Bible Remains Best Seller Despite Mixed Reviews

The Bible: Not to be Taken Orally

As my (3) regular readers will notice, I have been grossly neglecting my duties as the most interesting and intelligent religious blog writer (though my ego remains unscathed).

In lieu of the more commonplace blog I would like to offer the following shot clips to provoke some thoughts.  They are both short and entertaining.  Give them a look, I’ll wait

……
……
…….

West Wing:  On the Bible

and now for something entirely differet

Prop 8:  The musical

So these two videos offered the same criticism, though in completely different ways. How should we treat the bible?   It is a serious problem.  What is a good Christian (if there is such a thing) to do?  As Jesus says (as aptly played by Joe Black) “The Bible says a lot of things.”

Well first I think it is important to develop an understanding and familiarity with the bible.  I am not talking about being able to club people over the head with chapter and verse quotations, but simply reading the Bible.  How many of us have actually read the bible?  I can say in honesty that I have not.  But if I have not read the bible how can I be sure that I am no simply basing my understanding of my religion of what I hear from others?In an effort to personally rectify this issue, as well as preparing for seminary school in the fall, I plan to read the bible and offer my annotations as I progress through the ancient texts.

All this, of course, after I complete the finals for my last undergraduate semester

Quantum Theology: Where Science and Religion Kiss and Make up

Before I continue from my previous post, let me make a few things clear:  God created the earth, he did so in six days, on the seventh day he rested (you should too), this means that the earth is only about 6,000 years old, evolution is a LIE, oh and dinosaurs…. they didn’t exist, the bones were put her by the devil to deceive you.  So get rid of those dinosaur sheets you got your kid HEATHEN!

Did that not settle well with you?  Ok… let me try again!

There is no God…so stop crying about it.  Belief in God is nothing more than a delusion you tell yourself and your children to make you feel better.  Earth was created in the big bang; it’s been around for a very long time.  Evolution is FACT, we were all once monkeys and before that we were fish. So get your kid monkey sheets and stop sending him to church IDIOT!

For most people, nether of the above stances really work out.  If you are one of the few that firmly believe one of the above…you are about to be (and probably already are) offended.  The above contradiction represents the current “debate” regarding science and religion.  I use the “ ” because debates are typically more sophisticated than the childish arguing of those who believe either the firm science or firm religious beliefs.

So let me share what I believe.  First I am a Christian and I do believe in God.  I believe that the big bang is perfectly reasonable.  I believe that something had to cause the initial small piece of matter and/or the explosion of the big bang.  I believe that God, whatever he/she/it/they is, caused these things. Evolution seems to make a lot of sense.  I do not think that dinosaurs were put here by the devil…although they do resemble dragons and that’s sort of demonic.  I have never heard a scientific theory, fact, or conclusion that made my faith feel threatened.

I also do not think that I am alone.  I do not think that there are many people out there that can prescribe to a strictly Christian or strictly scientific view on life, the world, the universe, etc.  As I discussed in my previous post, science and religion were once the same thing.  To divide science and religion is really to cause both injustices.  Einstein said, “Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.” The two should not, and I argue, do not contradict.  Science and religion make up different parts of the same whole.

Today’s science has taken us to amazing places and afforded us rapid progress.  We learn so much from science, yet there is still so much we don’t know.  Where did the matter for the big bang come from?  What caused the explosion of the big bang?  Why to the laws of physics seem to break down at the subatomic scale, on the scale of large planetary bodies, and whenever we approach the speed of light?  The point I am making is that there are always things that we cannot and do not understand.  Neither science nor religion can explain everything and therefore neither one can nullify the other.

What results from this separation of science and religion is really quite detrimental.  While science and religion can yield great benefits, both are double bladed swords. Science was used to justify the holocaust, eugenics and slavery.  Religion is not innocent either.  Religion without logic, common sense and a worldly perspective is rather dangerous. Religion has been used to justify, wars, the oppression of homosexuals and intolerance of many different cultures.  If religion and science can again find harmony, the direction of both could be greatly improved.

Religion and science each make up for what the other lacks.  There are some things in the world that simply cannot be explained.  You can push science as far as you want but you will eventually reach an end where you run out of answers.  This is where faith and religion often come in.  At first, it may seems as though we use religion in lieu of a plausible explanation, I disagree.  Science does not explain away religion, it clarifies it.

In Christian theology it is accepted that God knows everything.  Given this, in order to give knowledge to humanity, he must simplify this infinite knowledge, dumb it down so to speak.  So lets say that God explains creation to us by saying that he created the heavens and the earth and formed humans from the clay of the earth.  This is relatively simple because we can imagine God (in the form of a human) creating all these things as we might make something ourselves (a sandwich maybe).

Later, science tells us that the universe was created by the big bang (probably), which is responsible for the heavens and the earth and all matter.  We know that the big bang happened but some of the details are lacking.  But then we get to humans, we can talk about a puddle of primordial ooze struck by lightning (oddly associated with God) that eventually evolved to become humans.  This would be a bit hard to swallow especially so long ago.  Perhaps God has given us a simplistic explanation of the universe with the hope that we might some day attain some of the knowledge that only he possesses.

But how can science and religion come to terms?  If we follow religion to the edge of what it can explain, and science to the edge of what it can explain, we find this strange area were all bets seem to be off and there is no telling what will happen next.

One of these places is Quantum mechanics.  I do not profess to be anything close to an expert, but one thing I have observed is that in quantum theory things get very strange.  The rules of science do not seem to work as they once did, though still have a very strong value. There have been observations that seem to show everything, something, and nothing all at the same time.  There have been experiments that may indicate that prayer impacts the physical world.  These things are all hotly debated, but their nature is such that both science and religion become relevant.

I believe areas such as these are opportunities for science and religion to again converge for a joint effort to find fact and truth.   Imagine a quantum theologian, a person who examines the greater mysteries of existence and then determines their implications for both science and theology at the same time. This gives rise to clergy and scientists again being one in the same.  We could all look at our world with a full and complete questioning, with both passion and logic, examining all angles and possibilities, to find both knowledge and wisdom.

If any of this seems remotely interesting to you, I urge you to consider watching either or both of the following videos and share your thoughts.*

What the bleep do we know? Down the rabbit hole.

Imagining the Tenth Dimension

*I question, and at points disagree with, some of the arguments in the above videos yet I find their main points to have truly fascinating implications for both science and theology.

Science VS Religion: Tonight on Pay Per View

Recently, there has been a considerable amount of discussion regarding science and government. Some have claimed that due to President Obama’s new policy on stem cell research, science has been set free of the shackles of the Bush administration and we can finally move forward.  I do not know enough about stem cell research or science in politics to say if this is true or not.  I have also noticed that when discussions regarding science and politics take place, religion is almost always brought into the mix.

There seems to be a general acceptance that science and religion (or perhaps just Christianity) are, and always have been, at odds with each other.   At this point, my education in history compels me to correct this misconception.

So let’s go back to ancient Greece.  The three major philosophers of the Greeks were (as many know) Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle.  Each of these philosophers was the teacher to the one before.  Philosophers contemplated matters regarding how the world works, the elements and nature as well as ethics, morality, and many of the studies we might consider to be oriented with religion.  The Greek philosophers treated all these subjects as one and, for the most part, all of them were equally important to a developed understanding of the universe in which we live.

So let’s fast forward to the renaissance.  Many of the contributions from the Greek philosophers are still accepted.  The new world was recently discovered (NOTE:  All educated people knew the world was a sphere but they did not know how large it was) and many were questioning what else there was to be learned about the world.  In the renaissance it was accepted that the universe (what we call the solar system) operated as a system of spheres with Earth in the middle.  According to Aristotle’s physics, the earth was the densest and therefore sunk to the center of the solar system and hence all other things revolved around the Earth.  So far, we can understand the logic even if we know that the conclusion is false.

The problem with this model of the solar system (or universe as they called it) was that certain things did not follow as expected.  One particular problem was that there was difficulty predicting the positions of the stars.  Then along comes Copernicus.  Copernicus suggested that Earth was not the center of the universe but instead the Sun was.  Copernicus published this idea…no one cared.

So why did the few that read Copernicus’s ideas about a sun-centered universe reject it?  Blame Aristotle.  Remember when we talked about the Greeks?   Aristotle stated that Earth was the center of the solar system because it was most dense.  If the Sun was the center, then the Sun was the densest, which would refute Aristotle’s system of physics.  Copernicus’s solar model was based on aesthetics and not Physics and therefore it raised more questions than it answered and was rejected.

It is at this point of the story that along comes a spider.  This eight legged trouble maker is none other than Galileo.  Galileo was the first to really push the idea of a sun-centered solar system.  As a matter of fact, Galileo argued for a sun-centered universe so fervently that he managed to anger people pretty badly.

At this point in time, science and theology were not separate as they are today.  In fact, the word science is derived from the Latin word scientia which means knowledge, so science was anything concerning knowledge.  Theology was considered the head of the sciences.  What we call science today was then called natural theology.  All this was based off the idea that God created everything and therefore we can learn about God by studying what he created.

But this is where things get messed up.  Galileo continues to argue for the Sun as the center of the universe.  Natural theologians continued to reject this because it contradicts Aristotelian Physics and therefore failed to explain many things.  Regardless, Galileo continued to push natural theologians.  Perhaps in anger or poor judgment, the theologians in question decided to try to shut up Galileo by bringing the Bible into things.  The Bible WAS NOT USED TO DISPROVE GALILEO, but was merely an attempt to scare him into leaving Aristotelian physics alone.

At first glance this may seem like cause for the church and science to fight.  In actuality it was a disagreement between natural theologians that became very heated.  The argument became so heated that it ceased to be about physics and the nature of the universe (and possibly God) and became a personal (and perhaps illogical) battle.

It is this very same mind frame that exists today.  We are now at the point where we have stopped working together for knowledge.  Because someone may see the world differently than us we assume that they are foolish, narrow minded, perhaps brainwashed or Godless.  But truth is valuable regardless of where it comes from.  Furthermore, things that are false have value because they allow us to better question and understand the truth itself.
But fear not.  I have the remedy for this conflict between religion and Science.  I hope you will stay tuned for the exciting conclusion in my next post…

Quantum Theology:  Where Science and Religion Kiss and Make up

Marriage: Giving Love a Bad Name

For once I would like to stray a bit from my typical subjects of religion and philosophy.  Today I would like to talk about the big “M”…that’s right Marriage.

As I get older I have started to think more and more seriously about marriage.  I have noticed that there have been several people around me who have been married and from what I can tell are very happy (which Is why I hate them).  As a male in my twenties, I have developed a few questions?  What is marriage?  What is love?  Do they have anything to do with each other?  What are the requirements for a person to get married?

Everyone seems to realize that there is a problem with marriage (at least in the US).  There are many who call for a defense of marriage against the ills of homosexuality and the like (I will not discuss gay marriage here but you can guess what my views are from my previous posts).  Despite views on gay marriage it seems clear that marriage needs help.  The rate of divorce is over 50%.   When the chances of having a successful marriage are about the same as a coin toss there is a problem.

But in order to protect/support/defend marriage we need to know what it is.  This is not simple task.  Is marriage a function of love? Is it just a function of reproduction as many have claimed?  Who should get married?  Is age a factor? Everyone seems to have different definitions of marriage and love.  That makes sense as marriage is typically considered a rather intimate affair.  Perhaps the real question is what do marriage and love mean to you?

I think one of the largest problems facing us as we approach the battlefield that is marriage is our own expectation.  Many of us growing up, myself included, have been exposed to the Disney ideal of marriage.  Of course there are some major problems with these ideals.  Lets look at Cinderella. Cinderella is the focus of the story as with many of these storybook romances.  This gives me the impression that men are really not that important to marriage process.  As a matter of fact, men tend to be very neutral and passive in many of these romance stories.  The prince is around to slay some dragon (who does not appear in this movie) but that is pretty much it.  The male characters are typically not well developed.  But imagine if every couple had to slay a dragon before they could be married…that would be interesting.

But men are by no means the only ones harmed by these stories.  Sleeping Beauty:  In this one the female is SLEEPING for most story!  It does not get much more passive than that.  Meanwhile the prince has to overcome all manner of obstacles (dragons, witches, federal legislatures) just to wake the girl up.  And we are to believe that once the obstacle is overcome (which Sleeping Beauty did not assist with by the way) that the marriage will be all happy?  How do we know the princess wont wake up and say “Sorry. You are not my type.  But how did that dragon thing work out for you?”

And does anyone remember the characters names?  The characters are so ill developed as to allow the five-year-old viewer to put them selves into the shoes of their corresponding gender character (sorry princesses charming).  But what is it that attracts the characters in the first place?  Do they have any genuine chemistry?  Is it a sense of obligation after the dead dragon?  Is it old school marriage tradition?  Or is it just so heart warming that we need an unrealistic happy marriage ending?

But not all Disney movies are trying to kill or marriages.  I think Aladdin is probably the best example for marriage (Honorable mention to Beauty and the Beast).  Now let me be honest, Aladdin is my favorite Disney movie and not just because it is malecentric.  Firstly, the characters are well developed and each have their own challenges to over come in life.  Aladdin and Jasmine are from different social classes and manage to find a way to overcome the challenges of their social norms.  At one point Jasmine asserts her individuality by telling the male characters “I am not a prize to be one!”  Furthermore, after the dragon was defeated, which in this case turned out to be a snake (kinda), Aladdin and Jasmine DID NOT GET MARRIED.  They waited until the third.

During the course of the third movie (we do not speak of the second) Aladdin and Jasmine had to face challenges that real couples have to face: issues of family, honesty, conflict resolution, values and giant turtles.  Only AFTER overcoming these obstacles as a couple did Aladdin and Jasmine get married.

Perhaps you feel I have been unfair to Disney.  Maybe I am taking these cartoon movies too seriously (I’m not!).  But the fact of the matter is that we need to reexamine how we look at marriage and where our ideals and priorities come from.  It is important to keep our presuppositions about marriage, love, relationships, and dragons, in their proper place as we approach marriage.

Too often we develop an image of a marriage and a relationship early in our lives.  We then try to find a person to fit the mold that we have already created.  That is not a reasonable way to approach marriage.   We cannot expect to find someone to meet the ideals we developed at the age of five.  Instead we should be open to a developing and maturing relationship with another person.  When you find someone you love, you and that person should establish your own ideals, goals and values rather than trying to change each other to fit unreasonable standards.

As for me:  I do not expect to get married but I hope to.  I hope that some day I will be able to feel confident in a fifty-fifty relationship with a woman that I cannot help but spend the rest of my life with.  Then, and only then, she can propose to me but not with a ring.  She will propose to me with a battle ready sword to signify our love and my masculine authority

God Charged with “crimes against humanity”

In debates regarding God, religion, and/or philosophy (and all that fun gray area in between) there have been a number of questions that come up on a regular basis. Some of these questions include, but are not limited to: “Why do bad things happen to good people?” or “If God is good why is there so much evil in the world?” or if you rather “How can we even be sure that there is a god, let alone that he cares about us?” Obviously these are some serious questions. I would never profess to be able to answer them but I would like to reflect on them a bit and perhaps share some insight.

Why do bad things happen to good people?

Because there are no good people!

Ok I obviously do not believe that but let’s look at the question. People tend to gravitate to God for the answer to this question, as though God is directly responsible for every action that happens to us as humans. So is he?

When I was younger I was at my grandmother‘s house and I had managed to get myself into some trouble. I do not remember what I had done (probably gotten into the liquor cabinet again) but my grandmother was not pleased with me. On the way to the car I fell and skinned my knee. My grandmother then told me “See! That’s God punishing you for being bad!” As a five year old this was a very scary concept. Was this ever present God always going to be there to pull the rug out from under me or cut my brake lines whenever I mess up?

The answer is no. The bible tells Christians that God is just. This does not mean that God is prepared at a moment’s notice with smite bullets at the ready, it means that on the Day of Judgment (May 14^th so mark your calendar) God will be our Judge and determine our fates. In the everyday, while God knows what we are doing he does not punish us just yet. Were that the case I think some people would have been victims of God’s wrath by now (I am sure you can think of a few)

The fact is I tripped because I was a clumsy 5 year old (and in many ways I still am). We need to recognize the role of ourselves and other people in bringing bad things to us. When something goes wrong are you really a victim? Are you just trying to blame someone? Is God just an easy target? Well be careful because I am pretty sure his aim is better than yours. Many of the “bad things” that happen to people have little or nothing to do with God at all. Many of these “bad things” happen either because people have caused them or failed to prevent them.

If God is good, then why is there so much evil in the world?

Because evil is such GOOD entertainment!

I feel pretty safe in the assumption that God is, in fact, good. This is probably because I am a Christian and God being good is rather important to the forgiveness thing. But did God create evil? Can a good God create evil? Where did evil come from?

Well here is another question to consider: How do we know what good and evil really are? Unlike God we are not omnipotent, we do not know everything and therefore we cannot be sure of or definitions of good and evil. Furthermore, the meaning of the words “good” and “evil” are different depending on worldview and timeframe. There is very rarely a universal absolute good or evil.

Perhaps there is some greater good to be found in the things that we believe are evil. I know it seems terrible to think but often times we learn the greatest lessons from the most terrible of circumstances. If we never encountered obstacles, loss, pain, suffering, or any of these “evils” we would never learn or develop in mind body or faith. Consider: what would life be like without these “evils”?

How can we even be sure that there is a God, let alone that he cares about us?

Are you dead yet? Then he can’t hate you that much.

I have already discussed the existence of God in my first post so I encourage you to give it a read. As for whether or not he cares about us, that is an interesting question.

Let us assume for a moment that God created all things. It then stands to reason that God would care about that which he/she/it/they/ created. In many religions humans are created from either a part of God or “in his image”. If something is part of you, or bares your resemblance to you, it stands to reason that you would take interest and even care about it.

How about from the other direction? Let’s assume that God, having created us or not, hates us. God despises us, our very existence makes God ill. Why would God not destroy us and wipe us from the plane of existence? You would think that if God really does hate humanity, humanity would not have time to consider this before being destroyed in a shower of apocalyptic smite bullets. From this standpoint it seems that God either likes us (I’d say love but I don’t want to move to quickly) or is indifferent. However, by virtue of our continued existence I do not believe God hates us.

Of course all these points are based off presuppositions and in many cases are results of my personal world view. As one of my professors says “your mileage may vary.” But we often consider these questions in times of trouble and we are rather egocentric at the time. “Why would God do this to me?” This is especially true during this time of economic down turn. Many of us struggle to understand what is happening to us and how God fits into it all. I personally believe that God does not hate us, but can offer us strength and support to get through these hard times… However, “your mileage may vary.”