Wednesday, March 13, 2013
I want to share what it feels like for me to pray
This morning I had another article in mind, but I can't seem to pull up the intellectual energy to write it so I'm going to put up what I was planning to on Saturday. What it feels like for me to pray.
To be clear, I am not Jesus nor do I have the same relationship with God that he did. However, how I tend to talk to God is a lot like how this song goes. I start walking with God, talking about an idea and slowly I start to understand what he tries to tell me. It's like these little idea bubbles pop into your head or Elijah's still small voice. I don't always understand them at first or I disagree with what they have in mind. It's unnerving and really cool at the same time.
Has God ever given you just a taste of his majesty? There is a bliss that you experience when you are close to his kindness and power. It gives you an idea of what God's kingdom really means.
These are two prayers that I have
Tuesday, March 12, 2013
I want to share opportunities for online volunteering
First there is www.freerice.com.
The site is a series of educational flashcards. If you get the answers right a certain about of food will be donated if you get it wrong it just skips to the next question. The flashcards come in a variety of subjects in the humanities, math, language learning, English, chemistry, and geography as well as SAT preparation.
Another good place to volunteer is http://rollingjubilee.org/
Another good place to volunteer is http://rollingjubilee.org/
A Jubilee is an event usually described in the Bible as a cancellation of all debts. That the essential goal of Rolling Jubilee. They buy up bad debt and forgive it. I was originally started by the Occupy Wall Steet movement. They have already raised enough to buy $11,342,585 in debt and cancel it. This is mostly a donation project. It does give information about debt but to really help it is a good idea to give them money if you want to help with this cause.
There are also research opportunities for volunteerism
The site http://phylo.cs.mcgill.ca/ has a game that helps scientists map genetic diseases. It is a puzzle game where you match up corresponding pieces of DNA. It eventually will help scientists deal with genetic diseases. apparently computers have a harder time doing it than humans
A similar site is http://eterna.cmu.edu/web/ this site asks you to create your own strands of RNA for use to find different possible medicines. It is another puzzle game that asks you to use bonding to create different shapes for the molecule.
I am not being paid to advertise these sites. I just think they are interesting. I would also like to put up more. I specifically am looking for volunteer sites that have the visitor do something beyond a simple awareness campaign or at least provide information on how to act within their own communities. Leave any suggestions in the comments section.
Monday, March 11, 2013
An Independent's review of the Christian Left
The Christian Left is a Facebook page that can be found here. It is an essentially public forum that is intended to provoke discussions by those of Christian belief from the political left. There are many areas of concern that are discussed on that forum that I believe are also concerns of Jesus and should be the concerns of his followers. There are also other aspects of the forum that I do not believe are conducive to christian community.
Jesus was always ministering to those who were marginalized in his society: the poor, women, foreigners, the sick and the imprisoned. He walked among people healing those who were harmed and teaching methods of responding to the injustice surrounding him. His followers continued that tradition through the millennia. Many of the topics discussed on the Christian Left have the intent on continuing that mission. Articles and petitions to respond to poverty abound. Appeals to members to use wisdom in how they interact in the world: climate change and evolution are not false science. Homosexuality is not choosing to shake your fist at the loving God that created you but a genuine awareness people experience from childhood. Government and even taxes have a functions in our communities and dismissing them as interfering busybodies will occur at our own peril. The existence of poverty is an injustice, not an attempt to mooch off those who have done "real work."
The articles on economics and poverty are usually very interesting and the expectation of Christians to respect evidence that science provides and to honor the beliefs of those who believe differently than strict christian dogma is worthwhile. There are, however, things that make me uncomfortable about the site. For one there is a maliciousness against people on the right. Republicans are sometimes treated as the enemy instead of brothers and sisters you disagree with. There is a justifiable anger and frustration with many on the Right, but there is something unloving about how the Christian Left tends to express it. Political figures are mocked and famous people who would disagree with the group are sometimes seen as vile destroyers of the public good or greedy villains out to take after their own interests at the expense of the public good. I don't know if the theorized motivation behind their behavior is accurate. I do know they are children of God and should be treated accordingly. Christians should not root for one team or the other but root for justice. Instead of trying to explain why God is on my side, ask continuously if I am on God's side. This must be true for both the Left and the Right, for some reason neither is willing. So let me try.
There is more than one side to the homosexuality debate. The first is that Jesus respected the law, Matthew 5:17-20. There are certainly passages of the law that do not sound approving of homosexual behavior, interpretation issues aside. I will not go into the passages here( that would be for a different article that I may or may not write.) There is a tendency on the Christian Left to go through all sorts of mental gymnastics to explain why those passages are not what you think. To be fair, sometimes the Christian Left is correct, such as the Sodom and Gomorrah passages. But sometimes the wording is too explicit to disregard this way. Jesus did not discard the law, he simply pointed out the purpose to it, love. On the side of the political Right, there is a tendency to forget that God's purpose for the law was and is to remind people to love. On the sides of the political Left as well as the Right, there is a dismissive attitude towards laws that doesn't fit a modern paradigm. The response on any side tends to be anger and vindictiveness instead of asking questions like why do you believe this law is justified or not? Are there more loving or economical ways to achieve the goals you are looking for? Or simply why do you believe the way you do? And force them to be more specific than "The Bible told me to." or "They are born that way." Regardless of your position on this issue, discarding the rights of people you disagree with or dismissing someone as hateful or bigoted for similar reasons is not loving. There is a place for finding the truth but it can only be done in the context of a respectful relationship between brothers and sisters.
Abortion is always a controversial subject. It is a tragedy in almost every way you look at it. It is a protection against the evils of rape. It is a response by young women who are sexual beings, but who are not ready to deal with the consequences of their actions. It is the outcome of the lack of responsibility by men. It is the result of policies that create ignorance out of the delusion that we are teaching children instead of burgeoning adults. It requires people to treat even potential human life as a curse instead of a blessing on one hand or a woman as a whore and murder instead of as a human being made in the image of God that believes they will lose what they have or will be forced into parenting a child they can't handle. Rationalizing either position is not a choice I would ever be willing to make, and I don't think society should make this decision either. It is a false choice to say one side or the other is a necessary evil, only a lack of creativity or patience in either party.
Evolution is another sore subject for christians. Christians often look delusional when debating evolution because the data is essentially in. Evolution is a better model to fit the facts. However, what is at stake for christians is not facts it is a story that they build their lives on. Evolution is not simply a set of facts, it has a story of its own and the story in many christian's opinions directly conflicts with the story of the Bible from the very beginning. It is a billions year old creation by combat where humanity is insignificant and God is unnecessary. Combined on that there is a tendency by those in power to justify themselves by the stories taken to be true. What happens when your story, your mythos is based on the principle of survival of the fittest? Maybe Social Darwinism, eugenics, Ayn Rand's philosophies, unchecked capitalism and empire? Evolution is rarely debated in this context because scientist are more concerned with it's veracity and christians are simply more interested in discrediting facts they don't like or are to lazy to understand fully. Scientists do not try to reshape the story of evolution because it is not part of their discipline. Christians don't reshape the story for the same reason the church was reluctant to respond to the heliocentric model. False arguments had been used for years to bolster positions that were untrue and outside even the priorities of the church.
I make these arguments because I see in the Christian Left a certainty of position by many posters that I am not sure is warranted or is as mean spirited and delusional as anything said on the Right. Admittedly the site is basically a public forum. Anyone can post, but there are certain arguments that are tolerated that I am not sure should be. People can argue with what I have described above and there is a distinct possibility that I am wrong in quite a bit of it. However, I feel the need to find ways to remind people that Jesus taught his followers to love and respect those they disagreed with or who disagreed with them. This task is extremely difficult and I ask the Christian Left to meet the challenge.
Jesus was always ministering to those who were marginalized in his society: the poor, women, foreigners, the sick and the imprisoned. He walked among people healing those who were harmed and teaching methods of responding to the injustice surrounding him. His followers continued that tradition through the millennia. Many of the topics discussed on the Christian Left have the intent on continuing that mission. Articles and petitions to respond to poverty abound. Appeals to members to use wisdom in how they interact in the world: climate change and evolution are not false science. Homosexuality is not choosing to shake your fist at the loving God that created you but a genuine awareness people experience from childhood. Government and even taxes have a functions in our communities and dismissing them as interfering busybodies will occur at our own peril. The existence of poverty is an injustice, not an attempt to mooch off those who have done "real work."
The articles on economics and poverty are usually very interesting and the expectation of Christians to respect evidence that science provides and to honor the beliefs of those who believe differently than strict christian dogma is worthwhile. There are, however, things that make me uncomfortable about the site. For one there is a maliciousness against people on the right. Republicans are sometimes treated as the enemy instead of brothers and sisters you disagree with. There is a justifiable anger and frustration with many on the Right, but there is something unloving about how the Christian Left tends to express it. Political figures are mocked and famous people who would disagree with the group are sometimes seen as vile destroyers of the public good or greedy villains out to take after their own interests at the expense of the public good. I don't know if the theorized motivation behind their behavior is accurate. I do know they are children of God and should be treated accordingly. Christians should not root for one team or the other but root for justice. Instead of trying to explain why God is on my side, ask continuously if I am on God's side. This must be true for both the Left and the Right, for some reason neither is willing. So let me try.
There is more than one side to the homosexuality debate. The first is that Jesus respected the law, Matthew 5:17-20. There are certainly passages of the law that do not sound approving of homosexual behavior, interpretation issues aside. I will not go into the passages here( that would be for a different article that I may or may not write.) There is a tendency on the Christian Left to go through all sorts of mental gymnastics to explain why those passages are not what you think. To be fair, sometimes the Christian Left is correct, such as the Sodom and Gomorrah passages. But sometimes the wording is too explicit to disregard this way. Jesus did not discard the law, he simply pointed out the purpose to it, love. On the side of the political Right, there is a tendency to forget that God's purpose for the law was and is to remind people to love. On the sides of the political Left as well as the Right, there is a dismissive attitude towards laws that doesn't fit a modern paradigm. The response on any side tends to be anger and vindictiveness instead of asking questions like why do you believe this law is justified or not? Are there more loving or economical ways to achieve the goals you are looking for? Or simply why do you believe the way you do? And force them to be more specific than "The Bible told me to." or "They are born that way." Regardless of your position on this issue, discarding the rights of people you disagree with or dismissing someone as hateful or bigoted for similar reasons is not loving. There is a place for finding the truth but it can only be done in the context of a respectful relationship between brothers and sisters.
Abortion is always a controversial subject. It is a tragedy in almost every way you look at it. It is a protection against the evils of rape. It is a response by young women who are sexual beings, but who are not ready to deal with the consequences of their actions. It is the outcome of the lack of responsibility by men. It is the result of policies that create ignorance out of the delusion that we are teaching children instead of burgeoning adults. It requires people to treat even potential human life as a curse instead of a blessing on one hand or a woman as a whore and murder instead of as a human being made in the image of God that believes they will lose what they have or will be forced into parenting a child they can't handle. Rationalizing either position is not a choice I would ever be willing to make, and I don't think society should make this decision either. It is a false choice to say one side or the other is a necessary evil, only a lack of creativity or patience in either party.
Evolution is another sore subject for christians. Christians often look delusional when debating evolution because the data is essentially in. Evolution is a better model to fit the facts. However, what is at stake for christians is not facts it is a story that they build their lives on. Evolution is not simply a set of facts, it has a story of its own and the story in many christian's opinions directly conflicts with the story of the Bible from the very beginning. It is a billions year old creation by combat where humanity is insignificant and God is unnecessary. Combined on that there is a tendency by those in power to justify themselves by the stories taken to be true. What happens when your story, your mythos is based on the principle of survival of the fittest? Maybe Social Darwinism, eugenics, Ayn Rand's philosophies, unchecked capitalism and empire? Evolution is rarely debated in this context because scientist are more concerned with it's veracity and christians are simply more interested in discrediting facts they don't like or are to lazy to understand fully. Scientists do not try to reshape the story of evolution because it is not part of their discipline. Christians don't reshape the story for the same reason the church was reluctant to respond to the heliocentric model. False arguments had been used for years to bolster positions that were untrue and outside even the priorities of the church.
I make these arguments because I see in the Christian Left a certainty of position by many posters that I am not sure is warranted or is as mean spirited and delusional as anything said on the Right. Admittedly the site is basically a public forum. Anyone can post, but there are certain arguments that are tolerated that I am not sure should be. People can argue with what I have described above and there is a distinct possibility that I am wrong in quite a bit of it. However, I feel the need to find ways to remind people that Jesus taught his followers to love and respect those they disagreed with or who disagreed with them. This task is extremely difficult and I ask the Christian Left to meet the challenge.
Saturday, March 9, 2013
Friday, March 8, 2013
Apparently it is National Women's day
I have no children of my own, I have no sisters I am not married and have never had a girlfriend. The closest females I encounter are my mom, some of my extended family, and a few members of surrogate family in the form of housemates and their kids. My friend Chrissy is like my sister and her two girls are my nieces. I have had other female friends that I see as family as well. There are times when I talk with them and I see a kind of lack of empowerment. Discussions of dating involve women being the passive recipients of affection from male suitors. Women, when discussing marriage, also discuss obedience and submission. This kind of talk always makes me uncomfortable. There is an instinct in me to objectify or at least idealize women. This tendency may come from my lack of experience. Combined with this instinct is the ingrained idea that women are people and should be treated so. Expecting women to submit to me seems unreasonable, but I see friends of mine that I respect essentially arguing that idea. It seems far more reasonable to me to encourage a partnership where a woman encourages leadership and improvement in me while I do something similar for her. I want to empower the women and girls in my life, I just don't always know how. Here are a few things I have noticed that can be empowering to women.
A possible change in video games I hope to see.
I'm also a mathematician and this has a special place in my heart
Something my Mom and Dad showed me
If anybody reads this can you post articles or videos of famous women you admire or of idea that shape the view of women in our society?
Thursday, March 7, 2013
Statistics, Lies and Truths
There has been a viral video that I keep seeing on my Facebook page. it is this one to the right. The video summarizes several different studies. They include an understanding of ideal income distribution, an expected reality of income distribution, and the determined reality of income distribution. They state these statistics in ways that they hope the average viewer would understand. The problems that they state in the video may have serious consequences. unfortunately the statistics they state in the video are also unhelpful in proving their conclusion. First, the video never goes into the details of how the distribution they cite were create beyond a general procedure. Neither do the sources cited in the video. Distributions themselves have no labels for the axis though given the proportional nature of the diagrams, the vertical axis would be proportion of money supply controlled by the percentile and the horizontal axis is percentile of income. The stated distributions do tell us some information but it doesn't necessarily point to the conclusions reached. For one the creator of the video made no effort to explain why the current distribution was bad. He simply compared it to the other distributions for the sake of shock value. Two, the other distributions were stated to be a survey of opinions, not a distribution that analyzes what would create the least suffering, the highest motivation to work, the highest social mobility or the lowest inequality or a compromise between those ideas. Such a distribution would be difficult to find but certainly possible using economic principles. It might not be what the population thinks it is. Third, the causes of the inequality are never stated only that the statistics say that the tactics argued against by the wealthy are not sustained by the levels of income they have. Fourth, the information cited in the video is not in the references the actual study described in the video is not one of the links.
The positions described in the video may be accurate but the statistics the video uses do not mean what the authors say the numbers do. It might be a good idea to take this video with a grain of salt.
Wednesday, March 6, 2013
Is YHWH the Stephen Colbert of Near Eastern Deities?
I know it is an inflammatory title. I am not saying God is not a real god. I am saying I think he has defined himself in the past in terms of satire. People talk about the creation myth in the Bible in response to scientific data, but it wasn't written to respond to that. Genesis uses the same imagery as other creation myths in Israel's sphere of influence. Similar ideas happen with the story of Noah's arc, the development of agriculture, the creation of kings, the necessity of the law, and the nature of man. Scholars point to these similarities and in some cases try to dismiss Yahweh because of them, or in the case of true believers explain them away. I think they are both wrong to try these tactics. My reason for believing this occurs when you look at the differences between theologies.
In most middle eastern, pagan myths, the world was created through an act of violence. Marduk slays Tiamat, Ba'al slays Yam, Θraētaona slays Aži Dahāka (Zorastrian). This type of chaoskampf occurs in a variety of pagan belief systems in the world and many of the systems would have interacted with the country of Israel. And what monster does Genesis offer? Nothing. The closest reference to any sort of chaos is tohu vabohu which is normally translated as "formless and void". Some scholars try to treat that as the primordial monster to better match up Genesis with its ancient peers. It doesn't quite work though. It is treated in Genesis as more of a side-note than an epic battle between the All powerful Yahweh and the primordial evil of the deep that is so paramount to other myths. When the topic is discussed extra-biblically the monsters were usually created by God and the battle was an attempt to set limits on a simple creature sort of like what God did with humanity at the tower of Babel. There is a point to this difference in theology but a few other stories and topics expand on this issue.
The Flood story which biblically is centered around Noah has counterparts in other mythologies. Utnapishtim in the Gilgamesh epic, Ziusudra in the Sumerian Kings list, and Atra-Hasis in the Akkadian version are all versions of this. Most of the pagan flood stories have a few things in common. The flood is usually an attempt at population control or an attempt to cut down on the noise or similar ideas. One god circumvents another to preserve humanity in some way. In Gilgamesh, they Ea protects humanity because humans are the main food source of the gods and believed total destruction was a disproportionate punishment. Similar situations occurred in the Sumerian and Akkadian versions. The gods did not continue their slaughter because they realized they would lose their main food source and attempted to determine other means of population control. Then, there is Noah. Most of the same plot points at the other flood stories with a couple of differences. God does not try to do population control, he is trying to ensure justice. The organizer of destruction had every intention of ensuring redemption. The God of the Bible had a plan for human beings for the sake of human beings.
Sacrifice in the pagan customs was a means to feed the gods. In the bible, it was simply a redemptive act, entirely human in nature. They are not necessary in God's eyes in Isaiah it talks about God not needing sacrifices and preferring justice. Music, agriculture, technology, royalty, in pagan theology are all handed down from on high. In the bible, they are human creations. And most importantly, pagan theologies create humans as slaves of the gods and the leaders who represent them. The God of the bible creates all of humanity in his image. Same imagery, completely different worldview. In one, the divine is the foundation of an empire that is the universe and human beings are livestock. In the other, the divine is a gardener and the universe his masterwork and humans are his prize possessions that he is trying to cultivate into a beautiful image. The contrast is striking and I can only imagine how it would have been received when it was first written. Plus, I have a sneaking suspicion as to what inspired the writing in the first place. It might behoove the church to use similar strategies when attempting to infect the world with the kingdom of God.
In most middle eastern, pagan myths, the world was created through an act of violence. Marduk slays Tiamat, Ba'al slays Yam, Θraētaona slays Aži Dahāka (Zorastrian). This type of chaoskampf occurs in a variety of pagan belief systems in the world and many of the systems would have interacted with the country of Israel. And what monster does Genesis offer? Nothing. The closest reference to any sort of chaos is tohu vabohu which is normally translated as "formless and void". Some scholars try to treat that as the primordial monster to better match up Genesis with its ancient peers. It doesn't quite work though. It is treated in Genesis as more of a side-note than an epic battle between the All powerful Yahweh and the primordial evil of the deep that is so paramount to other myths. When the topic is discussed extra-biblically the monsters were usually created by God and the battle was an attempt to set limits on a simple creature sort of like what God did with humanity at the tower of Babel. There is a point to this difference in theology but a few other stories and topics expand on this issue.
The Flood story which biblically is centered around Noah has counterparts in other mythologies. Utnapishtim in the Gilgamesh epic, Ziusudra in the Sumerian Kings list, and Atra-Hasis in the Akkadian version are all versions of this. Most of the pagan flood stories have a few things in common. The flood is usually an attempt at population control or an attempt to cut down on the noise or similar ideas. One god circumvents another to preserve humanity in some way. In Gilgamesh, they Ea protects humanity because humans are the main food source of the gods and believed total destruction was a disproportionate punishment. Similar situations occurred in the Sumerian and Akkadian versions. The gods did not continue their slaughter because they realized they would lose their main food source and attempted to determine other means of population control. Then, there is Noah. Most of the same plot points at the other flood stories with a couple of differences. God does not try to do population control, he is trying to ensure justice. The organizer of destruction had every intention of ensuring redemption. The God of the Bible had a plan for human beings for the sake of human beings.
Sacrifice in the pagan customs was a means to feed the gods. In the bible, it was simply a redemptive act, entirely human in nature. They are not necessary in God's eyes in Isaiah it talks about God not needing sacrifices and preferring justice. Music, agriculture, technology, royalty, in pagan theology are all handed down from on high. In the bible, they are human creations. And most importantly, pagan theologies create humans as slaves of the gods and the leaders who represent them. The God of the bible creates all of humanity in his image. Same imagery, completely different worldview. In one, the divine is the foundation of an empire that is the universe and human beings are livestock. In the other, the divine is a gardener and the universe his masterwork and humans are his prize possessions that he is trying to cultivate into a beautiful image. The contrast is striking and I can only imagine how it would have been received when it was first written. Plus, I have a sneaking suspicion as to what inspired the writing in the first place. It might behoove the church to use similar strategies when attempting to infect the world with the kingdom of God.
Tuesday, March 5, 2013
Sometimes it is good to laugh
I wanted to put a couple things up that I found funny.
Really funny but takes a while to explain why
I really enjoyed this until I realized I was Broke-az, Po-az and possibly Cheap-az.
I will also say that if I ever meet Beatinyo-az I will become Kikis-az.
My new favorite song: I'm about to whip somebody's ass
I guess humans are not the only ones who like cute things
Monday, March 4, 2013
Why I'm not sure I should be on the church's website
I have been working on the website at my church and one of the areas I wanted to improve was the blog section. I wanted to expand the number of people talking in my church and on the web. I thought maybe I might be asked if I wanted to put a blog up there too. I looked at my character and the kind of things I say on facebook and realized it might not be such a good idea to link to a blog I was writing from a church website. I believe in God and I follow Jesus, but I don't want to be responsible for people leaving my church. on the off chance the leaders of my church are crazy I'm going to create a blog anyway and see if my assumptions are valid.
So the theme for this month is getting me excommunicated in the most respectful way I can. My first attempt, explain why it might be a good idea for us as Christians to view the world through the eyes of others. Thankfully, other people have considered this idea and have explored it in more entertaining and intelligent ways than I can so enjoy.
So the theme for this month is getting me excommunicated in the most respectful way I can. My first attempt, explain why it might be a good idea for us as Christians to view the world through the eyes of others. Thankfully, other people have considered this idea and have explored it in more entertaining and intelligent ways than I can so enjoy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)