January | 2013 | Asian and Entertained

Time and a Word

Posted on January 21, 2013 by babemoby

I’m actually not sure how much the Yes song has to do with this post, but I was trying to think of something catchy that had to do with words, and I very much enjoy Yes’ music, so I decided I’m going with it.

Speaking of love and word, I’ve been doing a lot of rethinking about Christianity and the Bible and how the two intersect. I’m coming to the conclusion that the way those of us who read the Bible (or any other holy book for that matter) interpret it generally says more about who the interpreter is and what he or she personally believes rather than any objective rules or standard for living.

I know that I’ve probably immediately lost any who purport to read the Bible literally and take seriously its infallibility. Oh well.

To state my case, I’ll give a couple personal examples that have led me in this general direction.

The man on the left is the would-be Bible scholar.

Shortly after I finished college, I went to Thailand on a mission trip with my Southern Baptist college group. I met a college dude there who had never read the Bible before and didn’t know very much about it, but when I started talking about Christianity with him, he was very interested to learn about it. Excitedly, I let him borrow one of the English-Thai Bibles we had brought with us, knowing in my heart that somehow the light of Christ would brighten his world and enlighten him to the exclusive truth of the gospel, and he would turn and repent of his wicked ways to become a true believer in the ways of the Lord. More in line with reality, after studying the Bible, he came to the conclusion that Christianity was little different from Buddhism, and the Jesus was just a replacement for the Buddha (Buddhism is the national religion of Thailand). Basically, the idea is do good things and be rewarded for them with Heaven in the afterlife. Still believing then that belief in Jesus as Savior was the only way to Heaven, I was stunned and didn’t know how to apologetically (if you get my drift) respond in a way that wouldn’t acknowledge his astute observation. He wasn’t the only Thai person who responded to my evangelism in that way on that trip. Sadly, without a retort, I had to acknowledge that, yes, that made sense. And years later, I discovered this website comparing the similarities of Christianity and Buddhism.

Another time, I had a conversation with a friend who is from Ethiopia when I worked at the GAP. He was talking about a girl he was either dating or wanted to date, I can’t remember which. He said something to the effect that, according to the Bible, if she’s dating him, then she shouldn’t have sexual intercourse with other men. Still being a Southern Baptist-leaning evangelical at that point, I thought she shouldn’t have sex with anyone unless she’s married to that person. I weakly responded in agreement with him, not wanting to be impolite or not knowing how to politely argue with someone in his second language that he didn’t understand very well. Case in point, every time the boss said something to the workers as a group, my friend would ask me what he said. Ethiopia’s national religion is Christianity, by the way.

Looking at the Bible from the perspective of someone from a different culture without bias or influence, I think it’d be pretty easy to come to the same conclusions my friends did.

Those who use the Bible as the crux of their arguments for determining some sort of strange spiritual morality or to try to separate Christians from non-Christians or who’s going to hell, are already looking for those things going into their reading. If you do a study of history and Jewish tradition and read it from their perspective, you’ll see that very little of those concepts are concepts a Jew in the time of Jesus would have understood very well.

If people want to use the Bible to justify their dislike of a certain group of people, they generally will point to whichever clobber verses they like to argue their ~~bigotedness~~ difference of opinion (and not the Phantom Menace). A different study of the Bible might generally conclude that love, charity and acceptance are generally the values Jesus thought were most important. But time and culture have twisted those ideas into a message that wasn’t conveyed in the original texts.

Take homosexuality, for instance. The word doesn’t exist in the Greek language, nor the same concept of homosexuality accepted by modern culture.

But those who accept that modern translations of the Bible condemn homosexuality as it is today, then despite the research and history, they’ll believe the modern translations are more inspired to condemn it in the current cultural climate. Their conclusions, however, are more inspired by their own disdain for those people rather than any Biblical evidence. The Bible is merely the tool for validating the belief.

Take any example of ostracism present or past. People have used holy texts to demonize people of different races, lower economic status, women and even other religions. American slave owners used the Bible’s references to slavery to justify taking and keeping their African slaves. And if you try to tell them they are wrong, they point to the text for their justification.

It’s also possible to see the Bible as a source for inspiration toward a culture of love and inclusion. As Jesus states, the golden rule is to love God with all your heart and to love others as you love yourself. The entire word is summed up in those tenants. People who agree with this are generally prone to focus their lives on love and social justice. But again, this has more to do with the person reading the text than the text itself.

Basically, regardless of original meaning or which translation we read the Bible with, it’s going to say what we want it to say. We can try to use it comprehensively or cherry-pick ideas, but at the end of the day, it’s our own bias that shines through.

Basically, regardless of original meaning or which translation we read the Bible with, it’s going to say whatever we want it to say. We can try to use it comprehensively or cherry-pick ideas, but at the end of the day, it’s our own bias that shines through.

If you want to be part of an exclusive religion where action is unnecessary and salvation is based only on your beliefs, that’s what you’ll find in the Bible. If you want an inclusive religion of love and community, then that’s what you’ll find. Not to say that the Bible has nothing to say on its own, but its mostly our own biases talking that we use the texts to support.

With such an ancient text that has been retranslated and reinterpreted over thousands of years, it’s time and a word. “The word is ‘love’ and it’s right for me.”

Let’s Eat!

Posted on January 14, 2013 by babemoby

One of my favorite church traditions is going out to eat as a group after services. For most evangelical churches, this usually means heading to the nearest Cracker Barrel, Bob Evans or American buffet-style restaurant, all of which I personally enjoy occasionally. That’s beginning to change with emergent and progressive churches, as they might add Chipotle or a modern-styled restaurant that offers meager portions and both vegetarian and vegan options for a much higher price than you’d usually like to pay.

Like the Bible says, you should probably cook it first, in case you were unsure what to do.

I’m not about to argue the value of traditional American food versus more progressive, nuanced forms of obtaining sustenance, as I try not to be judgmental. But then again, we all know the Bible commands us “⁹Do not eat the meat raw or boiled in water, but roast it over a fire—with the head, legs and internal organs,” making hog roasts one of the few Biblically proper modern means of meat preparation. It continues, “¹⁰Do not leave any of it till morning; if some is left till morning, you must burn it,” showing God’s disdain for keeping leftovers, so you better make sure you intend to eat all that hog before you start roasting it.

At my current church, the University Church of Toledo, which I will gladly unhumbly brag about whenever I get the chance, instead of just grabbing your favorite group of people who attended the service, the pastor invites everyone in attendance to a meal at a local restaurant after the service has ended to continue the conversation the pastor began with his sermon. The church frequents an Indian restaurant among a few others in the area.

Everyone gets some!

Something I greatly appreciate about many other cultures is the communal manner of food service. At the Indian restaurant, for instance, everyone orders their own dish, which they might share with others. There is also bread and rice, which are served in bowls that everyone passes around the table to scoop some onto their own plate.

I like the practice of sharing food. I feel that it brings people together over a common goal, if you want to call it that. The goal being ~~shoving as much food as you can into your own mouth before anyone else gets a chance~~ leaving enough to be able to share and make sure everyone gets some. It also adds a communal element is not quite as present as when everyone just gets their own plate or heads to the buffet line. It’s a shared experience, so if there’s a dish everyone particularly likes (or hates), they can share their appreciation of it (or if there’s any leftovers, fight over who has to reluctantly take it home).

Sharing a meal is an event that is easy to bond over. For one thing, it’s a common interest for most people. Eating is an activity pretty much everyone has an interest in. It’s something you gotta do that is enjoyable, and if you go to a restaurant, it’s an excuse to not have to do your own preparation work for, or an excuse to not have to go to the restaurant alone. I mean, there are lots of activities common to all people, but using the bathroom is something you generally don’t want to share with someone else.

Yeah, everyone dig in there. I apologize to germophobes, you’re probably very frightened at this moment.

In Chinese restaurants, a large group will generally order several dishes, which are placed on a large spinning disk in the center of the table that allows easy access for everyone who wants some. At one job, I had a friend from Ethiopia who would bring food that he would share with me a few times, where you just reach in the bowl and take some. That might intrude upon some people’s standards of cleanliness, and if you’re not used to it, you may want to make sure you’re pretty good friends with the people you eat with before you trust them sanitarily to touch all the food you’re about to put into your mouth. Then again, if you visit some African countries, you may not have a choice who you share the food bowl with.

Also cool are churches that still do potlucks. Garrison Keillor on his radio show, Prairie Home Companion, was well-known for playfully making fun of Lutheran churches that love to do potlucks, but it’s a pretty cool idea for community to have an event where everyone brings a dish to share with everyone else. It leaves the possibility for feelings of rejection if you end up taking home most of what you brought, but, seriously, it’s good for building a sense of community within a group.

In case you don’t know of Garrison Keillor, I’ve provided a video as an example as to what he does. I don’t know if he ever actually gets around to talking about potlucks in this video, but it’s always possible. And there’s the possibility he may just lull you to sleep with his rambling.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzF2Jw2jZd8

Food can be a deeply rooted cultural art, and it’s always interesting to learn about cultural traditions that the food stems from, and it’s someone everyone has in common, so I think it’s kind of important that we all share in it, which brings me to my point.

I don’t even know how this makes kids want to eat.

With fast food and the business of the culture in the U.S., it feels to me like food has lost something. Food has become more of a necessity and a commodity rather than something that promotes a good community environment. Like everything else, it’s something that’s becoming deeply individual. Even at most restaurants, everyone gets their own plate. That’s a far cry from everyone sticking their hands in the same bowl! Instead of being an event, eating something everyone does on their own time, often privately.

In many ways, greater independence is a good thing, and it’s something that’s very important for society. But for people like me, it becomes kind of lonely. I like eating with others, just as I like spending time doing many other activities with others. Interdependence, though it can lead to abuses sometimes, much of the time it will bring people together instead. And even as our country and world become more individualistic, it’s sad to me that we live in a world where it’s very difficult to meet new people.

And I think sharing a meal is one of the easiest ways to meet people. I’ve written about the commodification of music before, something that’s true of any art. Generally, everything is commodified due to capitalism. It stinks that food is included in that.

I’m not expecting that everyone should drop everything they’re doing thrice a day to eat breakfast, lunch and dinner with any random stranger they can find or have tea time or anything. I realize people are very busy, which I think it’s a good thing for general productivity.

But if we could all find time to sit down at least once a week to sit down with some people beyond our own families to share a meal and conversation, it would make for a much warmer and more friendly society in general. Don’t just go and stick your hands in someone else’s food and call it community though, that’s not a good way to make friends.

Food, we all need it, so let’s use it to our advantage as a society.

God the Gentleman

Posted on January 7, 2013 by babemoby

*TRIGGER WARNING: VIOLENCE*

I think in the aftermath of the school shootings in Connecticut, I think it would have been pretty insensitive to try to offer a religious explanation for why this happen. So, I decided to hold off on writing this for a bit to let the gaping open wound it left in people’s hearts and minds heal a bit before starting to talk about the implications.

Unfortunately, through social media, when I wasn’t being bombarded with people trying to tell me that having more guns in schools would somehow decrease gun violence in schools, I was also told that because we supposedly don’t allow God in schools, that He politely excused Himself and left us with the consequences of His absence.

I can’t accept a god like that.

If God even needs prayers that much that if He doesn’t get enough of them, He’ll punish some people in exchange or allow the work of “evil” people to make others into victims, even if those things are true, then why does God punish innocent children for our “mistakes”?

There are others who could be implicated as parties to evil in this case. The shooter obviously had evil intentions, as he plotted his scheme. His mother kept these guns in her house knowing she had a child with mental illness. If God is all-powerful, then why didn’t God stop this plan as it was being set into place? Why didn’t God keep the guy’s mother from owning all those guns? And if God is going to punish someone for perpetrating evil, why doesn’t God punish the perpetrator instead of the victims?

Furthermore, why doesn’t God stop the U.S. government from sending drones to kill children in Pakistan? I don’t ever hear anyone around here ask that unfortunately.

And I know there is the idea that God gives people free will, so people are responsible for their own actions. But even if that’s true, how do people become so mentally deteriorated that they believe they need to kill people? I think it’s difficult to say that anyone in their right mind would believe killing someone else or themselves is necessary or a proper way to behave. Our justice system tries to make a distinction between those with mental stability or instability, but how can any murderer be in their right mind? Not trying to excuse murderers, but it must take a lot to make someone think it’s a good idea to take someone else’s life.

I mean, it’s not as if Milton in Office Space just decides one day that because Lumberg took his stapler away, he’s going to shoot him. It takes a lot of frustration to get up the courage to do something that drastic. In the end, he only burns down the office, but he doesn’t kill anyone.

No words

If God is all-powerful, then whether we have free will or not, God allows this evil to happen. If God gives us free will, then why does that free will we were created with turn out to be so evil? If God doesn’t give us free will, then it would be easy to say God is directly responsible.

In any case, the worst part about believing in a God who is all-powerful and strict enough to punish people for their sins, is that the innocent are the ones who suffer.

If God will allow evil because we don’t pray to him, innocent children are gunned down and the murderer gets off with suicide, taking the easy way out. Women (or men) who are raped are generally told it’s their fault for so many reasons. Everything is done to ruin her reputation to discredit her, and the evildoer rapist is let off scot-free. Or when a major disaster happens like Superstorm Sandy, Christians say God is punishing gayness or whatever, but why is He just punishing random people? (side note: I’m not trying to say homosexuality is a sin, because I don’t believe it is, just trying to convey popular Christian beliefs) Or when a person is suffering with debilitating cancer and they die, their loved ones are told that God will use this for His Glory, or God is hurting with them.

If Mandy Moore’s character in A Walk to Remember believes “maybe God has a bigger plan for me than I have for myself!” then why does God have to cause her to suffer and die, or fail to prevent it rather than miraculously healing her. Wouldn’t that accomplish the same goal, but with a happier ending?

If God is truly loving and graceful, as well as all-powerful, then why does He punish the innocent rather than the ones who are acting “evil”? As much as we may rationalize, I don’t think we can get away from that conclusion. Every time God chooses not to intervene, the ones who suffer are those who don’t deserve to.

I mean, what the hell?

And you can argue that we’re all evil because we’re born evil, so we don’t deserve favorable treatment from God and if we do, it’s because of His Grace. Personally, I think everyone makes mistakes, but small things like forgetting to pray hardly seem worthy of death. In fact, if God created us with the capacity to sin, how can we be blamed for doing things we were created with the ability to do.

If you get sick of the blue screen of death, you don’t blame your computer, you blame Microsoft. If God is all-powerful, yet allows evil to happen, why do we blame the creation rather than the creator?

Stupid computer, this is all your fault!

I’m currently on a journey to rediscover where I stand on faith. I fall somewhere in the vast chasm between faith and atheism, and I don’t begrudge people who have reasonable faith or unfaith if they aren’t hurting anyone else with it and have good reason to believe the way they do.

But if God is the all-powerful, yet free will-giving, graceful, but not too graceful God popular in evangelical Christianity, then I can’t believe in that, or I can’t bring myself to worship it.

That God is no gentleman.

But if we can live with sorrow for the effects of evil, shake our fists at the sky and wonder why any good god would allow such things to happen, and being able to accept that sometimes, there just aren’t any good answers, I can struggle with that idea and come to my own conclusion and hope that a good God can help heal and restore broken lives, and I’ll deal. If we can admit that if God exists, but is not in total control of every aspect of our lives, and, that we just can’t totally understand God, I can live with that. So we stop attributing everything that happens to God. We take responsibility for our own actions. We do all we can to limit suffering. In that case, I can live with questions and doubt, yet still hope that God is on our side somehow.

But any god who would punish innocent people for the sins of others, I can see no hope in that at all. If we believe God is all-powerful, then the truth we must accept is that the innocent are always the ones who will suffer the most.