit those who will listen, and leave in the hands of God those who live as their own god.

God's judgment?

Shortly after hearing that Mike Huckabee won primaries in Arkansas, Alabama, Tennessee and Georgia, I heard that a freak superstorm pounded the Southeast with numerous tornadoes in Arkansas, Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi and Kentucky. The states are listed in the order of the number of tornadoes sighted, so this is obvious to me that God is judging these states for selecting Huckabee as their Republican candidate.

Okay, I can't keep up the not-funny joke any longer. But this is exactly the rhetoric we hear from the stereotypical Huckabee supporter. (By this I mean the extreme Christian conservatives the media likes to pick to rile up the masses. I know there are sane Huckabee supporters.) For my part, I grieve the loss of life and livelihood. The story of the woman who made it into her closet in time, but whose husband didn't, breaks my heart.

Since the majority of the "present evil age" ended 1) upon Jesus's defeat of evil on the cross and death and sin at the resurrection and 2) upon the final destruction of the corrupt Jewish Temple regime in AD 70, I don't see much space for God's retributive justice short of the time when he restores all of creation. God's true Israel is spread across the globe, both Jews and Gentiles, and they're bringing life and redemption to a world still marked by death and sin. Some of these true Israelites died in the tornadoes. They die in tsunamis, earthquakes, hurricanes, genocide, terrorist attacks and American bombing raids.

But because I'm logical, here goes: 9/11 and Katrina happened because of gross sin. Why would those states be hit with massive tornadoes and death in such a close time frame if not for gross sin, supporting Mike Huckabee?

Iowa, you're lucky. This time.

Wednesday, February 6, 2008

Suburbanism

I had lunch with a friend today, and he pointed out how funny it is that new shopping centers title themselves "Main Street" or some such matter. It made me think of the big consumer center south of our house, which houses a movie theater, JC Penney, Dick's Sporting Goods, Best Buy and Wild Oats among numerous other smaller shops and restaurants. The name? "First and Main Town Center."

I'm not sure if they were intentionally trying to be ironic or not. They're using a name to evoke images of small town America, the kind of place you could conceivably walk to, but if you didn't live nearby, you could comfortably walk around. First and Main is structured around the automobile. There are giant parking lots with several big streets coming in. Your blood is on your own body should you choose to get out of your car and try to go into an establishment. And there are no living spaces within a mile or so as the crow might fly if he's feeling adventuresome. That is to say, there are barely any dwellings within two driving miles.

First and Main Town Center. This idea used to be centered around community life with commerce as an incidental. Now you have to get in your car quite intentionally, drive a few miles, nearly die under the wheels of a maniacally crazed and consumption-obsessed driver, all to go focus on your own group of people that just drove in. Over stuff you just paid way too much money for.

FaMTC? Why are you twisting a decent image into something wholly perverse? I know; "Centralized Location for Medicating Your Pain over Consumer Debt by Driving You Deeper into It While Destroying the Former Prairie Landscape" just doesn't quite have that marketing appeal, does it?

Monday, February 4, 2008

Regional sports teams

The New England Patriots did more than make me cheer for the Giants last night. They made me think, "Why alienate groups of potential fans by being too local?" A couple of name changes came to mind instantly: Midwest Chiefs and Rocky Mountain Broncos. Further discussion led to Almost Canadian Bills and Great Lakes Lions.

Or maybe it's just dumb they're not the Boston Patriots.