A friend of mine posted an interesting comment or three about Commercemass, when we celebrate how much money we have to spend, and how the day after it is Ingratitude Day, when we exchange gifts for, well, toys we want to pick for ourselves instead of reminders of our friends who care about us.
Bleh.
I hate the whole thing. It's not that I don't like to give people presents. It's that I don't entirely like the underlying mindset, and I'm not sure it does our economy any good to have a big burst in needless consumption.
I think maybe this year I'll get people gift certificates good for, say, four hours of my time doing social things, whether it's bowling or watching movies or playing board games. At the rate I normally get paid for work, that's worth more than most presents I could buy, and it involves less shopping.
I invite anyone who is thinking of gifts to get me something that you don't have to shop for, or perhaps just give me a call, or come over and visit sometime.
So, I really liked Shrek. Funny movie. And I might like Shrek 2.
But I can't watch 'em on DVD. I borrowed a copy of Shrek 2 to see whether I'd like it.
And the fuckers made it so you have to sit through long previews before you get to the main menu. You can't just hit the menu button. Or the title button. Or the track skip button. Or anything. You just have to sit around being bored silly by a horrible ad for Shark Tale (they have now ensured I will never watch that movie), and then an ad for I don't even know what with an unfunny comedian trying to pitch some badly animated animal movie with voice actors and unfunny lines.
And I got bored. So I gave up.
So, I dunno. Maybe the movie's good. But if I'm gonna sit through previews before a movie, I'm gonna get hot, buttered, popcorn with it. Previews need to be an option you can go look at. Think about how this will age. Two years from now, when those movies are old and forgotten, will anyone anywhere care whether I see those previews? Will it bring in any business? If I were showing this movie to kids, do you think they'd be particularly enthusiastic about bad previews for movies they don't want to watch?
Dreamworks has a rep for making good DVDs. At least, for making DVDs whose main menus are sorta cool, with lots of features. Great. How about the feature where I don't have to get bored and insulted for several minutes before the movie even starts?
In the long run, I think it's pretty clear that the DVD industry needs to drop the "operation prohibited" thing. I would pay a lot of money for a DVD player that simply did not ever honor the "no skip" flags. In fact, I have a free software one, and I may just start using that instead of commercial DVD players. But it's a good feature, and it's about time someone told the rest of the consortium that the consumers are the ones bringing money to the table, and that consumers don't want stupid restrictions like that.
Edited to add: I sent in an informative email to the only contact I could find, the guy whose name was on the press release about the sales of Shrek 2 DVDs.
I noticed your name on a press release, after spending 20 minutes trying to find ANY CONTACT INFORMATION AT ALL on the Dreamworks site.Some relatives of mine have Shrek 2 on DVD.
The version they have has the interesting quality that there is no way to get to the main menu without sitting through several minutes of parrticularly obnoxious previews for other movies.
Are you guys CRAZY? Is this some kind of sick practical joke? You may rest assured that I won't buy this movie unless you come out with a DVD that I can actually watch. If I wanted to be stuck sitting through things of no interest to me before watching the thing I actually paid for, I'd be using a VCR, or maybe watching movies on cable. The whole point of DVD is that you can just hit a button and be at the main menu. Why not put some of that famous menu-design expertise to work making the previews accessible for the main menu?
Do you really, sincerely, think I want to spend my kids' childhoods explaining to them that the reason they can't watch Shrek for another five minutes is that some yutz at Dreamworks is trying to compensate for his flagging manhood by demonstrating his ability to force things on people?
(Once again, a reference to something posted over at ChristianForums. The original thread is here.)
Okay, this will refer back to a couple of previous articles. If you haven't read 'em yet, maybe you should read them now.
Here's a likely order to read them in:
Deus Domesticus (Also found on the blog.)
What is salvation, anyway? (Also found on the blog.)
Do you deserve to be loved? Who cares! (Also found on the blog.)
How, then, shall we live? (Also found on the blog.)
Okay.
So, in the above articles, I've sort of made the following case:
1. Christianity is not necessarily restricted to what any given Christian tells you, or what you see on TV.
2. Salvation is not a hypothetical and untestable claim about the afterlife; it's something you can observe right here and now.
3. Whether or not you "deserve" salvation should not be at issue.
4. One of the most important things about a teaching is how it affects the way we live our lives. If it doesn't change what you'll do, it's not clear how much it matters.
This, it turns out, makes a case for a sort of naturalistic Christianity. It's Christianity without much religion to it; it's all stuff you can see and think about without even hinting at supernatural questions.
But... What if it's true? What if the reason Christianity works isn't just some kind of elaborate sociological result, but that there's something to it? What if there really were a God? How would that change things?
The answer is, it might change things a lot.
Now, what's important here is that I'm not talking about the effects of belief. I'm talking about the effects of the thing believed in. These effects, if they're real, oughta happen whether or not you have any particular intellectual position on claims made about Mediterranean history of two thousand years ago.
This salvation thing, it's real. It really happens. It isn't just something that people talk about on TV and then go back to their jobs with nothing changed. It changes the way people live.
And the way it changes them, I think, is better explained by the theory that it's true.
There is something out there. Let's just call it "God". We don't really understand this thing, but it's out there, and it's real. Sometimes, when you let yourself be open to it, it changes you; it touches you, it shows you things, it changes the way you think and feel. When you're really in the groove, words just sorta happen, and they're good words. Things move. The world is a little different.
Being open to this makes impossible things possible. I don't mean silly parlor tricks. Who cares about those? I mean bringing hope to the hopeless, comfort to the bereaved. Bringing people who have fought back together as friends. Healing hearts. Stuff that matters.
It makes it possible to get past things you didn't even know how to start on, conquer fears that were bigger than you.
How's this work? I dunno. Why should I know? To quote Real Live Preacher, I don't really even know how the VCR works! But... If you are willing to trust a bit, to open yourself up, and let this force change you, it will, and you will be better.
What's perhaps more interesting is that you will also be more-you. What's that mean? It means that I am more as I have tried to be, now, and less as I just happened to be. The anger and ill temper that are my birthright have been replaced by the comparative calm and peace I have always wanted. I am more able to make the decisions I want, and less constrained by the happenstance of my nature. I've grown up in ways I didn't know were possible.
This is not something that happens "because I believe". This is something that happened long before I believed, and is still happening. I believe because of what happens. These experiences are the data; my conclusion is that Something Is Going On.
From here, we get into the question of trying to figure out what is going on. I have found that, of the people out there describing experiences like these, the Christians seem to be the ones closest to my own experience. Well, some of them. C. S. Lewis and George MacDonald seem to be talking about something nearly identical to what I'm experiencing.
In reading, say, 1 Corinthians 13, I recognize someone else who had encountered whatever I've encountered.
In reading the Gospels, I recognize someone who, insofar as I can use words for these kinds of things, was whatever I've encountered.
So... I adopt this set of explanations. I find that they are, on the whole, consistent. I don't necessarily accept everything anyone's ever claimed as "Christianity"; just the core of the faith itself.
I end up being what people call a "liberal Christian". That's nothing to do with the positions I end up holding; it means that I think the Bible was written by people, just like me, trying to get their ideas about God written down so they could share them. Thanks to some pretty huge efforts by the early church, the Bible is a particularly exceptional set of such writing. If you study it honestly, you're pretty likely to end up being in the right mindset to recognize God when you see Him.
Christianity doesn't go in much for defending the trademark. There's a good reason for this. You know how people love to point at other people and say "well, they're not really Christian"? That makes no sense. How should we know? Do they not deserve to be Christian? Big deal; none of us do. This good deal is not justified, or earned; it's just free. It's grace. Do they not agree with me? Big deal. I could be wrong too. Most likely, we're both wrong, but if we talk about it and listen to each other, maybe we'll see a little more of the truth. I figure, if they're sorta weird, well, hey, that's fine. I'm sorta weird too. We can all be weird together.
But... If you've been thinking this salvation thing sounds interesting... Not the silly one where you're bored but at least you're not on fire, but the thing where you get changed into the person you've always been trying to be... It's an option. You can do that. You'll need help, but the help is available.
Don't let the theology get in your way. Theology is a hobby. It's a way we try to get closer to understanding what's happening... But it isn't essential to the thing happening. People ate well enough to live until they had babies long before we had nutritionists.
Don't worry too much about whether all the weird finicky details line up. Maybe they never will. It's okay. Lots of people don't really get this stuff. Christians argue about it all the time. Most of us, I like to think, realize that we're arguing because it's fun.
But... The basic teachings really do work. Loving your enemies can do something much better than beating them; it can heal them. All that crazy stuff about loving strangers, it turns out, makes the world a better place to live in. There is joy to be had in living. You don't really have to believe any of this to find that out; you can go try it yourself.
But if you find yourself wanting to try it, and having a hard time getting past all your social conditioning and habits and fears... There's help. Don't waste your time trying to figure it out. Don't try to figure out what prayer does, or why an omniscient God would need you to tell Him things. Don't waste time trying to figure out why we say "Him" about a genderless spirit. Language is not gonna get you there. Doesn't matter. Just pray for help. Ask for help. Feel free to qualify it all you want. "Hey, if you even exist, I'd like some help here." That's fine.
Don't sit around expecting big drama. Just live your life, as best you can. Trust that, somehow, and we don't really know how, the help you need will be there when you need it. You can make a go of this. If you screw up occasionally, just pick yourself up and keep walking. There is forgiveness of sins. There is grace.
Don't worry about trying to identify exactly what actions are "sins". Sin is not about a big list of Forbidden Verbs. Sin is about how you're relating with the world. Love God. Love your neighbor. Not sure what God is, or whether there is one? Just love the world. Drink it in. Enjoy the weather, even when it's bad. Watch the people trying so hard to find ways to be happy. Help them as much as you can. Understand that your enemies are lonely and scared and trying to find a way to feel good. Understand that everyone else is, too.
It's true. It works. Come on in, the water's fine.
http://students.risd.edu/yr2005/eflynn/site/gallery/prophet.html
Okay, maybe you've already seen it. It's still cool.
(Another copy from ChristianForums: the original thread is here.)
One of our regular posters has adopted the habit of responding to theological claims with a simple question. "How, then, shall we live?"
This is a good question. It is an excellent question. It is sometimes the only question that matters.
How, then, shall we live?
This is the ultimate question of nearly all philosophy, and the basic question that religion mostly answers. A claim which does not change our answer to this question may be interesting, but it is a different kind of interest, and the answer has a different kind of importance.
I frequently respond to questions that would not affect my answer to this question with simple apathy. Why should I care? What will it change?
Jesus says to love your neighbor. We have a discussion on what He means by "neighbor". This, I think, affects how I will live. Is the person across the street from my my neighbor? How about a friend of a friend who happens to remember that I live in the Twin Cities, and wants a ride to the airport? This person doesn't liive near me, and I've never met her... So it matters how I understand the term "neighbor". Am I called to love this person? Is giving her a ride a good way to express that?
For an example of something that, perhaps, has less of an effect on me: Consider the question of the Assumption of the Virgin Mary. Imagine the heated debate; did Mary go to Heaven in the normal way, leaving a corpse behind, or was she assumed bodily into Heaven? Well... What am I going to do differently if I decide one way or the other? I'm not much for trying to track down two-thousand year-old bodies, so it's not clear to me that any decision I ever make will be affected by this. When would I need to know? What would I do differently?
One problem we often see with theology is that it ends up giving us no practiical advice. Worse, it can take away perfectly good practical advice. One objection I've seen made to naive interpretations of Calvinism is that it removes any basis for making any decisions, by asserting that we won't make any. Well, if we won't make any decisions, why does it matter how we talk about them, or think about them? (Note that not all Calvinist views run into this problem.)
So... This is something to keep in mind when discussing theology. Some of us are mostly concerned with the pragmatic question. How, then, shall I live? I don't really understand the future, I don't have any conceptual grasp on "eternity". Those, I am willing to leave in God's presumably capable hands. What difference would it make? How could I change my life if there were possible problems? So I don't worry.
But I pay a lot of attention to theological questions that will tell me how to live, because that's sort of the name of the game.
Now, someone's probably going to come in and talk about "works". Salvation, we are assured, is not through works. Indeed. You cannot follow a book of rules and end up saved. You cannot take an action to force God to make you happy. No amount of taking actions will fix these problems... But that isn't the same as living a given way. A lifestyle goes deeper than a set of actions; it's an entire way of approaching the question.
Shall I give my neighbor a ride to the airport? I should. This follows from love... But the other way around doesn't work. I could wear out three cars giving people rides to the airport without loving any of them. How shall I live? Not by resenting people, not by begrudging them the charity I feel I must give to be worthy... But by actually loving them. That's a way to live.
It's not that these things are rewarded by salvation. God isn't a salvation machine that requires exact change. It's that these things are a way of expressing something, and that something matters.
This is the danger of confusing faith and belief. We talk about faith, and faithfulness, and we sort of understand what we mean. A faithful spouse does not resent another spouse's occasional impositions. Believing that you're married is not the same as being faithful. You can assert the Nicene Creed until you're blue in the face without loving anyone. It does not tell us how to live, only what beliefs would lead us to looking at the words of Jesus in a way that will lead us to the knowledge of how to live. It is the start of a journey, not the end. It is the milk we eat until we are ready for the meat.
How, then, shall we live? In love.
Bertrand Russell Parties are fun. So much fun that we're gonna do one this year, too. December 24th, 2004. Afternoon and evening; figure we'll have the house in some kind of shape for visitors by 1PM. There will be food. There might be video games. There will be a grapefruit tree with lights on it, and maybe some music. Come by whenever, before about 11PM. Call if you're unsure, or if you just want someone to talk to. Our party, like us, will be in Saint Paul, Minnesota. Email for directions, if you need them.
For those who weren't around last year, the idea is simple: A Christmas party for the set of all people who are not invited to a Christmas party. Or who just have some good reason not to go. Family troubles? Family in another state? Don't get along with Cousin Joe? Whatever. Come on by. We'll come up with something.
As always, we claim no ownership of the idea, and encourage other people to have one too.
So, why is it that peaceful resistance is so dangerous?
What makes people throw away their chance at real power, because they look horrible, because they have to smash down that one really polite guy everyone knows is not a threat to them? The answer is simple. He's not a threat to anyone else, but he's a threat to the people who want power.
Sometimes, you get people. Maybe they're cops, maybe they're moderators. They're people who have some kind of power. And the reason they have that power is that they are given that power, because they are trusted to use it for the good of the community.
If the community doesn't need so many people with power, there's less to go around. If the community is under attack, it needs lots of people with lots of power to protect it. But some of those people, maybe they're not so good. Maybe they just want the power. The ones who want the power make bad cops.
Enter our peaceful protester. He's not a threat to the community, but he's a threat to the bad cops. (By the way, I'm not talking about "police officers" specifically; even more, I'm not talking about everyone who holds these jobs, or performs these duties, but just a few people.) He's a threat to the cops in two ways. One is that he challenges their authority, their mandate, their very right to exercise all that lovely tasty power. The second, and more dangerous, is that he is a person who offers no threat at all to the community. If there were a lot of people like that, we might not need so many cops.
The problem, I think, is that the bad cops know he's a threat, but the very thing that makes him a threat to them makes him harmless to everyone else. So, when they react to this threat in their traditional manner, they squash him, because he's a threat. They lock him up, or they beat him, or they ban him from posting. Whatever. They make the threat go, using power, because that's what they do.
Only now it gets ugly, because everyone else knows the guy isn't a threat. To them, to the community as a whole... Suddenly, you can tell which people are defending the community, and which people are defending their own ability to exercise power to control others.
As you may have guessed, I've been banned from ChristianForums again. My previous warnings are still on appeal, and the new one is for "flaming".
Lemme tell you about flaming. Let's say someone posted, in a political forum, asking whether the Republicans shouldn't, if Kerry wins, do the same thing Gore did after the dust settled in the 2000 election, and just accept a leader they don't much like. This response would be a flame:
Posted by brewmama
Ho ho ho ha ha ha ho ha ho ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!!
This is just too funny!! Oh my goodness!!
(Wiping away the tears), Yeah, well, it was the Dems who started the plan of hiring 10000 lawyers and declaring victory on election night no matter what the vote is, and throwing the whole thing in court right away. That's how your side plays, honey.
That's a flame.
What'd I post? We don't know. It's a secret; the thread's been trashed, so I can't tell you what post I supposedly flamed.
But I will say that I am skeptical that the author of the above post is qualified to judge my post to be a flame. I think, more likely, it was polite, calm, and opposed to the basic premises on which she bases her position, her power, her presumed mandate and authority.
But I'm just gonna keep on talking, preaching the Gospel, and letting them ban me as much as they want. I appeal. The warning gets overturned. I come back, and I tell people it's all good, and they don't have to fight, and they can just be friends. And we'll see who feels threatened by that.
One more thing, you should know, about this whole peaceful resistance thing. I am not alone.
Okay, so, I mostly vote Republican. And I like to think of myself as a fiscally conservative Republican sort.
Republicans can be pretty shameless, though. I don't think a bunch of Republicans lying about their affiliation and holding up Kerry/Edwards signs with big obvious signs about gay adoption and how good abortion is, is a good reflection on the party. I think it says what I've been gradually realizing for some time: There's a lot of Republicans who are, quite simply, genuinely evil. They have abandoned any notion of ethics. They figure any lie that gets you in power is a good lie.
I have been surrounded by these people at ChristianForums, where they appear to be the majority of the active Republican posters.
I don't know what to do about this. I still like the idea of fiscal responsibility. But I like the idea of ethics, too.
I think the key to this is that these people have mastered the art of absolute and perfect dishonesty. One of the more viciously evil posters at ChristianForums, a man who goes by the name of "Sharp", doesn't even try to make sense. He just posts lies about people he doesn't like. For example, in attacks on "liberals", he's been known to accuse them of just taking the Bible at face value without studying it. Now, there are a lot of problems with some liberal belief systems... But that's not generally one of them.
I've seen these people go. They'll just make stuff up. They'll take a nasty thing that they've seen someone do, and attribute it to the other side. One person explained that the reason for no-bid contracts for Haliburton was that bidding "increased prices". I guess that's the entire basis of our capitalist economy, the notion of competition, thrown out the window. IDIOTS!
According to some of the posters, the people doing this are "neocons". I've been unable to get a clear answer as to what exactly neocons are. Different people give different definitions. However, I will say that the posters who associate themselves with this name seem to be pretty brutally nasty people. It's become a pure power game; I don't think they have any interest left in what they supposedly stand for.
It was a real shock the first time I saw someone, claiming to be Christian, say that turning the other cheek is "just a bribe to people in power". But these people are out there, and they have stolen Christianity, and they have stolen the Republican party. And they must be stopped, because what they are pushing is not fiscally responsible, it is not Christian, it is not good in any way; it is anathema to the very notion of a democratic system where we try to govern ourselves, and indeed, it appears that they despise this notion of being answerable to people. They want the annoyance of elections and checks and balances swept away so they can impose the policies they've picked.
Please, folks. Just remember that not all Republicans are like that. When we've suffered through a while of people like Bush and Cheney, remember that there are Republicans who are in favor of fiscal responsibility, personal freedoms, and an open and fair electoral process. And if we vote against enough of the psychos, we might get some of those other guys back again.
There's a petition about God and politics. A petition to remind the people who keep claiming God's part of their party that, well, He's not.
This is mostly aimed at Christians who are willing to grant that there may be other Christians who disagree with them about politics.