Just a Minute, There's Someone Wrong on the Internet.

I have a confession to make, I get in arguments on the internet.

I used to do it for fun.  Sometimes I'd argue with people just to be annoying, sometimes I'd do what's called "trolling" which is basically just dragging people into arguments by saying something inflammatory.  It's real real easy when you're of a progressive mindset and you live in the south and attend a Bible Belt church.  What you say doesn't even have to be inflammatory or even false, I've found southerners are very easy to bait, just by saying something they disagree with.

I've also had a long standing on-and-off argument going with my Jehovah's Witness cousin Bill (name changed).  And in fact, it is that which is precipitating this post.

I am tired of arguing with people online.

It starts innocently enough, often you leave a comment about something you're interested in on some blog, but soon somebody says something that you not only disagree with but that is simply wrong.  Well, you don't want to let that go unchallenged, so you correct it.  Then the person replies with something that sounds kinda like a veiled insult, pointing out that you are just uneducated on the subject.  Then you come back with a more thinly veiled insult.  And it gets personal and blows up and before you're thinking, "this is not looking good on me, but I can't stop because this other idiot will win."

With cousin Bill, he always contacts me first, weasel's his way in with some pretense about wanting to discuss religion or beliefs, and more often than not, I have taken the bait.

But in the same way that cousin Bill isn't really interested in discussing religion, (his is right and yours is wrong and he's going to prove it) that internet troll isn't there to talk about these things on any sort of level playing field.

I've taken to examining my motives recently.  Why am I in this conversation?  Is it civil?  Is this person on the same level as me as far as where it is going?  Am I representing Christ?  Is this what Jesus would do?  Is this what Jesus did do?

Before you answer that, let's explore this a little more.

What is being right worth?  Is it worth maintaining an reputation?  What is a reputation worth?  What is a reputation?  What does it say about a person who can't let something go in the pursuit of being right and may or may not simply not have the ability to quit?

I wish I knew.

I have been accused many times of things like "you always have to be right."   This has confused me.  Is there some point at which I have to be wrong?  Is pursuing rightness a bad idea?  Is it really the case that I "always have to be right."  By saying that are you saying "you always have to win the argument?"  I do always want to win the argument.  After all, if I'm arguing, there's a pretty good chance I think I'm right.  If I didn't think I was right, I wouldn't argue.  In fact, if you find me not arguing about something you say, chances are I either agree with it or don't feel I have an effective argument against it.

And here I think comes the problem.  If I use this reasoning, that by not disagreeing, I am actually tacitly agreeing, then that pushes me to disagree vehemently if I do in fact disagree.  So by not disagreeing, I am actually agreeing. 

We see this in so many places in public life.  We hear figures claim solidarity with "the silent majority."  They're silent, so they must agree with me, yes?  I recently read a family of stories which were complaining because some big famous church refused to comment on some social issue that was in the news at the time.  A bunch of bloggers and commenters lamented the fact that this church didn't advocate in agreement with their position and it was "not taking a stand" or "the same as agreeing with the other side."

But it's not agreeing with the other side is it?  That kind of argument is specious.  That's the rhetoric of division.  If someone doesn't say something, that by saying something, they're not saying something, they're really truly not saying anything.  That has got to be okay.

When it boils down to it, arguing with people online takes up mental space that could better be used doing something useful.  Real change of heart comes person to person.  We agree with people we respect.  We adopt the beliefs of the groups we fit into generally speaking.  I'm not going to be able to change your mind about something unless we have a closer relationship, and you won't change mine for the same reason.

So I implore you, not because I'm making an argument here and that you should believe me.  If you know in your heart that arguing online is a bad idea, then follow your own impetus and stop.  If you don't, then by all means, do what ever feels right to you.

If you're a Christian, please consider this with deep introspection.  There are a number of Christian apologists I just don't want to listen to anymore.  They have great arguments, great points, and I agree with the logic they use.  But they come off with such an overbearing rightness of attitude that it really turns me off.  One is James White who on his YouTube channel tears somebody up in almost every video.  And the makes videos to tear them up after debates.  With such condescension I hear terms like "once again."  If you have to explain it again, just explain it again.  Do you have to let us all know that you're annoyed to have to do it?  David Robertson was recently on "Unbelievable?" in a debate with Matt Dillahunty and there were many complaints about his demeanor.  He posted a lengthy post that said essentially "I have reviewed all the evidence and decided that I will not be apologizing for anything." 

I can't abide this attitude.  I do not see Jesus unleash such disdain for anyone but religious leaders, not sinners and non-believers.

Stop arguing online and use the emotional energy that burns your mind while you lay awake at night to solve real problems.  And really, with the number of people who read this blog, I'm honestly only talking to myself.

The F Word and the R Word

Recently, I’ve undertaken to explore the differences between faith and religion. I guess the greatest reason for doing this is because I’ve ceased to identify myself with the American Christian church at large. What I’m really looking for is an intermediate term that identifies me with Jesus the Messiah, but not with the American church and Christian Conservatism, and especially not with conservatives and republicans. They do not represent me as a Christian, or represent Christ either.

There are a lot of problems as I see them with the way we use the words faith and religion and how they compare with how they were used traditionally and originally especially in a Christian context. Western thought now often espouses the idea of a spiritual life separated from a work life, a sex life, a financial life, and the overall concept of life as it is. In Jesus time and in ancient thought in the near east in general, there was no such thing as a spiritual life, there was just life. It was expected that everything you did affected and was affected by everything you were and believed. Fortunately, thinkers today are in some ways returning to this mode of thought. Today, faith and religion are used almost interchangeably, and even some try to delineate them in ever more creative vocabularial gymnastics. Contemporary preachers are now heard describing religion as a bad thing, a set of rules, while faith is what we should do if we follow Jesus.

I myself find that I want to get away from those rules and focus on a more personal faith. Faith after all is only as efficacious as the object in which it is placed. However, I do want to associate myself with the orthodox Christian faith, and am definitely interested in the history of the church. One of the ways I’ve explored this is by studying the Mennonites recently. Since the inception of their tradition, they have been committed to non-violence (well, most of them, you know how it is.) Jesus said “Blessed are the Peacemakers” so, naturally, I assumed that meant that it was a good idea not to be starting wars and killing people. Apparently, according to the Christian conservatives, I was mistaken. I’ve come to understand a completely new (to me) meaning of the Beatitudes as well. For as long as I can remember, the beatitudes have been another list of things that you should do if you want to be blessed by God. This is not the correct interpretation. If the beatitudes are a new law, then Jesus did not fulfill the law, he made a new one. This stands in the face of everything Jesus actually did, to restore the universe to its rightful order. Read the text carefully, it does not say “Blessed are you when you do such and such.” It says “Blessed are you when you are such and such.” Blessed are you, fortunate are you when you are just as you are, broken, wrecked, and longing for a better way. This interpretational difference really codifies the difference between faith and religion for me.

Recently, a friend, in a moment of startling lucidity, explained it in this way. "There IS a difference between religion and faith. Faith is something that is very personal and is understood by an individual. Religion is an attempt by man to explain faith and allow a group to understand the faith of the individual." In some cases, I’d say it is an attempt to coerce or convince a group to understand the faith of the individual or even to fall in line with a certain dogma.

One of the unfortunate things the church is doing is getting the attention of the world, but in a bad way. The ones who are getting the attention of the world lately are the unfortunately conspicuous like Pat Robertson, Joel Osteen, and James Inhofe. Ask a non believer what they think of Christians and they will say “hypocrite.” Ask a non believer what they think Christians should be doing and they’ll say “helping the poor.” One of these things Jesus preached for, the other he preached against. Lately it seems, more than anything, that the world knows Christians for only one narrow set of political doctrines, being against abortion and gay marriage. Abortion aside, it’s not just good enough to be against gay marriage, but further to try to make it illegal, to take it so far as to desire to soil the great Constitution of this Union with the requirement that marriage be between only one man and one woman. Interestingly enough, the Bible only makes that stipulation for leaders of the church. Are politicians to be leaders of the church?

I want to be noticed by the world for positive things. The Christians who get noticed for the good they do today are those like Mother Theresa who live in poverty to help the poor. They notice those like Shane Claiborne who made national news by going to Iraq and comforting the people as the bombing started. They notice teachers like Rob Bell who like the Mennonites eschew words like “heretic” for words like “love” and “community.” The world sometimes notices people like me who believe so strongly in caring for creation that they decide not to waste water by pooping in it. That kind of radical lifestyle gets people’s attention. When you dare to be different in a positive way, the world takes notice.

For a while now, I’ve been saying that I am spiritual but not religious, because I love Jesus but I’m not a republican. But I’m not only spiritual; I also want to reach out to the larger faith movement of my day. And I do mean movement, I am a progressive, I believe in moving forward and making things better. It’s not a movement if it’s not moving. And it’s not a certain church or ideology that I follow. I follow progressive radical faith movements, like Mars Hill Bible Church who are doing and thinking of things so differently. I follow movements like Cornerstone in Simi Valley who decided to give up their nice building so they could devote more money to humanitarianism.

The truth is you can have faith and religion apart from one another. You can be faithful without belonging to an organized religion. And you can certainly belong to a religion, or be religious without having the faith. It’s like James talks about with faith and works. In a very literal sense, you cannot have faith without it being unconsciously outpoured through what you do. But you can have good works without even having the slightest positive attitude about it. People hear me say this and try to pass it off as legalism, but it is so much beyond legalism. Legalism says “You have to do this or you’re not in.” Faith says “People who are in do this.” You have to make your own conclusion.

One of the things I’ve come to realize is that non believers don’t really care what happens to me after I die. Much of evangelism has included as part of its message threats of hell. The thing is, when you use fear to motivate someone, you only motivate them if they are actually afraid. How does a person fear hell when they don’t even believe it exists? Non believers don’t care what I do after I die; they care what I’m doing when I’m alive. You can’t manipulate people with the threat of hell if they aren’t threatened by hell.  All those years of studying apologetics, and I find that I have all the answers to the questions no one is asking.

The kind of Christianity I want to get away from is the kind that can’t be distinguished from other parts of the culture. Today, we have “God and Country” when in reality it’s just “God.” Jesus doesn’t want Christians who act like Muslims with their understanding of revenge. Revenge is an entirely non-biblical concept while Islam is undeniably a revenge incorporating religion. We can’t fight the “War on Terror” with guns and bombs. Muslims wreak violence, because first, they’re hungry, and second, it’s like we want them to hate us. We keep working by their system, you kill one of them, their brother vows to kill you, so you kill him too, so his wife and children vow to kill you, and you kill them so their siblings and cousins vow to kill you, so you kill them, so very quickly, you have thousands of family members making death threats and generally trying to destroy you. This is not Jesus’ system of peacemaking. Jesus’ way involves sacrifice. He says you have to feed them, pray for them, and love them like you love yourself.

According to Wikipedia, the definition of religion is: “A religion is a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a supernatural agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.” The definition I was taught in World Religions class was this: “Religion is the belief that there is an unseen order, and our good as a people lies in harmoniously adjusting ourselves thereto.” I like the second definition just a little better because you can interpret it to include atheism as well. For atheists, the unseen order can be naturalism, or entropy, or simply lack of an unseen order, and our good as a people, or as individuals would lie in adjusting ourselves to that understanding. At any rate, a religion does not require actual belief in any god, or even following a specific set of guidelines. And this is where religion meets with philosophy, but that’s a discussion for a different day.

Individually, the concept of faith really works well in the Christian context, even among conservatives, and I believe that individual people are really rather good in the world. When we all have to work as individual agents, having only one to a team, peace tends to reign because one is less likely to make waves with few allies. On the other hand, you rarely see large groups of people storming around fixing things. You see large groups of people roaming around and destroying things. Individually, people are nice, generally friendly and sane. Corporately, humanity is a bunch of bastard coated bastards sprinkled with bastard and with a bastard filling. This is where faith meets religion. This is where the practices of the individual meet the practices of the group.

In this study and the several weeks of research I’ve undertaken to gather ideas, the one aspect of faith and religion that I have grabbed hold of is the discipline. Spiritual disciplines are important to one’s wellbeing. And I’m not just talking about reading the Bible and praying, I’m also talking about practicing silence, purity, and moderation. It’s not just about not doing the don’ts; it’s really about doing the dos. Remember, Jesus had disciples, and a disciple, as you may know is one who comes under the discipline of another. However, the word disciple is used in many contexts I’m not willing to adhere to as well, so I’m going to go with something a little more complex. From now on, under religious affiliation, I’m going to use the term “Under the discipline of Jesus of Nazareth.” I want to fully embrace the faith, but also the movement, the man, the messiah, the message and the commission.

WiredForStereo

Interview with an Athiest

I just want to start out by saying that this post is for Micah. He's the only one of my readers who was there and he complains all the time that I don't post enough. Micah, you know who you are.

There were a bunch of us at Encounter and near the end there was an outspoken (read loud) guy who was talking to some people and I got in on the convo. He said that he was an atheist, and was making much of the fact that he was an atheist at a prayer meeting. He invited a bunch of us back to his apartment to hear why he was an atheist, so our interest piqued, we followed carravan style.

What followed is difficult to explain, but after about an hour, I calculated it down to essentially a soft (read "not so harsh") Marxist viewpoint. From what he has seen, he essentially believed that people are Christians (or believe in God) to help them deal with problems. When I questioned him why if it were the case that people would still become believers even though doing so would bring persecution, he changed his story to the viewpoint of the promise of paradise. I found his inability to synthesize these two viewpoints a bit disconcerting. His roommate brought up the existence of "lost gospels" and I was unable to convince them that those arguments had been settled years ago.

What I found more disconcerting, and indeed disgusting was the sheer arrogance he and his roommate exhibited, both during the affair and even more so after most of the people had left. Let's just say he was extremely happy with himself about how smart he sounded. I'm not saying that to be insulting, I'm reporting the facts, he repeated it several times and seemed to be in awe of his abilities. He then explained to us who remained various ways of killing people with a knife (he is a former Marine.)

Anyway, at this point, he's not the kind of person I'd want to be close friends with, but not because he's an atheist. Indeed, I've known far more dishonorable people than he is, he's not a bad guy, I'm just not into the loud arrogant type, it has nothing to do with the atheism. I do value good discussion and debate and so rarely get it. It's just not fun for me to have to wade through and hour of philosophical bullsh*t to get to the point, I want more of a back and forth, give and take.

After most of the younger (16-19) kids had left, he kept asking me if he had challenged their faith, like they'd never heard of atheism before. I assured him that they'd be fine, that those were the more devout kids that I know.

So, after meeting the guy and hearing his whole life philosophy, I was just like "Wow, ok, so that's like...it and stuff?" Not to say that my life is particularly meaningful, or that I know where I'm going and stuff, in life I mean. But the dude is an atheist and goes to church. Like he's gonna get to heaven one day and say "Ha, did you see that, God's a douche, I made it in and all I had to do was go to church!" On the other hand, he knows that if God does exist then he's going to hell, which in itself is like kissing your sister, I mean his philosophy, not the actual hell, that's gotta be way worse. I was reading something for my Death and Dying class today and it basically presented the point of view that you should spend your life doing good things, that way if there is an afterlife or rebirth, you'll probably come out ahead, and if there isn't, well, maybe people will remember you for being a good guy which is something in itself. But even so, what's the point if there is no point?

In the end, I'd say I'm glad I have the meaning in my life that I do. And it's not the mushy buddy Jesus crap either, I gotta get up in 5.5 hours to go to church to set up the stage and sound system for a bunch of whiny musicians of which I am one. I'm here to do what God tells me to do, I didn't invent God to make myself feel better, because if I did, I have obviously been a horrible failure, and so has my god.

WiredForStereo

Done with Jehovah's Witnesses

Today I've decided that I'll not longer write about Jehovah's Witnesses unless specifically asked to. I don't feel I need to any more because of what it does to me.

I have spent too many years in spiritually dry apologetics. I have known for a long time what this stuff does to me, but after reading The Shack, I've decided to give it up. I know what is correct and incorrect, I've studied alot, but at this point, it is a simple waste of time for me spiritually speaking.

So, unless you want to ask me questions, I will answer those, but unless there is something especially grevious, I'm done.

I will keep stealing Watchtowers and Awake!s from bus stops though.
WiredForStereo

Why I am not a Jehovah's Witness

Which is to say, why I do not attend a Kingdom Hall, why I do not belong to or am not affiliated with the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. Because I am not a witness of "Jehovah," for that is not his name, just as the Allah of Islam is not God and the Jesus of the LDS church is not Jesus.

I am a follower of Christ, a "Christian," a believer in the One true God, named in the Old Testament with the letters YHWH. The Father who's only begotten, not made, son Jesus died and whose blood cleanses the sin of all who call on him for forgiveness, and the Spirit who himself calls for repentance and fills the believer with light and understanding.

I have spoken to a number of Jehovah's Witnesses (JW's) and have found a number of characteristics which they, apart from the majority of the population, have.

They use certain words that others never use. The greatest example of which is the term "do obeiscence." They use this term to keep Jesus from being worshiped as God. No one uses this term. No one but JW's. This is how you can spot them a mile away. In the post below, you can see an email sent to me under the auspices that the person who wrote the book mentioned therein was not a JW. I almost laughed out loud. JW's are so disconnected with the rest of society that they can't discern their own writings and beliefs from those of others, and any attempt by them to use the "Reductio ad Absurdum" argument suffers for it. JW's are not allowed to read materials not explicitly published or OK'd by the Watchtower people. So all the materials they read say the same thing, and they believe it because that's what they are told. I have to admit, they have very good memories, but they have nothing new or fresh. And I know this to be true. Their arguments go the same direction every time, and I know this to be true, because I have had plenty of arguments with them. They have nothing new because they don't have the prompting of the Holy Spirit, but I'll talk more about that later.

I am a studier Christian Apologetics, because first of all, we don't all have to agree on every tiny point. There are differing points of view on minor subjects, and that's OK. There are unlimited numbers of arguments in Christian Apologetics and they change daily because of a changing world and philosophical marketplace, and they can compete in the philosophical marketplace and they always have. But the truth at the center remains the same. Because Christianity is about a set of ideas that are really true to paraphrase J.P. Moreland. I also study Christian Apologetics because I believe the the historic Christian faith can be defended and championed because it is true objectively.

It also is my belief that life should be fun, love of God should be wonderful, life should be about enjoying the LORD, and making him known. Living in his grace and growing in his love is the way of life for a Christian. Fun, because God invented fun. I can say from personal experience that missions work is fun. I do not see much fun in the lives of Jehovah's Witnesses.

I have heard that many JW's will never led anyone to their faith. That is not fun. Spending a lifetime of proselytizing on a daily or weekly basis and seeing no result is not fun. And I know why it happens. JW's do not believe in the person of the Holy Spirit. How can the Spirit lead someone to repentance in Jesus Christ if there is no Spirit? Thats why true JW's number well less than 10,000,000 in the entire world while other Christians number around 2,000,000,000. Now I am not saying that all those are true believers, but there is a point there.

On the subject of fun, I enjoy listening to good contemporary Christian and Gospel music. I don't know of any Contemporary JW musicians. Point made.

I also love good philosophical conversation. I know of no well known or even not so well known JW philosophers, while I know of tons of Christian philosophers and thinkers.

I even love celebrating holidays, even if what I am celebrating did not actually take place on that date. Take Christmas, Jesus was born on the Day of Atonement in September, but he was still born, and if everyone else celebrates his birth in December, I'm ok with that. I also enjoy having a birthday every year, and celebrating with others when they have a birthday. I enjoy Valentine's Day which is also my wife's birthday, and named after a Roman Catholic saint. But I am ok with that because it is a chance to celebrate love, and love is good. I enjoy Independence Day, because it signifies the founding of a country where I am free to have all these opinions. I enjoy Mother's and Father's Day, as well as Labor Day, and Presidents Day, and New Years, and even Martin Luther King Jr. Day. Name one JW holiday. Point.

I would also be glad to accept the gift of life of someone else's blood or body tissue, not only to save my life, but to add credit to their spiritual account for saving my life. Jesus said that no one has greater love than someone who lays down their life for a friend.

I read a story written by a man who used to be a Jehovah's Witness, and decided to leave the church. The problem was, his coworkers at work were also JW's. They effectively kept him from being promoted, or even to perform his job to the best of his ability. He eventually had to quit. A true Christian would never do something like that. Former believers are of all people to be pitied and loved, not tortured.

Let's explore the concept of Hell. In the JW view, believers spend eternity on earth while Jehovah, Jesus, and the 144,000 (filled up in the 1930's by the way) rule in Heaven. There is also no hell. People are just blinked out of existence, end of show, as if they had never existed. In my view, heaven comes to earth and believers get to spend eternity with the risen Christ as the faithful bride and Church. Hell is a place of eternal conscious torment that Jesus himself spoke endlessly about with the strongest of warnings. I don't know about you, but I think there is much more to be both gained and lost in my view and the orthodox Christian view. JW Salvation and damnation is kinda "eh."

And the final reason why I am not a Jehovah's Witness is this. Jesus. Jesus is life and love. Jesus, my creator, died for me of his own free will. You see if Jesus was created himself, it means that the Father in his omnipotent way would have known that Jesus would have to die. He would have therefore been created to die, only to be recreated after death by the Father in the JW view. This is no savior, he'd be a pawn, maybe a rook. If God created somebody named Bob to die for my sins, it would mean nothing. But if the Father, the Son, and the Spirit have existed in perfect union and love from eternity past, then none was created by, for, or to do, anything, and they'd be free to create and love and to die for what they willed. That is the meaning of a true sacrifice.

And that my friends is a reason for the hope that I have, and it is a real hope.
WiredForStereo

Apologetics and Stuff (Fun!!!)

I used to really be into apologetics, that is the "defense of the faith." Turns out though, you have to be really careful because you can get severely legalistic and stare down your nose-ish.

Whenever you get into arguments, you always seem to be right (in your own mind) and the other person is always wrong. You have a list of verses to back up your point and obviously, their list isn't near as comprehensive or as understanding of context.

Who doesn't want to be right?

I still do believe in objective truth. But I also believe that the Word of God is alive (so to speak) and fluid as it pertains to the culture. It will always have effectiveness as a message and as the basis for a faith, but that means we have to allow it to say different things to different people.

Some believe in speaking in tongues, some believe in deliverance ministry, some think focus should be on missions, some prefer shepherding the flock. I think as long as we don't make Jesus out to be an anti-Semite (he was a Jew) white supremacist pimp, I think we are going in a good direction. What I mean to say is, major on the majors, minor on the minors, and don't tell me there aren't such things as miracles any more.

You are Loved
WiredForStereo