A discussion of the way to show thankfulness, but more importantly, a way in which we probably shouldn't.
Saturday, July 18, 2015
Vlog- Thankfulness in Witness
A discussion of the way to show thankfulness, but more importantly, a way in which we probably shouldn't.
Wednesday, July 15, 2015
Reader Question- Censorship
What do you think of censorship? -Taidaishiar
---------
Interesting question, Taidaishiar. I was considering writing a couple of paragraphs and then formatting them so they look like they have been blacked out, but then I remembered how fundamentally lazy I am. So, I guess I'll just talk about that joke for a second and then answer your questions.
My thoughts on censorship are complicated, because it is a really, really complicated issue. It SHOULDN'T be, but largely is because while internet warriors tend to be all about some free speech, and so against censorship, they tend to get a little fuzzy on when, precisely, free speech is being honored or violated, and it often turns into an issue of "I can say what -I- want, but if you disagree with me, then you're censoring me!" People often forget that while free speech allows you to speak, it isn't a right to be heard, and certainly not a right to a platform.
So in general, I oppose censorship. But when I say that, I find I have to define what, precisely, I mean.
Someone saying that a method of story-telling is harmful to certain people isn't censorship, it's criticism.
Someone threatening the life of someone criticizing a thing they like so that they'll stop criticizing it IS censorship, or at least attempted censorship.
A retailer choosing not to carry a product because of its content isn't censorship, it's a sales strategy.
A government telling retailers that they aren't allowed to carry a product because of it's content is censorship.
Arresting someone because they threatened someone else's life isn't censorship, it's law enforcement.
Arresting someone because they videotaped civic officials threatening (or harming) someone else IS censorship, and corruption besides.
So, to sum up, you have the right to speak. And so long as your speech isn't harming someone else, no one has the right to shut you up. They are NOT, however, obligated to sell what you have to say for you, or to give you a platform to say it from, or carry your message into mass media. That falls under THEIR free speech.
---------
Interesting question, Taidaishiar. I was considering writing a couple of paragraphs and then formatting them so they look like they have been blacked out, but then I remembered how fundamentally lazy I am. So, I guess I'll just talk about that joke for a second and then answer your questions.
My thoughts on censorship are complicated, because it is a really, really complicated issue. It SHOULDN'T be, but largely is because while internet warriors tend to be all about some free speech, and so against censorship, they tend to get a little fuzzy on when, precisely, free speech is being honored or violated, and it often turns into an issue of "I can say what -I- want, but if you disagree with me, then you're censoring me!" People often forget that while free speech allows you to speak, it isn't a right to be heard, and certainly not a right to a platform.
So in general, I oppose censorship. But when I say that, I find I have to define what, precisely, I mean.
Someone saying that a method of story-telling is harmful to certain people isn't censorship, it's criticism.
Someone threatening the life of someone criticizing a thing they like so that they'll stop criticizing it IS censorship, or at least attempted censorship.
A retailer choosing not to carry a product because of its content isn't censorship, it's a sales strategy.
A government telling retailers that they aren't allowed to carry a product because of it's content is censorship.
Arresting someone because they threatened someone else's life isn't censorship, it's law enforcement.
Arresting someone because they videotaped civic officials threatening (or harming) someone else IS censorship, and corruption besides.
So, to sum up, you have the right to speak. And so long as your speech isn't harming someone else, no one has the right to shut you up. They are NOT, however, obligated to sell what you have to say for you, or to give you a platform to say it from, or carry your message into mass media. That falls under THEIR free speech.
Sunday, July 12, 2015
After the Marriage Fight... What Now?
With certain Country Clerks still holding out against issuing Marriage Licenses, the battle over the right of homosexual couples to marry isn't precisely over, but in the United States, in general, it is. The Supreme Court has ruled, a majority of Americans approve, and over time the holdouts against it will become more and more marginalized.
It's over. Marriage in the United States, as a matter of law, is no longer uniquely an institution between a Man and a Woman.
It's no secret that I consider this a victory, both from the civic and the religious perspectives. I am supremely grateful that my denomination, the PC(USA), managed to get there before my nation, if only by a matter of months, and I am also grateful to all the pioneers who worked so hard, and sacrificed so much, to bring us to this point.But as many people are making clear, both on social media and in the news, there are still a sizeable number of people who do not agree with this change of events, and most of them at least claim to do so for religious regions. And so it is to these Christians I now turn.
Hey there, guys. Pastor Dan, here.
Over the past couple of weeks I have heard numerous sermons, on the radio or online, with Pastors urging their congregations to fight the good fight, to "courageously stand up for the Bible." That is a sentiment that I agree with. Their intention, of course, is that you did your heels in on the marriage issue, refusing to acknowledge gay unions with loud voices. That intention I do not echo.
This is not the first time that a group of Christians has found themselves on this side of history in the United States. There were powerful groups of Christians who defended slavery until the Civil War ended the matter. Others opposed interracial marriage. Still others opposed divorce, and women's rights. All did so with Biblical arguments, all thinking that they were upholding the will of God.
Here is the kicker... most were, essentially, good people, trying to do the right thing, the Biblical thing, even when the world told them they were wrong. A laudable goal to be sure. The fact that they were completely wrong does not change that... sin affects us all. But what happens after? What do you do when society has rejected the truth you cling to?
There are several routes one can follow. Some never stop fighting, as those radio pastors were urging their congregations, but to what point? To become just another Westboro Baptist, confident, and utterly isolated, in their rightfulness? Or do you continue to recognize the call Christ has given you to the world, and choose a different fight?
The Supreme Court Ruling may be an amazing boon to the Evangelical community, an opportunity to move on. Because even if you still believe that Marriage should be exclusively between a man and a woman, there are, presumably, other things that you believe as well, things that you can work towards and pursue now that the issue of gay marriage is no longer a debatable point in our country.
For instance, for every instance of scripture having anything to do with homosexuality, there are reams and reams of text discussing the needs of the poor, the outsider, the sick. Instead of spending your energy in political forums, you can redirect those energies towards other God-mandated tasks. You can feed hungry people. Visit people in prisons. Provide aid to immigrants. These are all Biblically commanded practices that have been left sadly undeveloped in the light of the much louder, much more expensive, political battle over gay marriage.
No one is saying that you have to believe in Gay Marriage. But fighting against it is a lost cause, unless your intention is to no longer be capable of performing the other ministries the LORD has called you to. Like I mentioned before, this won't be the first time a group of Christians has been forced to do such a thing.
There is more to your faith than sex laws. There is more to your ethics than marriage. There is more to Christianity than opposing equal marriage rights. You could choose to fight this battle forever, to be defined by it and seen by others as hopeless, meaningless anachronisms. If you are loud enough, successful enough, they may even decide that opposition to homosexuality is all there is to you.
Or you could move on, and show the Love God has commanded you to have for others in other ways, ways that help people, that nurture people.
It's your call.
It's over. Marriage in the United States, as a matter of law, is no longer uniquely an institution between a Man and a Woman.
It's no secret that I consider this a victory, both from the civic and the religious perspectives. I am supremely grateful that my denomination, the PC(USA), managed to get there before my nation, if only by a matter of months, and I am also grateful to all the pioneers who worked so hard, and sacrificed so much, to bring us to this point.But as many people are making clear, both on social media and in the news, there are still a sizeable number of people who do not agree with this change of events, and most of them at least claim to do so for religious regions. And so it is to these Christians I now turn.
Hey there, guys. Pastor Dan, here.
Over the past couple of weeks I have heard numerous sermons, on the radio or online, with Pastors urging their congregations to fight the good fight, to "courageously stand up for the Bible." That is a sentiment that I agree with. Their intention, of course, is that you did your heels in on the marriage issue, refusing to acknowledge gay unions with loud voices. That intention I do not echo.
This is not the first time that a group of Christians has found themselves on this side of history in the United States. There were powerful groups of Christians who defended slavery until the Civil War ended the matter. Others opposed interracial marriage. Still others opposed divorce, and women's rights. All did so with Biblical arguments, all thinking that they were upholding the will of God.
Here is the kicker... most were, essentially, good people, trying to do the right thing, the Biblical thing, even when the world told them they were wrong. A laudable goal to be sure. The fact that they were completely wrong does not change that... sin affects us all. But what happens after? What do you do when society has rejected the truth you cling to?
There are several routes one can follow. Some never stop fighting, as those radio pastors were urging their congregations, but to what point? To become just another Westboro Baptist, confident, and utterly isolated, in their rightfulness? Or do you continue to recognize the call Christ has given you to the world, and choose a different fight?
The Supreme Court Ruling may be an amazing boon to the Evangelical community, an opportunity to move on. Because even if you still believe that Marriage should be exclusively between a man and a woman, there are, presumably, other things that you believe as well, things that you can work towards and pursue now that the issue of gay marriage is no longer a debatable point in our country.
For instance, for every instance of scripture having anything to do with homosexuality, there are reams and reams of text discussing the needs of the poor, the outsider, the sick. Instead of spending your energy in political forums, you can redirect those energies towards other God-mandated tasks. You can feed hungry people. Visit people in prisons. Provide aid to immigrants. These are all Biblically commanded practices that have been left sadly undeveloped in the light of the much louder, much more expensive, political battle over gay marriage.
No one is saying that you have to believe in Gay Marriage. But fighting against it is a lost cause, unless your intention is to no longer be capable of performing the other ministries the LORD has called you to. Like I mentioned before, this won't be the first time a group of Christians has been forced to do such a thing.
There is more to your faith than sex laws. There is more to your ethics than marriage. There is more to Christianity than opposing equal marriage rights. You could choose to fight this battle forever, to be defined by it and seen by others as hopeless, meaningless anachronisms. If you are loud enough, successful enough, they may even decide that opposition to homosexuality is all there is to you.
Or you could move on, and show the Love God has commanded you to have for others in other ways, ways that help people, that nurture people.
It's your call.
Friday, July 10, 2015
Reader Question- Why No Bible Quotes?
I guess my main concern is that nothing you said in your blog was backed by Scripture.
-Anonymous
--------------
I've wondered if something like this would come up. I addressed the idea in brief when Anon mentioned it in the comments elsewhere, but thought it was worth an entry of it's own.
For people who are used to reading blogs by pastors, mine might stand out somewhat in that I do not spend much time quoting, or even referencing, scripture in my blog. There is a strong tradition in the church for whom this is nearly anathema, where making a statement without an accompanying Biblical Bibliography is almost unheard of.
The thing is, most of what I say in this Blog is backed by Scripture. (I say "most" because, try as I might, I am unable to find solid Scriptural Attestation to the awesomeness of comic book movies.) I have decades of experience with the Scriptures, and I take them very, very seriously. They form the backbone of all of my theological thought.
So why not quote them? Several Reasons. To the list!
1- It can be really annoying to read blocks of quoted text. I'm going for readability, here, and huge blocks of reference text is exactly the sort of thing that might get an internet reader to stop.
2- Hardly anyone checks reference texts. I have read so many documents that were constantly throwing out random Biblical text addresses. Even in an age of Google, looking them all up is even more interfering with the reading than block quotes. So no one does... and then what do they prove? A lot of those references I have seen had exactly zilch to do with the ideas they were supposed to be backing... which leads me to believe their authors knew how much they were used.
3- Scripture is easy to Twist. The first thing the Devil said to anyone was a misrepresentation of the words of God, and later in the Bible Satan quotes scripture directly. Clearly, simple knowledge of the scriptures does not make one a good exegete. Or a good person.
4- Atheists don't care. I have a strong atheist/agnostic/whatever demographic who reads the Blog, and to them, space spent quoting scripture is wasted space. They don't care what the book says, for them it has no meaningful authority. If my thoughts and words can't be persuasive of themselves, all the Bible Quotes in the world won't change that.
5- It doesn't make me unassailable anyway. Even if I put in all the work and gave a full Bibliography for each of my posts (hard for a work of love, "do it as you have time" project) at the end of the day, so what? Another Christian could (and would, if so inclined) rebut me, with quoted scriptures of their own. And once all were quoted, we would be right back here at the beginning, two people talking through their differences.
There is this perception among Christians, especially in Evangelical circles, that all you have to do is throw down a good scriptural quote in order to win a Biblical argument, like scriptures were cards and a good Bible Scholar has all the trumps. But that isn't true, it never has been.
The scriptures aren't there to solve all of our problems, or make the world easy. The Bible is a complicated, living document representing hundreds of worldviews, some of which differ and contrast internally. What it DOES provide is a useful common language for discussion.
So that is why I don't spend time quoting the Scripture that helped me form my various philosophies, ideologies, and opinions. At the end of the day, if I can't provide a cogent argument in words for why you should think the way I do, you won't, no matter who or what I quote. And in the meantime, I save everyone a LOT of time and keep these posts WAAAAAY easier to read.
-Anonymous
--------------
I've wondered if something like this would come up. I addressed the idea in brief when Anon mentioned it in the comments elsewhere, but thought it was worth an entry of it's own.
For people who are used to reading blogs by pastors, mine might stand out somewhat in that I do not spend much time quoting, or even referencing, scripture in my blog. There is a strong tradition in the church for whom this is nearly anathema, where making a statement without an accompanying Biblical Bibliography is almost unheard of.
The thing is, most of what I say in this Blog is backed by Scripture. (I say "most" because, try as I might, I am unable to find solid Scriptural Attestation to the awesomeness of comic book movies.) I have decades of experience with the Scriptures, and I take them very, very seriously. They form the backbone of all of my theological thought.
So why not quote them? Several Reasons. To the list!
1- It can be really annoying to read blocks of quoted text. I'm going for readability, here, and huge blocks of reference text is exactly the sort of thing that might get an internet reader to stop.
2- Hardly anyone checks reference texts. I have read so many documents that were constantly throwing out random Biblical text addresses. Even in an age of Google, looking them all up is even more interfering with the reading than block quotes. So no one does... and then what do they prove? A lot of those references I have seen had exactly zilch to do with the ideas they were supposed to be backing... which leads me to believe their authors knew how much they were used.
3- Scripture is easy to Twist. The first thing the Devil said to anyone was a misrepresentation of the words of God, and later in the Bible Satan quotes scripture directly. Clearly, simple knowledge of the scriptures does not make one a good exegete. Or a good person.
4- Atheists don't care. I have a strong atheist/agnostic/whatever demographic who reads the Blog, and to them, space spent quoting scripture is wasted space. They don't care what the book says, for them it has no meaningful authority. If my thoughts and words can't be persuasive of themselves, all the Bible Quotes in the world won't change that.
5- It doesn't make me unassailable anyway. Even if I put in all the work and gave a full Bibliography for each of my posts (hard for a work of love, "do it as you have time" project) at the end of the day, so what? Another Christian could (and would, if so inclined) rebut me, with quoted scriptures of their own. And once all were quoted, we would be right back here at the beginning, two people talking through their differences.
There is this perception among Christians, especially in Evangelical circles, that all you have to do is throw down a good scriptural quote in order to win a Biblical argument, like scriptures were cards and a good Bible Scholar has all the trumps. But that isn't true, it never has been.
The scriptures aren't there to solve all of our problems, or make the world easy. The Bible is a complicated, living document representing hundreds of worldviews, some of which differ and contrast internally. What it DOES provide is a useful common language for discussion.
So that is why I don't spend time quoting the Scripture that helped me form my various philosophies, ideologies, and opinions. At the end of the day, if I can't provide a cogent argument in words for why you should think the way I do, you won't, no matter who or what I quote. And in the meantime, I save everyone a LOT of time and keep these posts WAAAAAY easier to read.
Thursday, July 9, 2015
Reader Question: The Crusader Fallacy
But the Bible says that Homosexuality is a sin!
-Anonymous
Homosexuality is routinely listed among sexual perversions...
-Anonymous
How can it be sin to protect the Bible...
-Anonymous
We're just trying to do as we have been commanded by God...
-Anonymous
Fuck you, you godless demon-worshipping Sodomite...
-Anonymous
---------------------------------------------
I seem to have struck a nerve.
My post on the sinfulness of opposing Homosexual rights got a lot of feedback, a lot of it good or thankful. There were some, though, who seemed to oppose what I was saying strongly. Some very, very strongly. For reasons I won't waste time to speculate on, a lot of them also wrote anonymously. Hmmm.
Now anyone who spends any amount of time around Internet message boards will know that nothing above is particularly shocking, even the last, which you would assume you'd always get a certain amount of. If anything, getting "f-bombed" probably is just a metric that I have started getting enough readership that an internet Troll finally wandered in. We'll take it as a sign of progress... maybe I'm not just preaching to the choir here, anymore.
It's the other responses that piqued my interest. My previous article didn't spend any time claiming that homosexual relationships weren't sinful, in fact, it outright said that they were. (I know this because, homosexual or not, they are HUMAN relationships.) So that people would defend their own actions by reiterating a point I had already conceded shows that we are dealing with an interesting line of thought, one I choose to refer to as the "crusader fallacy."
The Crusader Fallacy is simple: It is the presupposition that any acts an individual makes are acceptable, so long as they are for a good(read: divine) cause. It's a popular line of anti-heroes, often popularized by the quote; "I may fight on the side of the angels, but do not mistake me for one of them."
So cool, so daring, so eager to get the job done! Makes for GREAT fictional characters, and as it happens, piss poor Christians.
Because, you see, the Crusader Fallacy is COMPLETELY absent in Scripture. There are NO texts that imply that your actions toward another human being are justified by the sinfulness of their actions. Even Old Testament laws with prescribed punishments have been removed, because of a simple command of Christ: "Let the one without sin cast the first stone."
We like the idea of being the ones above the law, the ones who are righteous, not because of our actions, but because of the motivation behind them. Righteous in of ourselves. That is what self-righteous means. But to be Christian denies the concept of self-righteousness. To be Christian means to own that we are sinners in need of a savior. It also means we are called, by that savior, to love others, to care for others, to support our brothers and sisters in need. As opposed to the ones who are hurting them.
Your actions are your actions. Neither God nor the Bible need your protecting. You are not the great Crusader placed on Earth to enforce God's will. God can enforce God's own will pretty effectively. (So effectively, in fact, that you should do some honest soul searching about whether or not the Supreme Court Ruling wasn't itself God's will.)
The opponents of Gay Marriage, as a movement, have separated loved ones in their dying moments, have denied children loving parents, have used violence to frighten and intimidate people, have dragged people's names through the dirt in Social Media and have done all of this SAYING THAT THEY WERE DOING IT IN CHRIST'S NAME.
Those are sinful acts. No debate, no discussion, full stop. Supporting them, enabling them, FUNDING them, encouraging them, are also all sinful acts.
So it doesn't matter, not at all, not in the least, whether or not Homosexuality itself is sinful. If you support the suppression of Homosexual rights, if you expend energy towards fighting Gay Equality, and above all if you claim to do so in Christs name, then you are committing egregious sin, either by your own actions or by the actions of those you support.
Don't fall to the Crusader fallacy. Do not listen to the false prophets who turn the liberating word of God into a message of fear and anger (The Devil's oldest trick). Do not miss the log in your own eye from searching for splinters in others.
Recognize your own sin. And repent.
-Anonymous
Homosexuality is routinely listed among sexual perversions...
-Anonymous
How can it be sin to protect the Bible...
-Anonymous
We're just trying to do as we have been commanded by God...
-Anonymous
Fuck you, you godless demon-worshipping Sodomite...
-Anonymous
---------------------------------------------
I seem to have struck a nerve.
My post on the sinfulness of opposing Homosexual rights got a lot of feedback, a lot of it good or thankful. There were some, though, who seemed to oppose what I was saying strongly. Some very, very strongly. For reasons I won't waste time to speculate on, a lot of them also wrote anonymously. Hmmm.
Now anyone who spends any amount of time around Internet message boards will know that nothing above is particularly shocking, even the last, which you would assume you'd always get a certain amount of. If anything, getting "f-bombed" probably is just a metric that I have started getting enough readership that an internet Troll finally wandered in. We'll take it as a sign of progress... maybe I'm not just preaching to the choir here, anymore.
It's the other responses that piqued my interest. My previous article didn't spend any time claiming that homosexual relationships weren't sinful, in fact, it outright said that they were. (I know this because, homosexual or not, they are HUMAN relationships.) So that people would defend their own actions by reiterating a point I had already conceded shows that we are dealing with an interesting line of thought, one I choose to refer to as the "crusader fallacy."
The Crusader Fallacy is simple: It is the presupposition that any acts an individual makes are acceptable, so long as they are for a good(read: divine) cause. It's a popular line of anti-heroes, often popularized by the quote; "I may fight on the side of the angels, but do not mistake me for one of them."
So cool, so daring, so eager to get the job done! Makes for GREAT fictional characters, and as it happens, piss poor Christians.
Because, you see, the Crusader Fallacy is COMPLETELY absent in Scripture. There are NO texts that imply that your actions toward another human being are justified by the sinfulness of their actions. Even Old Testament laws with prescribed punishments have been removed, because of a simple command of Christ: "Let the one without sin cast the first stone."
We like the idea of being the ones above the law, the ones who are righteous, not because of our actions, but because of the motivation behind them. Righteous in of ourselves. That is what self-righteous means. But to be Christian denies the concept of self-righteousness. To be Christian means to own that we are sinners in need of a savior. It also means we are called, by that savior, to love others, to care for others, to support our brothers and sisters in need. As opposed to the ones who are hurting them.
Your actions are your actions. Neither God nor the Bible need your protecting. You are not the great Crusader placed on Earth to enforce God's will. God can enforce God's own will pretty effectively. (So effectively, in fact, that you should do some honest soul searching about whether or not the Supreme Court Ruling wasn't itself God's will.)
The opponents of Gay Marriage, as a movement, have separated loved ones in their dying moments, have denied children loving parents, have used violence to frighten and intimidate people, have dragged people's names through the dirt in Social Media and have done all of this SAYING THAT THEY WERE DOING IT IN CHRIST'S NAME.
Those are sinful acts. No debate, no discussion, full stop. Supporting them, enabling them, FUNDING them, encouraging them, are also all sinful acts.
So it doesn't matter, not at all, not in the least, whether or not Homosexuality itself is sinful. If you support the suppression of Homosexual rights, if you expend energy towards fighting Gay Equality, and above all if you claim to do so in Christs name, then you are committing egregious sin, either by your own actions or by the actions of those you support.
Don't fall to the Crusader fallacy. Do not listen to the false prophets who turn the liberating word of God into a message of fear and anger (The Devil's oldest trick). Do not miss the log in your own eye from searching for splinters in others.
Recognize your own sin. And repent.
Wednesday, July 8, 2015
Most Boring Cancer Story Ever
I've been a writer for most of my life. Through all of it, I have gained a sense of timing, of drama, of tension, or at least a feel for when I have achieved those things. I also have a sense of the moment. We were poised for something amazing here. The post where I shared that I had been diagnosed with cancer jumped past 2000 views... easily the single most of any individual bit of writing I have ever done. People were being great, sending their regards, following my story passing along good wishes.
The moment was ready, people were reading, and I was gonna tell the hell out of this story.
And now, it's kinda done. No swell of emotional toil, no heartbreaking second act, no last moment miracle cure. My pathology came back on the second growth and showed it was benign. There are no signs of cancer growth elsewhere in my body.
It is now very, very likely that all the cancer had been removed before I, or anyone else, knew that I had it.
Now we're not just going to leave it at that, of course. Over the next few months I will be setting up a series of tests and the like to keep an eye on things and make sure that it stays well and truly away. Maybe one day it'll all get picked up again, but then again, maybe not.
What matters is, for now, I seem to be cancer free. This little bit of Ask Pastor Dan ends up being over almost before it was begun. Most boring cancer story ever.
And you know what? I can live with that. We'll come up with something more interesting later. For right now, while I continue to heal from my surgeries, boring is JUST fine.
The moment was ready, people were reading, and I was gonna tell the hell out of this story.
And now, it's kinda done. No swell of emotional toil, no heartbreaking second act, no last moment miracle cure. My pathology came back on the second growth and showed it was benign. There are no signs of cancer growth elsewhere in my body.
It is now very, very likely that all the cancer had been removed before I, or anyone else, knew that I had it.
Now we're not just going to leave it at that, of course. Over the next few months I will be setting up a series of tests and the like to keep an eye on things and make sure that it stays well and truly away. Maybe one day it'll all get picked up again, but then again, maybe not.
What matters is, for now, I seem to be cancer free. This little bit of Ask Pastor Dan ends up being over almost before it was begun. Most boring cancer story ever.
And you know what? I can live with that. We'll come up with something more interesting later. For right now, while I continue to heal from my surgeries, boring is JUST fine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)