I've been thinking about justice a lot lately, and what we expect to happen when someone does something wrong. There are a few things we can focus on: making sure those who have been wronged are made whole, making sure those who have done wrong are punished, and making sure our solution leads to a better society. There are certainly times when these goals coincide, when one person steals from another for example. We can have the thief repay the victim for what was stolen, and add a bit for their trouble. This serves to make the victim whole, and if the extra is the right amount, it should discourage people from stealing in the future.
Of course, it isn't always so easy. If someone is raped or beaten to a pulp, it might not really be possible to make them whole. We will obviously try to do what we can for the victim, make sure they get medical care and some compensation for lost work and such, but there is definitely a part of us that wants to make sure the criminal gets punished. There is a certain amount that this will also make society better by making people think twice before committing such a crime, but I'm not sure how far this goes (I'm sure we've all heard that the death penalty is not a deterrent). But I think people are generally focused on the punishment side of things.
I can understand why people want to focus on punishment, when I hear about certain crimes (like rape) within a few seconds my mind goes toward how horrible it must have been for that woman, then I can imagine it happening to someone I know and care about, then I immediately want the guy to be punished. I'll have a little fantasy of kicking the guy repeatedly in the balls, or some other such thing. Fuck that guy. It is easy to just focus on making sure he winds up in jail and leave it at that. The problem with spending our focus on punishment is that we often don't make our society better, and we might even make it worse. If we send them to jail and don't worry about what happens to them while they are there, how will it improve our society when they get out? We should make sure their time in prison is actually rehabilitation and not just punishment. Is it possible to rehabilitate a rapist? I don't know, but I'm pretty sure our current prisons are terrible enough that they only make criminals worse.
When it comes to justice, the bible seems to focus mostly on the punishment side of things rather than rehabilitation. Just look at Sodom and Gomorrah or Noah's flood. The bible expects us to believe that everyone in those cities were evil, or in the case of the flood, everyone on earth except for 8 people were evil and deserved to die. There doesn't seem to be a lot of effort put towards bringing those people around, making them realize that they have lead a bad life and change things. No, they are just killed. Sometimes I wonder if these ideas are baked into the brains of the average believer in this country. Perhaps that is why we are so focused on punishment in this country and so few people seem to be concerned with the conditions within the prisons.
Monday, December 31, 2012
Sunday, December 30, 2012
How do you identify a Poe, and should you bother?
I'm sure most (if not all) of my readers are familiar with Poe's Law, but for anyone who isn't, a Poe in this context is an atheist who is pretending to be a religious nut. I've been having quite a few discussions with theists lately (mostly on twitter) and have spent my share of time wondering if the people I'm talking with are for real. It does seem like a waste of my time if I'm just arguing with an atheist who is screwing around. So part of me doesn't want to talk to them if they aren't really Christians, but instead are just pretending. If I really get an obvious vibe that someone isn't really a Christian I will sometimes disengage from the conversation.
On the other hand, because of Poe's law it is really hard to tell if those people are actually Christians. And part of me wonders if it is even worth thinking about. The great thing about twitter is that it is a public forum. Even if the person I'm talking with isn't really a Christian, it is possible someone who sees the exchange is a Christian and actually agrees with what the Poe said. It could also be worth it for me to just have a bit of practice arguing a certain point.
I think a much better measure for when to stop arguing with someone is when they get annoying. Whether they are actually Christians or not doesn't really matter much to me, what I care about is that we have a good conversation. If someone is being completely illogical, or if they are jumping from one argument to another every time I make a point, that is when I want to stop talking to them. This is independent of whether they are misrepresenting themselves.
On the other hand, because of Poe's law it is really hard to tell if those people are actually Christians. And part of me wonders if it is even worth thinking about. The great thing about twitter is that it is a public forum. Even if the person I'm talking with isn't really a Christian, it is possible someone who sees the exchange is a Christian and actually agrees with what the Poe said. It could also be worth it for me to just have a bit of practice arguing a certain point.
I think a much better measure for when to stop arguing with someone is when they get annoying. Whether they are actually Christians or not doesn't really matter much to me, what I care about is that we have a good conversation. If someone is being completely illogical, or if they are jumping from one argument to another every time I make a point, that is when I want to stop talking to them. This is independent of whether they are misrepresenting themselves.
Saturday, December 29, 2012
What Christian blogs do you read?
A while ago on the atheist experience, Jen mentioned that she likes to make sure she reads one thing she disagrees with every day. While I hadn't quite thought in those terms, I did make an effort to follow Christian blogs as much as I follow atheist blogs, at one point I went through a handful of top 10 lists of Christian blogs and added them to my feed reader.
These blogs fell in a few different categories, the first was people who are just posting inspiring things for fellow Christians to read. "Be happy today for all the good the lord has brought into your life" and things of that nature. While I obviously disagree that God has anything to do with it, I'm not here to shit all over their positive messages to each other. There was nothing for me in those blogs so I unsubscribed.
There were a few other blogs that I tried commenting on where either my comments would get moderated out for being an opposing viewpoint (I wasn't being nasty, just disagreeing and asking questions) or the other participants were outright hostile to anyone who disagreed with them. These blogs I found frustrating as I am really after a conversation, I unsubscribed. (I suppose I could just be a silent reader, but I like being able to weigh in and get a discussion going)
That leaves the good ones, blogs of Christians who post interesting stuff and welcome a conversation with people who have opposing views. I had found a few of these, but they seem to have stopped blogging lately.
It is my fault as I have not been putting in any effort to find new Christian blogs lately, but I seem to have fallen into a little bit of a bubble of only reading people who are also atheists. I try to be open minded, but I think it would be good for me to read a few blogs of people who I disagree with fundamentally. I recently discovered Speak the truth in love, and that one seems pretty good so far. Does anyone have any recommendations?
I have a few suggestions in the comments, so I figured I'd edit the original post to include them here. If anyone else has additional suggestions feel free to share. The more the better :)
Grundy has suggested the following blog
These blogs fell in a few different categories, the first was people who are just posting inspiring things for fellow Christians to read. "Be happy today for all the good the lord has brought into your life" and things of that nature. While I obviously disagree that God has anything to do with it, I'm not here to shit all over their positive messages to each other. There was nothing for me in those blogs so I unsubscribed.
There were a few other blogs that I tried commenting on where either my comments would get moderated out for being an opposing viewpoint (I wasn't being nasty, just disagreeing and asking questions) or the other participants were outright hostile to anyone who disagreed with them. These blogs I found frustrating as I am really after a conversation, I unsubscribed. (I suppose I could just be a silent reader, but I like being able to weigh in and get a discussion going)
That leaves the good ones, blogs of Christians who post interesting stuff and welcome a conversation with people who have opposing views. I had found a few of these, but they seem to have stopped blogging lately.
It is my fault as I have not been putting in any effort to find new Christian blogs lately, but I seem to have fallen into a little bit of a bubble of only reading people who are also atheists. I try to be open minded, but I think it would be good for me to read a few blogs of people who I disagree with fundamentally. I recently discovered Speak the truth in love, and that one seems pretty good so far. Does anyone have any recommendations?
Recommendations from my readers
I have a few suggestions in the comments, so I figured I'd edit the original post to include them here. If anyone else has additional suggestions feel free to share. The more the better :)
Grundy has suggested the following blog
Sheldon Cooper has suggested the following 2 blogs
Friday, December 28, 2012
Eye witnesses are unreliable
I've seen some people recently claim that evidence for Jesus lies in the eyewitness accounts in the bible. Of course I have seen people argue with this that the gospels were written much later than when Jesus supposedly lived, so any potential eyewitness would be very old by the time it was actually written, and more likely, it is second or third hand stories of people who knew these eye witnesses. Furthermore, the stories from the gospels are so spectacular, that if they were true you would expect it to be big news of the time, and yet there are no extra-biblical accounts of those events.
But that is not actually my main concern today, what if we were to assume that the gospels were first hand accounts of what four separate people saw and wrote about. What if they were simply writing down events as they recall? Would this mean that all of those things really happened? I would argue that no, it does not mean that what they think they saw happened. Eyewitnesses are notoriously unreliable, I feel like I have seen a huge number of news stories lately where people are determining that eye witness testimony is faulty. We can see this pretty quickly at wikipedia or at the innocence project webpage. Also, anyone who has been to a magic show can tell you how convincing the tricks were, even if they knew it was fake, it looked real. And how many people have been taken in by psychics who are just doing a cold reading?
No, eye witnesses are certainly not all the proof we need for anything. They provide a good place to start looking, but we need more evidence to make any actual conclusions. If you want to see a great example of eye witnesses failing miserably, watch this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBPG_OBgTWg
(well, the video isn't exactly eye witness testimony, but it sort of makes my point...just shut up and enjoy, Derren Brown is awesome)
But that is not actually my main concern today, what if we were to assume that the gospels were first hand accounts of what four separate people saw and wrote about. What if they were simply writing down events as they recall? Would this mean that all of those things really happened? I would argue that no, it does not mean that what they think they saw happened. Eyewitnesses are notoriously unreliable, I feel like I have seen a huge number of news stories lately where people are determining that eye witness testimony is faulty. We can see this pretty quickly at wikipedia or at the innocence project webpage. Also, anyone who has been to a magic show can tell you how convincing the tricks were, even if they knew it was fake, it looked real. And how many people have been taken in by psychics who are just doing a cold reading?
No, eye witnesses are certainly not all the proof we need for anything. They provide a good place to start looking, but we need more evidence to make any actual conclusions. If you want to see a great example of eye witnesses failing miserably, watch this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBPG_OBgTWg
(well, the video isn't exactly eye witness testimony, but it sort of makes my point...just shut up and enjoy, Derren Brown is awesome)
Thursday, December 27, 2012
Quantum Tunneling
Today will be a quick one, I was recently listening to the titanium physicist podcast on Quantum tunneling, which is the idea that through quantum processes, particles can make it to places where they shouldn't be based on classical mechanics. One thing about the idea that really caught my attention is that because of quantum tunneling, the sun is able to burn at a much lower temperature than it should be able to based on classical mechanics. Pretty neat stuff. I'm no physicist, so I'm not going to try to explain how it works, but if that little taste caught your interest I would definitely recommend listening to that episode.
Wednesday, December 26, 2012
John and Jude Overview
Listen to the podcast below (or right click this link for the mp3 file)
Podcast Powered By Podbean
As I have explained in the past, one of the reasons I am doing this blog is I am curious to see what kind of messages one might get from reading the bible. What might one learn as a take-away. Here is my quick summary of the good and bad from 1, 2 & 3 John and Jude
I have been trying to categorize the various items so that similar items will be next to each other. I will start with the categories that have all good items, next show categories with some good and some bad items, then finish with categories with all bad items.
1 John 1:3 You should share good things in life with other people
"that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ."
--Skepticism--
"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world."
Jude 4 Be aware of enemies in your midst
"For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ."
--Faith--
1 John 2:4 If you really have faith you will do works
"Whoever says "I know him" but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him"
1 John 3:22 God will give us whatever we ask for
"and whatever we ask we receive from him, because we keep his commandments and do what pleases him"
1 John 4:12 No one has ever seen God
"No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us."
--Love--
1 John 3:17 Love each other and help those in need
"But if anyone has the world's goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him?"
1 John 3:18 Talk is cheap, show love with your actions
"Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth."
2 John 5,10-11 Love those who agree with you, hate those who don't
"love one another"
"If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works."
1 John 1:8 We are all sinners
"If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us."
1 John 2:16 the world is evil, sex is bad
"For all that is in the world--the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions--is not from the Father but is from the world."
1 John 3:6 If you sin you can't be with God
"No one who abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him."
--Fear--
Jude 23 Use fear tactics if necessary
"save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh."
1 John 4:18 Love casts out fear
"There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love."
1 John 5:19 Satan has power over the whole world
"We know that we are from God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one."
--Justice--
1 John 3:15 Murder and hate are the same
"Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."
--Knowledge--
Jude 10 Punished for ignorance and following God given instincts
"But these people blaspheme all that they do not understand, and they are destroyed by all that they, like unreasoning animals, understand instinctively."
--Persecution--
1 John 3:13 Persecution complex
"Do not be surprised, brothers,that the world hates you."
--Sin--
1 John 5:18 Christians don't sin
"We know that everyone who has been born of God does not keep on sinning, but he who was born of God protects him, and the evil one does not touch him."
Jude 8 Sex, disobedience, and blasphemy are the worst sins
"Yet in like manner these people also, relying on their dreams, defile the flesh, reject authority, and blaspheme the glorious ones."
--Teachers--
1 John 2:27 You don't need teachers, you get everything you need to know from Jesus
"But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie--just as it has taught you, abide in him."
Podcast Powered By Podbean
As I have explained in the past, one of the reasons I am doing this blog is I am curious to see what kind of messages one might get from reading the bible. What might one learn as a take-away. Here is my quick summary of the good and bad from 1, 2 & 3 John and Jude
I have been trying to categorize the various items so that similar items will be next to each other. I will start with the categories that have all good items, next show categories with some good and some bad items, then finish with categories with all bad items.
--Selfishness--
"that which we have seen and heard we proclaim also to you, so that you too may have fellowship with us; and indeed our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son Jesus Christ."
--Skepticism--
"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world."
Good and Bad
--Faith--
1 John 2:4 If you really have faith you will do works
"Whoever says "I know him" but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him"
1 John 3:22 God will give us whatever we ask for
"and whatever we ask we receive from him, because we keep his commandments and do what pleases him"
1 John 4:12 No one has ever seen God
"No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us."
--Love--
1 John 3:17 Love each other and help those in need
"But if anyone has the world's goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him?"
1 John 3:18 Talk is cheap, show love with your actions
"Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth."
2 John 5,10-11 Love those who agree with you, hate those who don't
"love one another"
"If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works."
Bad
--Apocalypse--
"Children, it is the last hour, and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. Therefore we know that it is the last hour."
Jude 18-19 End times prediction
"They said to you, "In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions." It is these who cause divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit."
Jude 18-19 End times prediction
"They said to you, "In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions." It is these who cause divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit."
--Church Politics--
"No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also."
1 John 5:10 If you don't believe in Jesus you make God a liar
"...Whoever does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne concerning his Son."
3 John 9 Petty bickering between church leaders
"I have written something to the church, but Diotrephes, who likes to put himself first, does not acknowledge our authority."
1 John 5:10 If you don't believe in Jesus you make God a liar
"...Whoever does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne concerning his Son."
3 John 9 Petty bickering between church leaders
"I have written something to the church, but Diotrephes, who likes to put himself first, does not acknowledge our authority."
--Evil--
"If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us."
1 John 2:16 the world is evil, sex is bad
"For all that is in the world--the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride in possessions--is not from the Father but is from the world."
1 John 3:6 If you sin you can't be with God
"No one who abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him."
--Fear--
Jude 23 Use fear tactics if necessary
"save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh."
1 John 4:18 Love casts out fear
"There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love."
1 John 5:19 Satan has power over the whole world
"We know that we are from God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one."
--Justice--
1 John 3:15 Murder and hate are the same
"Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."
--Knowledge--
Jude 10 Punished for ignorance and following God given instincts
"But these people blaspheme all that they do not understand, and they are destroyed by all that they, like unreasoning animals, understand instinctively."
--Persecution--
1 John 3:13 Persecution complex
"Do not be surprised, brothers,that the world hates you."
--Sin--
1 John 5:18 Christians don't sin
"We know that everyone who has been born of God does not keep on sinning, but he who was born of God protects him, and the evil one does not touch him."
Jude 8 Sex, disobedience, and blasphemy are the worst sins
"Yet in like manner these people also, relying on their dreams, defile the flesh, reject authority, and blaspheme the glorious ones."
--Teachers--
1 John 2:27 You don't need teachers, you get everything you need to know from Jesus
"But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie--just as it has taught you, abide in him."
Tuesday, December 25, 2012
He sees you when you're sleeping, he knows when you're awake
Given that today is Christmas, I thought it might be fun to explore a recent thought I had about Santa Claus. If you take a step back, the story is actually a bit disturbing. There is some guy who watches you all year long keeping track of everything you do and judging you. At the end of the year he invades your home, eats your cookies and if he deems your behavior acceptable, drops off some presents. It seems like an inherently invasive story, which on the surface you might even think would be scary to children. I guess when kids are young enough to believe in Santa, this is probably their view of their parents and it doesn't seem like a big deal, but when I had that thought the other day it made me laugh. The other things, of course, is that he is a benevolent guy, but how little of a change would it take to make the story play out much, much differently?
Merry Christmas everyone!
Monday, December 24, 2012
Jude: When all else fails, use fear
Listen to the podcast below (or right click this link for the mp3 file)
Podcast Powered By Podbean
Back to wikipedia, apparently the authenticity of this book was never doubted, but it's canon status was. "The links between the Epistle and 2 Peter, its use of the Apocryphal Books, and its brevity raised concern." The links between Jude and 2 Peter are that they are too similar, and either one was copied from the other, or they both used a common source.
Greeting (v. 1-2)
Jude identifies himself as the writer and he says he is writing to those who believe in Jesus.
Judgment on False Teachers (v. 3-16)
Be careful, some ungodly people have crept in to the church hierarchy to pervert it.
Now this is interesting, it is basically admitting that there are bad people within the church and that you should be wary of that. I know there have been previous messages about false prophets and such, but this explicitly says that are from within the church, which wasn't the message I got before. I'm not sure if it wasn't implied before or if I was just being thick.
Don't forget, Jesus saved a people out of Egypt, but also destroyed those who did not believe. The people of Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities served as an example of those who deserve a punishment of fire.
It was Sodom and gomorrah and surrounding cities? I don't think I've ever heard that before. Also, I'd like to point out that in this version of the story it is Jesus who is doing these things. I guess this is consistent if Jesus=God.
Don't forget about the angels who sinned and are being kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until judgment day.
Whoa, I'm guessing stuff like this is why the canon of this book is questioned.
These people, relying on their dreams, defile the flesh, reject authority, and blaspheme the glorious one.
Interesting what is chosen as the horrible thing to do, defile flesh (sex), reject authority and blaspheme. These really don't seem like the worst sins to commit to me.
According to Guzik, the bit about their dreams means that they were dreamers out of touch with reality. It also could mean that they were relying on supposedly prophetic dreams. Seems like a reasonable enough interpretation to me.
v10 "these people blaspheme all that they do not understand, and they are destroyed by all that they, like unreasoning animals, understand instinctively."
This verse really jumped out at me. Does it really make sense for blasphemy to be so horrible if the person doing it doesn't understand what they are doing? It's one thing to understand what God is and blaspheme against him, at least that makes sense for God to get irritated by. But if someone doesn't even understand it and blasphemes, it is basically on accident right? I mean, if a young child or a mentally deficient person commits a crime which they don't understand, we don't punish them in the same way we punish an adult who knows what they are doing. You are being punished for ignorance. Furthermore, you are punished for you animal instincts, which presumably God gave you. Seems pretty damn unfair to me.
Enoch prophesied that Jesus would come with 10,000 holy ones to execute judgment on the ungodly.
Why does God need such a posse?
A Call to Persevere (v. 17-23)
Remember that Jesus said there would be scoffers in the last time. Keep yourselves in the in the love of God. Wait for the mercy of Jesus that leads to eternal life, and have mercy on those who doubt and save them from the fire. To others "show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh."
Again, it seems that the end times are said to be near, although this one is less solid than many others we have seen in the past. Also, I'm not sure what that last line means, but it sounds like we are supposed to save those we can and fear those we can't.
According to Guzik this second group must be saved with fear. They need to be confronted more strongly but with the right approach can be saved. I suppose this is consistent with the reading.
Doxology (v. 24-25)
Jesus is great.
For the overview post (If you think I should add or remove stuff from this list please let me know, I think it would make good conversation)
Good:
Jude 4 Be aware of enemies in your midst
"For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ."
Jude 22 Help those who need it
"And have mercy on those who doubt"
Bad:
Jude 8 Sex, disobedience, and blasphemy are the worst sins
"Yet in like manner these people also, relying on their dreams, defile the flesh, reject authority, and blaspheme the glorious ones."
Jude 10 Punished for ignorance and following God given instincts
"But these people blaspheme all that they do not understand, and they are destroyed by all that they, like unreasoning animals, understand instinctively."
Jude 18-19 End times prediction
"They said to you, "In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions." It is these who cause divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit."
Jude 23 Use fear tactics if necessary
"save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh."
Podcast Powered By Podbean
Back to wikipedia, apparently the authenticity of this book was never doubted, but it's canon status was. "The links between the Epistle and 2 Peter, its use of the Apocryphal Books, and its brevity raised concern." The links between Jude and 2 Peter are that they are too similar, and either one was copied from the other, or they both used a common source.
Greeting (v. 1-2)
Jude identifies himself as the writer and he says he is writing to those who believe in Jesus.
Judgment on False Teachers (v. 3-16)
Be careful, some ungodly people have crept in to the church hierarchy to pervert it.
Now this is interesting, it is basically admitting that there are bad people within the church and that you should be wary of that. I know there have been previous messages about false prophets and such, but this explicitly says that are from within the church, which wasn't the message I got before. I'm not sure if it wasn't implied before or if I was just being thick.
Don't forget, Jesus saved a people out of Egypt, but also destroyed those who did not believe. The people of Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities served as an example of those who deserve a punishment of fire.
It was Sodom and gomorrah and surrounding cities? I don't think I've ever heard that before. Also, I'd like to point out that in this version of the story it is Jesus who is doing these things. I guess this is consistent if Jesus=God.
Don't forget about the angels who sinned and are being kept in eternal chains under gloomy darkness until judgment day.
Whoa, I'm guessing stuff like this is why the canon of this book is questioned.
These people, relying on their dreams, defile the flesh, reject authority, and blaspheme the glorious one.
Interesting what is chosen as the horrible thing to do, defile flesh (sex), reject authority and blaspheme. These really don't seem like the worst sins to commit to me.
According to Guzik, the bit about their dreams means that they were dreamers out of touch with reality. It also could mean that they were relying on supposedly prophetic dreams. Seems like a reasonable enough interpretation to me.
v10 "these people blaspheme all that they do not understand, and they are destroyed by all that they, like unreasoning animals, understand instinctively."
This verse really jumped out at me. Does it really make sense for blasphemy to be so horrible if the person doing it doesn't understand what they are doing? It's one thing to understand what God is and blaspheme against him, at least that makes sense for God to get irritated by. But if someone doesn't even understand it and blasphemes, it is basically on accident right? I mean, if a young child or a mentally deficient person commits a crime which they don't understand, we don't punish them in the same way we punish an adult who knows what they are doing. You are being punished for ignorance. Furthermore, you are punished for you animal instincts, which presumably God gave you. Seems pretty damn unfair to me.
Enoch prophesied that Jesus would come with 10,000 holy ones to execute judgment on the ungodly.
Why does God need such a posse?
A Call to Persevere (v. 17-23)
Remember that Jesus said there would be scoffers in the last time. Keep yourselves in the in the love of God. Wait for the mercy of Jesus that leads to eternal life, and have mercy on those who doubt and save them from the fire. To others "show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh."
Again, it seems that the end times are said to be near, although this one is less solid than many others we have seen in the past. Also, I'm not sure what that last line means, but it sounds like we are supposed to save those we can and fear those we can't.
According to Guzik this second group must be saved with fear. They need to be confronted more strongly but with the right approach can be saved. I suppose this is consistent with the reading.
Doxology (v. 24-25)
Jesus is great.
For the overview post (If you think I should add or remove stuff from this list please let me know, I think it would make good conversation)
Good:
Jude 4 Be aware of enemies in your midst
"For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ."
Jude 22 Help those who need it
"And have mercy on those who doubt"
Bad:
Jude 8 Sex, disobedience, and blasphemy are the worst sins
"Yet in like manner these people also, relying on their dreams, defile the flesh, reject authority, and blaspheme the glorious ones."
Jude 10 Punished for ignorance and following God given instincts
"But these people blaspheme all that they do not understand, and they are destroyed by all that they, like unreasoning animals, understand instinctively."
Jude 18-19 End times prediction
"They said to you, "In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions." It is these who cause divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit."
Jude 23 Use fear tactics if necessary
"save others by snatching them out of the fire; to others show mercy with fear, hating even the garment stained by the flesh."
Sunday, December 23, 2012
Evolution Debunked!
I don't usually check twitter in the morning, but I'm glad I did today as I was treated to the following
One other point here before I move on, since I am planning on posting about this, I figured I'd check the wayback machine to see if I could get an archive of this page in case it gets changed at the source. And what I find is that on July 17 2011, they had 73 counterexamples instead of 48 which results in a 2.4% chance of evolution being true. Still doesn't seem terribly convincing to me, but it sounds a hell of a lot better than 9%. It might be fun to see what has been removed from the old list, I might do that in a later post.
Oh! I actually have yet another point here before I move on. Notice in my quote from conservapedia there is a footnote. It says the following.
Not surprisingly, many of these are simply arguments from ignorance. I would say the best example in the first section "logical examples" is item 6
Many of these items simply show that they writer doesn't understand how evolution works. In fact, they are so silly I'm not even sure how to respond to them, for example, number 7 (again, from the section "logical examples")
There is a whole section about irreducible complexity, which is actually just an argument from ignorance itself, which is why I wasn't going to make this my last item, but scrolling through the page I saw the bacterial flagellum and I couldn't help myself. Item 3 in this section states
There is plenty more material here, but this post is already getting long. Next time I feel like shooting fish in a barrel I'll revisit this list.
Excellent page on why the #evolution myth is so ridiculous:po.st/ktBGoC #science has repeatedly disproven evolution. #factThat's great! I've always wondered how evolution would be proven false, now I have a reference. It's a link to conservapedia and gives 48 counterexamples to evolution. It starts with the claim that if even one of the following 48 items is correct, then evolution is wrong. It goes on to say
— Evolution is a Myth (@DebunkEvolution) December 13, 2012
Moreover, even if there is merely a 5% chance that each of these counterexamples is correct (and the odds are far higher than that[2]), then the probability that the theory of evolution is true is less than 9%.What?! I haven't even gotten to the part about evolution and I'm already laughing out loud. Where do they get 5% chance for each of these items? I assume they just pulled that number out of their ass. And why would that lead to 9%? Well it's simple, they must be assuming that each of the arguments are independent, and if each has a 5% chance of being true, then each has a 95% chance of being incorrect, now we just need to combine the probabilities 0.95^48=.0852576, which is less than 9%, the math checks out! Let's assume that this ridiculous percentage is correct, their big claim here is that evolution has almost a 9% chance of being true. Is that really something to be so proud of?
Oh! I actually have yet another point here before I move on. Notice in my quote from conservapedia there is a footnote. It says the following.
Many of the counterexamples are indisputable, rendering each of their probabilities of being correct nearly 100%And I'm laughing out loud yet again. If that were true, why not just focus on those ones? Why pollute your article with other items that merely have a 5% chance of being true? Or at least start with those one. The first section of this article should be "these counterexamples are nearly 100% certain to be true"
Arguments from Ignorance
Not surprisingly, many of these are simply arguments from ignorance. I would say the best example in the first section "logical examples" is item 6
The development of feathers, which could not have conceivably "grown" from the scales of reptilesNow, I'm not a scientist, although I am a science fan, but my understanding is that this is pretty well understood. A quick google search gets us to the following page which seems to have a lot of information about how it evolved (full disclosure, I did not read that page). This reminds me of a book I have been wanting to read (Feathers: The Evolution of a Natural Miracle) maybe this will be my Christmas reading this year. At any rate, even if we didn't know how it was done, the lack of that information doesn't prove it didn't happen. This is a perfect example of an argument from ignorance.
Lack of Understanding of Evolution
Many of these items simply show that they writer doesn't understand how evolution works. In fact, they are so silly I'm not even sure how to respond to them, for example, number 7 (again, from the section "logical examples")
For evolution to be true, every male dog, cat, horse, elephant, giraffe, fish and bird had to have coincidentally evolved with a female alongside it (over billions of years) with fully evolved compatible reproductive parts and a desire to mate, otherwise the species couldn't keep going.Uhh, yeah, that is how it works. Assuming we are focusing on species that reproduce sexually, males and females evolve together. Evolution happens slowly on the level of populations, this isn't a problem for evolution at all. The only way I can even make sense of this complaint is to try to figure out how the writer is misunderstanding evolution. Are they claiming that according to evolution, one species randomly gives birth to another, and that one would have nobody to reproduce with? It's like they are imagining a dog giving birth to the first cat and then claiming this first cat wouldn't have anyone to reproduce with. How unlikely would it be for 2 separate dogs to give birth to 2 cats at the same time?!?
Irreducible Complexity
There is a whole section about irreducible complexity, which is actually just an argument from ignorance itself, which is why I wasn't going to make this my last item, but scrolling through the page I saw the bacterial flagellum and I couldn't help myself. Item 3 in this section states
The flagellum of certain bacteria contain a multi-part cellular motor which fails to function if a single part is removed. This is the classic example of irreducible complexity as publicised by Professor Michael Behe.Yup, it is also the perfect example of why irreducible complexity is bogus. If you remove a part it stops working as a motor, but it has other functions. This is perfect for evolution. A great explanation can be seen in this video.
More next time?
There is plenty more material here, but this post is already getting long. Next time I feel like shooting fish in a barrel I'll revisit this list.
Saturday, December 22, 2012
Ticket to Heaven
The first two panels contains things I hear Christians say all the time. The third panel comes from my recent reading of 1 John 3.
Friday, December 21, 2012
3 John: Ancient Church Politics
Listen to the podcast below (or right click this link for the mp3 file)
Podcast Powered By Podbean
Let's take a look at the wikipedia page. The wikipedia page on previous books of John said that all 4 were likely written by the same person, but this one says that is maybe not so. It says 2 & 3 John are similar and likely written by John the Presbyter, but a fourth century council of Rome said he should be distinguished from John the Evangelist who wrote the other 2 books. The dating of the writing is also all over the place, ranging from 60 to 115.
Greeting (v. 1-4)
John is apparently writing to someone named Gaius. He is happy to hear that Gaius is a strong believer.
Support and Opposition (v. 5-12)
John gives praise to Gaius for doing good and sending some brothers out to spread the word of God. John wants to support these people who have been sent out, but complains that Diotrephes is trying to stop his efforts from within the church.
So basically he is trying to get support from the church for his guys, but someone else within the church doesn't want to help them. This is just some ancient church politics, why is this in the bible?
This is great, I glanced through Guzik's commentary, and found this gem.
Be good, don't be evil.
Nice vacuous statement there.
Final Greetings (v. 13-15)
I have a lot to say but wish to do it face to face.
For the overview post (If you think I should add or remove stuff from this list please let me know, I think it would make good conversation)
Bad:
3 John 9 Petty bickering between church leaders
"I have written something to the church, but Diotrephes, who likes to put himself first, does not acknowledge our authority."
Podcast Powered By Podbean
Let's take a look at the wikipedia page. The wikipedia page on previous books of John said that all 4 were likely written by the same person, but this one says that is maybe not so. It says 2 & 3 John are similar and likely written by John the Presbyter, but a fourth century council of Rome said he should be distinguished from John the Evangelist who wrote the other 2 books. The dating of the writing is also all over the place, ranging from 60 to 115.
Greeting (v. 1-4)
John is apparently writing to someone named Gaius. He is happy to hear that Gaius is a strong believer.
Support and Opposition (v. 5-12)
John gives praise to Gaius for doing good and sending some brothers out to spread the word of God. John wants to support these people who have been sent out, but complains that Diotrephes is trying to stop his efforts from within the church.
So basically he is trying to get support from the church for his guys, but someone else within the church doesn't want to help them. This is just some ancient church politics, why is this in the bible?
This is great, I glanced through Guzik's commentary, and found this gem.
Diotrephes not only failed to receive John and the other apostles, but he also spoke against them. His malicious gossip against the apostles showed what kind of man he really was.So the complain is that Diotrephes was speaking against John, this is proof that he was a bad guy. Isn't that exactly what John is doing to him?
Be good, don't be evil.
Nice vacuous statement there.
Final Greetings (v. 13-15)
I have a lot to say but wish to do it face to face.
For the overview post (If you think I should add or remove stuff from this list please let me know, I think it would make good conversation)
Bad:
3 John 9 Petty bickering between church leaders
"I have written something to the church, but Diotrephes, who likes to put himself first, does not acknowledge our authority."
Thursday, December 20, 2012
2 John: Hate masquerading as love
Listen to the podcast below (or right click this link for the mp3 file)
Podcast Powered By Podbean
As usual, with a new book I start by looking at the wikipedia page. With respect to authorship, it says that the language is similar to 3 John so they are likely to have been written by the same person, and in fact the traditional view is that all 4 book supposedly written by John were in fact written by the same person.
The beginning and end of this book mention a lady, which are typically interpreted to mean the church. Another view is that it is addressed to a specific lady named Kyria, however that seems to not be terribly popular.
Greeting (v. 1-3)
Basically just a greeting to "the elect lady and her children", which again, according to the wikipedia page is about the church and the congregation.
Walking in Truth and Love (v. 4-11)
The most important commandment is to love one another and John is happy that he sees many people following this commandment.
This sounds pretty good. Also, from the language used here, I think it is pretty likely that the interpretation of the lady being the church and the children being the congregation makes the most sense.
Many deceivers have gone out into the world who do not preach that Christ has come in the flesh. Be careful listening to them so you don't lose your reward. Whoever is with God has both the father and the son, if anyone comes without this message, do not invite them into your house or give them any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in their wicked works.
So much for the message of spreading love. If someone disagrees with your religion, you are supposed to shun them. Terrible. It's really amazing to me that this is an obvious message of hate but it claims to be a message of love. It reminds me of people who want freedom of speech, but only for those who agree with them. We don't need to protect speech that is popular, in the same way you don't have to tell people to love those who they already love.
This should be fun, let's see how the Christian commentaries try to get out of this, obviously terrible, message. Let's start with Guzik. He starts by saying that it is not talking about shunning them altogether, but just having no religious connection to them. We should not let them speak in the church. On the other hand, he quotes Boice who points out that giving them hospitality is helping them spread their false words, and therefore we shouldn't do it. He also says that
Ray Steadman says that Christians are not supposed to simply slam the door in the face of any non-Christian, they should accept the strangers into their homes, but make the theological differences clear. This certainly sounds better, but it doesn't seem to mesh very well with the command to not even give them a greeting. He further says that if you continue to let them into your home you are endorsing their doctrine. So I guess in his mind you should help them out but only for a short time.
Gill doesn't even try to justify it. He says
Final Greetings (v. 12-13)
I have much to say but would rather do it in person.
Sounds good, doesn't help us though.
For the overview post (If you think I should add or remove stuff from this list please let me know, I think it would make good conversation)
Bad:
2 John 5,10-11 Love those who agree with you, hate those who don't
"love one another"
"If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works."
Podcast Powered By Podbean
As usual, with a new book I start by looking at the wikipedia page. With respect to authorship, it says that the language is similar to 3 John so they are likely to have been written by the same person, and in fact the traditional view is that all 4 book supposedly written by John were in fact written by the same person.
The beginning and end of this book mention a lady, which are typically interpreted to mean the church. Another view is that it is addressed to a specific lady named Kyria, however that seems to not be terribly popular.
Greeting (v. 1-3)
Basically just a greeting to "the elect lady and her children", which again, according to the wikipedia page is about the church and the congregation.
Walking in Truth and Love (v. 4-11)
The most important commandment is to love one another and John is happy that he sees many people following this commandment.
This sounds pretty good. Also, from the language used here, I think it is pretty likely that the interpretation of the lady being the church and the children being the congregation makes the most sense.
Many deceivers have gone out into the world who do not preach that Christ has come in the flesh. Be careful listening to them so you don't lose your reward. Whoever is with God has both the father and the son, if anyone comes without this message, do not invite them into your house or give them any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in their wicked works.
So much for the message of spreading love. If someone disagrees with your religion, you are supposed to shun them. Terrible. It's really amazing to me that this is an obvious message of hate but it claims to be a message of love. It reminds me of people who want freedom of speech, but only for those who agree with them. We don't need to protect speech that is popular, in the same way you don't have to tell people to love those who they already love.
This should be fun, let's see how the Christian commentaries try to get out of this, obviously terrible, message. Let's start with Guzik. He starts by saying that it is not talking about shunning them altogether, but just having no religious connection to them. We should not let them speak in the church. On the other hand, he quotes Boice who points out that giving them hospitality is helping them spread their false words, and therefore we shouldn't do it. He also says that
John means greets in a much more involved context than our own. In that culture, it meant to show hospitality and give aid.but then he follows it up with
Yet, for the weak or unskilled believer, it is best if they do not even greet (in the sense of speaking to) those who promote a false Jesus (like the Mormons or Jehovah’s Witnesses).Seems that he is just trying to have it both ways.
Ray Steadman says that Christians are not supposed to simply slam the door in the face of any non-Christian, they should accept the strangers into their homes, but make the theological differences clear. This certainly sounds better, but it doesn't seem to mesh very well with the command to not even give them a greeting. He further says that if you continue to let them into your home you are endorsing their doctrine. So I guess in his mind you should help them out but only for a short time.
Gill doesn't even try to justify it. He says
their ministry should not be attended on in the church, or house of God; and they should not be entertained in private houses, and much less caressedHe goes on to say that you shouldn't even bid them God speed, going on to explain
The meaning is, that with such no familiar conversation should be had, lest any encouragement should be given them; or it should induce a suspicion in the minds of other saints, that they are in the same sentiments; or it should tend to make others think favourably of them, and be a snare and a stumbling block to weak Christians.One more comment here, the bit about the reward. I have seen a lot of talk about morality lately, but if your entire reason for doing things is for personal reward then it isn't really about morality, just selfishness on a longer timescale.
Final Greetings (v. 12-13)
I have much to say but would rather do it in person.
Sounds good, doesn't help us though.
For the overview post (If you think I should add or remove stuff from this list please let me know, I think it would make good conversation)
Bad:
2 John 5,10-11 Love those who agree with you, hate those who don't
"love one another"
"If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works."
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
1 John 5: Christians don't Sin
Listen to the podcast below (or right click this link for the mp3 file)
Podcast Powered By Podbean
Overcoming the World (v. 1-5)
Everyone who believes Jesus is the Christ is born of God.
Everyone who loves the father loves whoever is born of Christ.
Therefore, anyone who loves God and obeys his commandments loves the children of God.
Well, if you believe the 2 premises the conclusion logically follows. It seems to say that everyone who loves God also loves all Christians. This is simply not born out in reality, there are certainly different groups of Christians that hate each other.
God's commandments are not burdensome.
Depending on which commandments you are talking about, I would argue that this isn't true. The kosher laws certainly do seem to be a pain in the ass. If we want to look at the 10 commandments, what about the fact that we aren't supposed to covet? That is not only a burden, I would argue it is impossible. If my neighbor has better stuff than I do, how can I help that I wish I had better stuff as well?
I don't want to go into the details on this one, but I looked at Guzik's take here, he starts with the following statement "Some Christians feel very burdened by the commandments of God, yet John insists that they are not burdensome." He then continues on for 4 paragraph explaining how it is not burdensome if you love God enough.
Everyone who has been born of God overcomes the world, this is a victory of our faith.
I'm not exactly sure what overcoming the world means. Given that 'the world' is often talked of as the source of all evil, I'm guessing that overcoming the world has to do with being 'Godly' while being surrounded by worldly things. It is absolutely silly to say that every Christian succeeds in this. Furthermore, even if I'm misunderstanding what 'overcoming the world' means, it is still an outrageous statement, no matter what, there are some Christians out there who will have failed. Unless of course you throw in a no true Scotsman fallacy.
Guzik says "The idea that anything born of God could be defeated by this world was strange to John and it should be strange to us." Whether or not it is strange, it seems to happen.
Testimony Concerning the Son of God (v. 6-12)
Jesus came not just in water but also in blood, and the spirit testifies that this is the truth.
I'm not sure what this means exactly, but him coming in blood I'm guessing is referring to the fact that he came physically, and not just spiritually.
"Through the centuries, there have been many different ideas about exactly what John meant by this phrase. “This is the most perplexing passage in the Epistle and one of the most perplexing in the New Testament.” (Plummer, cited in Boice)" At least I'm not alone :)
The testimony of god is greater than the testimony of men.
But where is the testimony of God? Even the bible is written by men, and not by God, so at best this testimony is second hand. Furthermore, just yesterday we learned that no one has ever seen God, so how can I be expected to trust them that they are giving me testimony from God?
Whoever does not believe in the testimony from God concerning Jesus is a liar.
This actually kinda pisses me off. It's one thing to say I'm wrong, I don't have a problem with that, but to call me a liar is bullshit. To call me a liar here implies that I in fact know that Jesus is real, but I am intentionally suppressing that knowledge. That is wrong, I do not believe in Jesus, no part of me deep down believes in Jesus. This type of thinking is the height of arrogance, they are so sure their position is correct, they think everyone else knows it is correct and they are all lying to themselves. I see this kind of crap regularly from Christians, it's ridiculous.
After looking at a few commentaries, it appears that it is not saying you are a liar, but that you are calling God a liar. I am going to just say this translation is shit, I parsed the pronouns incorrectly, Gill points out that another translation says "hath made God himself a liar" instead of "Whoever does not believe God has made him a liar". Fair enough, so instead of John calling me a liar, he says I'm calling God a liar. Although I guess he's talking about Jews of the time, and I guess they were saying John was wrong, and he retaliated by calling them liars.
That You May Know (v. 13-21)
If we ask anything of Jesus he will hear it.
I find it interesting that he doesn't go as far as saying that he will grant it, just that he will hear it. Seems to be a touch of backpedaling from what was written before.
If you see a brother committing a sin that doesn't lead to death, ask God to give him life. Some sins lead to death, we shouldn't pray for that.
If the sin doesn't lead to death, why do we need to ask God to give life? As for the sins leading to death, why are we saying not to pray for that? Is there an expectation that we would pray for those sins? The wording is confusing. In fact, this whole chapter uses pronouns poorly, it is hard to tell what is really meant.
Everyone born of God does not keep on sinning.
Again, it says that Christians don't sin.
The whole world lies in the power of the evil one.
Why would an omnipotent God allow such a thing?
For the overview post (If you think I should add or remove stuff from this list please let me know, I think it would make good conversation)
Bad:
1 John 5:10 If you don't believe in Jesus you make God a liar
"...Whoever does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne concerning his Son."
1 John 5:18 Christians don't sin
"We know that everyone who has been born of God does not keep on sinning, but he who was born of God protects him, and the evil one does not touch him."
1 John 5:19 Satan has power over the whole world
"We know that we are from God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one."
Podcast Powered By Podbean
Overcoming the World (v. 1-5)
Everyone who believes Jesus is the Christ is born of God.
Everyone who loves the father loves whoever is born of Christ.
Therefore, anyone who loves God and obeys his commandments loves the children of God.
Well, if you believe the 2 premises the conclusion logically follows. It seems to say that everyone who loves God also loves all Christians. This is simply not born out in reality, there are certainly different groups of Christians that hate each other.
God's commandments are not burdensome.
Depending on which commandments you are talking about, I would argue that this isn't true. The kosher laws certainly do seem to be a pain in the ass. If we want to look at the 10 commandments, what about the fact that we aren't supposed to covet? That is not only a burden, I would argue it is impossible. If my neighbor has better stuff than I do, how can I help that I wish I had better stuff as well?
I don't want to go into the details on this one, but I looked at Guzik's take here, he starts with the following statement "Some Christians feel very burdened by the commandments of God, yet John insists that they are not burdensome." He then continues on for 4 paragraph explaining how it is not burdensome if you love God enough.
Everyone who has been born of God overcomes the world, this is a victory of our faith.
I'm not exactly sure what overcoming the world means. Given that 'the world' is often talked of as the source of all evil, I'm guessing that overcoming the world has to do with being 'Godly' while being surrounded by worldly things. It is absolutely silly to say that every Christian succeeds in this. Furthermore, even if I'm misunderstanding what 'overcoming the world' means, it is still an outrageous statement, no matter what, there are some Christians out there who will have failed. Unless of course you throw in a no true Scotsman fallacy.
Guzik says "The idea that anything born of God could be defeated by this world was strange to John and it should be strange to us." Whether or not it is strange, it seems to happen.
Testimony Concerning the Son of God (v. 6-12)
Jesus came not just in water but also in blood, and the spirit testifies that this is the truth.
I'm not sure what this means exactly, but him coming in blood I'm guessing is referring to the fact that he came physically, and not just spiritually.
"Through the centuries, there have been many different ideas about exactly what John meant by this phrase. “This is the most perplexing passage in the Epistle and one of the most perplexing in the New Testament.” (Plummer, cited in Boice)" At least I'm not alone :)
The testimony of god is greater than the testimony of men.
But where is the testimony of God? Even the bible is written by men, and not by God, so at best this testimony is second hand. Furthermore, just yesterday we learned that no one has ever seen God, so how can I be expected to trust them that they are giving me testimony from God?
Whoever does not believe in the testimony from God concerning Jesus is a liar.
This actually kinda pisses me off. It's one thing to say I'm wrong, I don't have a problem with that, but to call me a liar is bullshit. To call me a liar here implies that I in fact know that Jesus is real, but I am intentionally suppressing that knowledge. That is wrong, I do not believe in Jesus, no part of me deep down believes in Jesus. This type of thinking is the height of arrogance, they are so sure their position is correct, they think everyone else knows it is correct and they are all lying to themselves. I see this kind of crap regularly from Christians, it's ridiculous.
After looking at a few commentaries, it appears that it is not saying you are a liar, but that you are calling God a liar. I am going to just say this translation is shit, I parsed the pronouns incorrectly, Gill points out that another translation says "hath made God himself a liar" instead of "Whoever does not believe God has made him a liar". Fair enough, so instead of John calling me a liar, he says I'm calling God a liar. Although I guess he's talking about Jews of the time, and I guess they were saying John was wrong, and he retaliated by calling them liars.
That You May Know (v. 13-21)
If we ask anything of Jesus he will hear it.
I find it interesting that he doesn't go as far as saying that he will grant it, just that he will hear it. Seems to be a touch of backpedaling from what was written before.
If you see a brother committing a sin that doesn't lead to death, ask God to give him life. Some sins lead to death, we shouldn't pray for that.
If the sin doesn't lead to death, why do we need to ask God to give life? As for the sins leading to death, why are we saying not to pray for that? Is there an expectation that we would pray for those sins? The wording is confusing. In fact, this whole chapter uses pronouns poorly, it is hard to tell what is really meant.
Everyone born of God does not keep on sinning.
Again, it says that Christians don't sin.
The whole world lies in the power of the evil one.
Why would an omnipotent God allow such a thing?
For the overview post (If you think I should add or remove stuff from this list please let me know, I think it would make good conversation)
Bad:
1 John 5:10 If you don't believe in Jesus you make God a liar
"...Whoever does not believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has borne concerning his Son."
1 John 5:18 Christians don't sin
"We know that everyone who has been born of God does not keep on sinning, but he who was born of God protects him, and the evil one does not touch him."
1 John 5:19 Satan has power over the whole world
"We know that we are from God, and the whole world lies in the power of the evil one."
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
Christmas Vacation
Hey Everybody
I'm flying out to visit my in-laws today, and we'll be there for a few weeks. I've front loaded enough posts to finish through Jude, it seemed like a good stopping point, when I get back home I'll pick things back up with Revelations, that should be fun. I may or may not be writing other posts while I'm there, it just depends on what else is going on and whether or not I feel like writing.
I hope everyone has a fun holiday season, see you on the other side.
I'm flying out to visit my in-laws today, and we'll be there for a few weeks. I've front loaded enough posts to finish through Jude, it seemed like a good stopping point, when I get back home I'll pick things back up with Revelations, that should be fun. I may or may not be writing other posts while I'm there, it just depends on what else is going on and whether or not I feel like writing.
I hope everyone has a fun holiday season, see you on the other side.
Monday, December 17, 2012
1 John 4: Love Casts Out Fear
Listen to the podcast below (or right click this link for the mp3 file)
Podcast Powered By Podbean
Test the Spirits (v. 1-6)
There are many spirits out there, you need to test them to see which are from God. Every spirit that confesses Jesus has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not is not from God.
First, I thought we were not supposed to test God,
Second thought, this seems like a pretty easy test for an impostor spirit to pass. All he has to do is claim that Jesus came in the flesh, then he can tell you anything else he wants. We better hope none of those spirits ever get their ethereal hands on a bible.
God Is Love (v. 7-21)
Anyone who loves was born of God, and anyone who does not love does not know God.
I love my wife, does that mean I know God?
Guzik says that every display of love doesn't have to be from a Christian, but our capacity to love comes from God because we were created in his image.
v18 "There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love."
But I thought God wanted us to fear him. For example, recently in 1 Peter 1 we saw that God wants to rule us through fear. If you want more examples, a quick google search reveals many examples.
Now, this is an item for my summary, as I want to be able to reference it later to put as contrast to other verses which say fear is a good thing, but do I count this item as good? I don't think it's good, love doesn't cast out fear, you can love something and still have fear in regards to it, for example, you could love someone and be afraid for their safety. Ask any parent whose kid is doing something dangerous. If anything, there is an argument that this would be bad, as it might make people think they don't really have love as they still have fear. I think I'll just put it as "interesting"
Guzik has an explanation for this, which I want to quote here
[note: added after I recorded the podcast as I noticed this during recording]
v12 "No one has ever seen God..."
This seems like a pretty obvious contradiction, my understanding is that Moses talked to God, didn't God tell him what to write for the part of the old testament that he wrote? And certainly Moses talked to God when he went up the mountain to get the 10 commandments, right?
Guzik claims that no one has seen God because he is invisible. He then addresses the complaint I had with the following quote from Boice:
For the overview post (If you think I should add or remove stuff from this list please let me know, I think it would make good conversation)
Good:
1 John 4:1 Don't believe everything you hear
"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world."
Interesting
1 John 4:18 Love casts out fear
"There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love."
1 John 4:12 No one has ever seen God
"No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us."
Podcast Powered By Podbean
Test the Spirits (v. 1-6)
There are many spirits out there, you need to test them to see which are from God. Every spirit that confesses Jesus has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not is not from God.
First, I thought we were not supposed to test God,
Luke 4:12 And Jesus answered him, "It is said, 'You shall not put the Lord your God to the test.'"okay, I know this is a spirit from God, and not God or Jesus directly, but it feels the same to me. Think of it from the perspective of a random guy, he needs to decide who to believe. Some dude claims to be Jesus, he is not allowed to test Jesus because that is testing God and not allowed. Of course there are false prophets, so if a false prophet claims to be Jesus our random guy is just fucked because if his first thought is that it might be Jesus, he is not allowed to test him. But if it is a spirit, he is supposed to test him? It just seems inconsistent to me.
Second thought, this seems like a pretty easy test for an impostor spirit to pass. All he has to do is claim that Jesus came in the flesh, then he can tell you anything else he wants. We better hope none of those spirits ever get their ethereal hands on a bible.
God Is Love (v. 7-21)
Anyone who loves was born of God, and anyone who does not love does not know God.
I love my wife, does that mean I know God?
Guzik says that every display of love doesn't have to be from a Christian, but our capacity to love comes from God because we were created in his image.
v18 "There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love."
But I thought God wanted us to fear him. For example, recently in 1 Peter 1 we saw that God wants to rule us through fear. If you want more examples, a quick google search reveals many examples.
Now, this is an item for my summary, as I want to be able to reference it later to put as contrast to other verses which say fear is a good thing, but do I count this item as good? I don't think it's good, love doesn't cast out fear, you can love something and still have fear in regards to it, for example, you could love someone and be afraid for their safety. Ask any parent whose kid is doing something dangerous. If anything, there is an argument that this would be bad, as it might make people think they don't really have love as they still have fear. I think I'll just put it as "interesting"
Guzik has an explanation for this, which I want to quote here
What about the many passages of Scripture, Old and New Testament (such as Ecclesiastes 12:13 and 1 Peter 2:17), which tell us we should fear God? The fear John writes of here is not the appropriate reverence we should all have of God, but the kind of fear which involves torment - that agonizing kind of fear which robs our soul of all joy and confidence before God. It is the fear that is the opposite of boldness in the day of judgment.Basically, his explanation is that we are talking about different kinds of fear, this is a translation issue. So I decided to take a look at the lexicon. The current verse (1 John 4:18) uses phobos, which is "panic, flight, fear, the causing of fear, terror". This is the kind of fear we should not have according to Guzik's interpretation. If we look at 1 Peter 2:17 we get phobeisthe, which is "to put to flight, to terrify, frighten", which doesn't read as that much different to me. And wouldn't you know, it also says that the origin of phobeisthe is phobos, I think there is a pretty good argument that we are talking about the same kind of fear.
[note: added after I recorded the podcast as I noticed this during recording]
v12 "No one has ever seen God..."
This seems like a pretty obvious contradiction, my understanding is that Moses talked to God, didn't God tell him what to write for the part of the old testament that he wrote? And certainly Moses talked to God when he went up the mountain to get the 10 commandments, right?
Guzik claims that no one has seen God because he is invisible. He then addresses the complaint I had with the following quote from Boice:
The Old Testament theophanies, including the apparently contradictory statement in Exodus 24:10, did not involve the full revelation of God as He is in Himself but only a suggestion of what He is in forms that a human being could understand.Basically, the claim is that anywhere it says they saw God, they didn't really see God, they saw the avatar of God which isn't quite the same as seeing God. This is utter nonsense as far as I am concerned. The bible says plainly that they saw God, not that they saw a facsimile of God, but they saw God. If you want to say that they thought they saw the real God but they didn't actually see God, fine, but you have to admit that you are just making stuff up to reconcile some obviously contradictory verses. Otherwise, cite an actual source.
For the overview post (If you think I should add or remove stuff from this list please let me know, I think it would make good conversation)
Good:
1 John 4:1 Don't believe everything you hear
"Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world."
Interesting
1 John 4:18 Love casts out fear
"There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love."
1 John 4:12 No one has ever seen God
"No one has ever seen God; if we love one another, God abides in us and his love is perfected in us."
Sunday, December 16, 2012
How Does Jesus Treat His Enemies?
This comic is inspired by Hebrews 10 and Hebrews 1, both of which mention Jesus using his enemies as a footstool. What a loving, merciful God he is.
Saturday, December 15, 2012
Mental Health and Gun Control
Yesterday was a terrible, terrible day. I usually don't write about stuff like this, but this particular event has really gotten to me. The fact that so many of the victims are 5 years old is just making it impossible for me to put it out of my mind. We would like to live in a world where these kinds of things don't happen, barring that, we would like to reduce the incidence as much as possible. As far as I can tell, there are two ways we can work toward this goal, gun control, and better overall mental health.
Let's start with gun control, as for me, it is the first thing that comes to mind. I am of the opinion that fewer guns is better. The harder it is to get a gun, the more difficult it will be for people to get their hands on guns, and therefore the harder it will be for things like this to happen. Some people might argue that the kind of people who want to shoot up a school will get their hands on guns anyway. That might be true, I don't know, I bet for some people this would be true, for others maybe more difficulty in acquiring firearms would stop one of these tragedies.
Some would argue that if everyone had a gun, this kind of thing wouldn't happen because the potential shooter would know that they would get quickly taken down. This argument seems completely silly to me. How many shots could the person get off before you could process what was going on, get out your gun, and shoot him back? I'm guessing quite a few...unless you are constantly at the ready to pull your gun out and start shooting a potential maniac. But if people all over the place have that mentality, how many accidents are we going to have? This seems like no solution to me. But regardless of your position, this is a conversation we need to be having, as John Stewart recently pointed out, the people who like their guns seem to want to stifle this conversation altogether. That is just unacceptable.
But my thinking here really does go toward preventing these types of things from happening. And we do live in reality, even if we had extremely strict gun control laws, people who really want guns could probably get their hands on them given how many are out there already. Furthermore, even if I could snap my fingers and make all of the guns in the world disappear (I would do this in a second if I could, btw) tragedies like this could still happen. So what can we do?
We need to be better as a nation with mental health issues. For a great many people in this country, simply going to a therapist is looked down upon. This stigma needs to go away. People should be applauded for working through their issues, not denigrated for it. I think everyone should go to a therapist occasionally, just to work things out a bit. Like an annual check up kind of thing. Just a normal part of life, everyone has issues, everyone would benefit from such a thing. A lot of people should probably go monthly or weekly, but if everyone else went on occasion and could understand the benefits, maybe they wouldn't look down so much on others who go more often.
Now I'm not trying to say that this particular shooter was mentally ill, I'm not going to say he had any particular condition or that he should have been medicated. Those things might be true, but I'm not sure if there is any way for us to know. But I would be a lot of money that he could have used someone to talk to. And I think there is a very real possibility that if he had gone to counseling, one way or another it would have led to a different result than him shooting up an elementary school. And as much as I hate guns (and I am in favor of gun control laws), getting more people into counseling seems like it would be a much more effective solution than gun control.
Let's start with gun control, as for me, it is the first thing that comes to mind. I am of the opinion that fewer guns is better. The harder it is to get a gun, the more difficult it will be for people to get their hands on guns, and therefore the harder it will be for things like this to happen. Some people might argue that the kind of people who want to shoot up a school will get their hands on guns anyway. That might be true, I don't know, I bet for some people this would be true, for others maybe more difficulty in acquiring firearms would stop one of these tragedies.
Some would argue that if everyone had a gun, this kind of thing wouldn't happen because the potential shooter would know that they would get quickly taken down. This argument seems completely silly to me. How many shots could the person get off before you could process what was going on, get out your gun, and shoot him back? I'm guessing quite a few...unless you are constantly at the ready to pull your gun out and start shooting a potential maniac. But if people all over the place have that mentality, how many accidents are we going to have? This seems like no solution to me. But regardless of your position, this is a conversation we need to be having, as John Stewart recently pointed out, the people who like their guns seem to want to stifle this conversation altogether. That is just unacceptable.
But my thinking here really does go toward preventing these types of things from happening. And we do live in reality, even if we had extremely strict gun control laws, people who really want guns could probably get their hands on them given how many are out there already. Furthermore, even if I could snap my fingers and make all of the guns in the world disappear (I would do this in a second if I could, btw) tragedies like this could still happen. So what can we do?
We need to be better as a nation with mental health issues. For a great many people in this country, simply going to a therapist is looked down upon. This stigma needs to go away. People should be applauded for working through their issues, not denigrated for it. I think everyone should go to a therapist occasionally, just to work things out a bit. Like an annual check up kind of thing. Just a normal part of life, everyone has issues, everyone would benefit from such a thing. A lot of people should probably go monthly or weekly, but if everyone else went on occasion and could understand the benefits, maybe they wouldn't look down so much on others who go more often.
Now I'm not trying to say that this particular shooter was mentally ill, I'm not going to say he had any particular condition or that he should have been medicated. Those things might be true, but I'm not sure if there is any way for us to know. But I would be a lot of money that he could have used someone to talk to. And I think there is a very real possibility that if he had gone to counseling, one way or another it would have led to a different result than him shooting up an elementary school. And as much as I hate guns (and I am in favor of gun control laws), getting more people into counseling seems like it would be a much more effective solution than gun control.
Friday, December 14, 2012
1 John 3: Hate and Murder are the same
Listen to the podcast below (or right click this link for the mp3 file)
Podcast Powered By Podbean
Children of God [cont.] (v. 1-10)
We are children of God and we shall be like Jesus because Jesus is pure and we purify ourselves in him. If you sin you are with the devil, if you know Jesus you will not keep on sinning. By this is it evident who is of God and who is of the devil.
Didn't we just learn in 1 John 1 that we are all sinners? That anyone who says they are not a sinner is a liar? Now this says that if you are with God you are no longer a sinner. It follows logically that no one is with God.
Guzik tries to explain this with grammar. He argues that in 1 John the grammar indicates occasional acts of sin, whereas the grammar here indicates living a life of sin. Let's examine this, for the verse here, it says "keeps on sinning", I suppose this could go either way, but it feels to me like it is saying that there is never a point in which you stop sinning altogether. What does it mean to say no one who abides in Jesus keeps on sinning? It sounds to me like it is saying once you are with Jesus you never sin again. What about 1 John 1:8? It says "If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." I suppose his argument works here, if everyone has a little sin now and then, then they can't say they have no sin. Given the source material, I think he has done the best that can be done, but it looks to me that we have contradictory messages here. I guess you just have to judge for yourself.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown say that we are talking about the ideal of a Christian. They say "Not that 'whosoever is betrayed into sins has never seen nor known God'; but in so far as sin exists, in that degree the spiritual intuition and knowledge of God do not exist in him." So their argument is that as far as you sin, that much you don't know God. As far as I read it, this goes pretty contrary to what the actual book says. Furthermore, we have seen plenty of times in the bible where all sins are equated, if you lie you deserve hell just as much as if you murdered. With this in mind, I think this way to justify the verse falls flat.
Love One Another (v. 11-24)
You should love your brother, not hate him. Cain hated Abel because his deeds were righteous so he killed him. Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer.
Whoa, let's stop right there. Hate and murder are the same thing? I know you are making a Cain and Abel analogy here, but hate and murder are quite far apart.
Here is Guzik's take on this: "To hate our brother is to murder him in our hearts. Though we may not carry out the action (through cowardice or fear of punishment), we wish that person dead. Or, by ignoring another person, we may treat them as if they were dead. Hatred can be shown passively or actively." I could not disagree with this more, and honestly, the fact that he would read this passage and then have this take-away demonstrates the negative impact reading the bible could have on someone who is so invested in it being correct. I've hated people, I've never wanted to kill anyone, to say that I have murdered someone in my heart is absolutely ludicrous. To imply that I have only not killed those people because I am a coward or that I fear punishment is also quite silly.
v13 "Do not be surprised, brothers, that the world hates you."
Persecution complex once again.
Both Guzik and Jamieson, Fausset & Brown take this as a given.
Jesus laid his life down for us, we should be willing to do the same for our brothers. If you have worldly goods and are able to help someone out who is in need, and you refuse, how is it possible that God's love abides in your heart. Don't just talk about loving your brothers, let your deeds speak for you.
You should help people out who are in need, this I can get behind.
Sometimes your heart might condemn you, but God is greater than your heart. If you keep the commandment to believe in Jesus, then God is in you.
Had a bit of trouble summarizing that paragraph, but basically it seems to be saying that you might sometimes want things that you are not supposed to want, but with God you can overcome your impulses.
Guzik says that "our heart condemns us before God" is about us feeling like we aren't really worthy of God, and the part about God being greater than our hearts is that we shouldn't take those feelings too seriously, because God is with us even though we have those feelings.
If we keep God happy with us, he will give us whatever we ask for.
We are back to faith I guess, this is basically the thing that Jesus talked about, if you really believe then you can move a mountain with a prayer. What nonsense. But even if we assume that moving a mountain is hyperbolic talk from Jesus, here we are still saying that we can get whatever we want if we really believe. I would argue there are plenty of believers who have cancer and really believe that prayer will heal them, and yet God doesn't cure their cancer.
For the overview post (If you think I should add or remove stuff from this list please let me know, I think it would make good conversation)
Good:
1 John 3:17 Love each other and help those in need
"But if anyone has the world's goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him?"
1 John 3:18 Talk is cheap, show love with your actions
"Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth."
Bad:
1 John 3:6 If you sin you can't be with God
"No one who abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him."
1 John 3:13 Persecution complex
"Do not be surprised, brothers, that the world hates you."
1 John 3:15 Murder and hate are the same
"Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."
1 John 3:22 God will give us whatever we ask for
"and whatever we ask we receive from him, because we keep his commandments and do what pleases him"
Podcast Powered By Podbean
Children of God [cont.] (v. 1-10)
We are children of God and we shall be like Jesus because Jesus is pure and we purify ourselves in him. If you sin you are with the devil, if you know Jesus you will not keep on sinning. By this is it evident who is of God and who is of the devil.
Didn't we just learn in 1 John 1 that we are all sinners? That anyone who says they are not a sinner is a liar? Now this says that if you are with God you are no longer a sinner. It follows logically that no one is with God.
Guzik tries to explain this with grammar. He argues that in 1 John the grammar indicates occasional acts of sin, whereas the grammar here indicates living a life of sin. Let's examine this, for the verse here, it says "keeps on sinning", I suppose this could go either way, but it feels to me like it is saying that there is never a point in which you stop sinning altogether. What does it mean to say no one who abides in Jesus keeps on sinning? It sounds to me like it is saying once you are with Jesus you never sin again. What about 1 John 1:8? It says "If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." I suppose his argument works here, if everyone has a little sin now and then, then they can't say they have no sin. Given the source material, I think he has done the best that can be done, but it looks to me that we have contradictory messages here. I guess you just have to judge for yourself.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown say that we are talking about the ideal of a Christian. They say "Not that 'whosoever is betrayed into sins has never seen nor known God'; but in so far as sin exists, in that degree the spiritual intuition and knowledge of God do not exist in him." So their argument is that as far as you sin, that much you don't know God. As far as I read it, this goes pretty contrary to what the actual book says. Furthermore, we have seen plenty of times in the bible where all sins are equated, if you lie you deserve hell just as much as if you murdered. With this in mind, I think this way to justify the verse falls flat.
Love One Another (v. 11-24)
You should love your brother, not hate him. Cain hated Abel because his deeds were righteous so he killed him. Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer.
Whoa, let's stop right there. Hate and murder are the same thing? I know you are making a Cain and Abel analogy here, but hate and murder are quite far apart.
Here is Guzik's take on this: "To hate our brother is to murder him in our hearts. Though we may not carry out the action (through cowardice or fear of punishment), we wish that person dead. Or, by ignoring another person, we may treat them as if they were dead. Hatred can be shown passively or actively." I could not disagree with this more, and honestly, the fact that he would read this passage and then have this take-away demonstrates the negative impact reading the bible could have on someone who is so invested in it being correct. I've hated people, I've never wanted to kill anyone, to say that I have murdered someone in my heart is absolutely ludicrous. To imply that I have only not killed those people because I am a coward or that I fear punishment is also quite silly.
v13 "Do not be surprised, brothers, that the world hates you."
Persecution complex once again.
Both Guzik and Jamieson, Fausset & Brown take this as a given.
Jesus laid his life down for us, we should be willing to do the same for our brothers. If you have worldly goods and are able to help someone out who is in need, and you refuse, how is it possible that God's love abides in your heart. Don't just talk about loving your brothers, let your deeds speak for you.
You should help people out who are in need, this I can get behind.
Sometimes your heart might condemn you, but God is greater than your heart. If you keep the commandment to believe in Jesus, then God is in you.
Had a bit of trouble summarizing that paragraph, but basically it seems to be saying that you might sometimes want things that you are not supposed to want, but with God you can overcome your impulses.
Guzik says that "our heart condemns us before God" is about us feeling like we aren't really worthy of God, and the part about God being greater than our hearts is that we shouldn't take those feelings too seriously, because God is with us even though we have those feelings.
If we keep God happy with us, he will give us whatever we ask for.
We are back to faith I guess, this is basically the thing that Jesus talked about, if you really believe then you can move a mountain with a prayer. What nonsense. But even if we assume that moving a mountain is hyperbolic talk from Jesus, here we are still saying that we can get whatever we want if we really believe. I would argue there are plenty of believers who have cancer and really believe that prayer will heal them, and yet God doesn't cure their cancer.
For the overview post (If you think I should add or remove stuff from this list please let me know, I think it would make good conversation)
Good:
1 John 3:17 Love each other and help those in need
"But if anyone has the world's goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God's love abide in him?"
1 John 3:18 Talk is cheap, show love with your actions
"Little children, let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth."
Bad:
1 John 3:6 If you sin you can't be with God
"No one who abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him."
1 John 3:13 Persecution complex
"Do not be surprised, brothers, that the world hates you."
1 John 3:15 Murder and hate are the same
"Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."
1 John 3:22 God will give us whatever we ask for
"and whatever we ask we receive from him, because we keep his commandments and do what pleases him"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
