Following Crosswalk America

We Can Solve It, Mos Def

by Howie

1.4-odd million people have beaten me to the www.WeCanSolveIt.org party, but that’s a good thing! We’re calling for 100% green energy production in 10 years - the same length of time President Kennedy used in his challenge to put a man on the moon.
Sound familiar, long-time readers?

So I ask you to join with me to call on every candidate, at every level, to accept this challenge - for America to be running on 100 percent zero-carbon electricity in 10 years. It’s time for us to move beyond empty rhetoric. We need to act now.

This is a generational moment. A moment when we decide our own path and our collective fate. I’m asking you - each of you - to join me and build this future. Please join the WE campaign at wecansolveit.org.We need you. And we need you now. We’re committed to changing not just light bulbs, but laws. And laws will only change with leadership.

On July 16, 1969, the United States of America was finally ready to meet President Kennedy’s challenge of landing Americans on the moon. I will never forget standing beside my father a few miles from the launch site, waiting for the giant Saturn 5 rocket to lift Apollo 11 into the sky. I was a young man, 21 years old, who had graduated from college a month before and was enlisting in the United States Army three weeks later.

I will never forget the inspiration of those minutes. The power and the vibration of the giant rocket’s engines shook my entire body. As I watched the rocket rise, slowly at first and then with great speed, the sound was deafening. We craned our necks to follow its path until we were looking straight up into the air. And then four days later, I watched along with hundreds of millions of others around the world as Neil Armstrong took one small step to the surface of the moon and changed the history of the human race.

We must now lift our nation to reach another goal that will change history. Our entire civilization depends upon us now embarking on a new journey of exploration and discovery. Our success depends on our willingness as a people to undertake this journey and to complete it within 10 years. Once again, we have an opportunity to take a giant leap for humankind. -Al Gore

So I need your help, guys. Gore is drawing the parallel with the “Moon Shot,” but hasn’t lept to the conclusion that this goal needs a name - a meme - as well. If you can help get the name “Green Shot” as shorthand for “100% carbon-free energy production in 10 years” to his attention, please do! I’m going to submit something via the website, try a message board, and work with a friend-of-a-friend who is one of the three thousand “Inconvenient Truth” presenters. If you can add to the effort, please. The marketing on this idea may make or break it, with serious consequences for all of us - especially the most vulnerable members of humanity.

\

==================================

\

I was driving around last week, listening to Mos Def, and “Fear Not Of Man” struck me:

Bismillah ir Rahman ir Raheem *
If you can hear me ladies and gentlemen
Then I’m very happy that you came here..
Ooh-ooooooooooohhhh, ooh-ooooooooooooooohh-WHEEEEE!!!
That was for Brooklyn..
Ha ha, we get it everytime
You got me on? Ohh
Shout out to all of my crew, East-West, North-South
All the continent, Europe, all abroad international
Bring it in, bring it in, bring it in, bring it in

It’s a lot of things goin on y’all
21st century is comin’
20th century almost done
A lot of things have changed
A lot of things have not, mainly us
We gon’ get it together right?
I believe that
Listen.. people be askin’ me all the time,
“Yo Mos, what’s gettin’ ready to happen with Hip-Hop?”
(”Where do you think Hip-Hop is goin’?”)
I tell em, You know what’s gonna happen with Hip-Hop?
Whatever’s happening with us
If we smoked out, Hip-Hop is gonna be smoked out
If we doin’ alright, Hip-Hop is gonna be doin’ alright
People talk about Hip-Hop like it’s some giant livin’ in the hillside
Comin’ down to visit the townspeople
We are Hip-Hop
Me, you, everybody, we are Hip-Hop
So Hip-Hop is goin’ where we goin’
So the next time you ask yourself where Hip-Hop is goin’
Ask yourself.. “Where am I goin’? How am I doin’?”
‘Til you get a clear idea
So.. if Hip-Hop is about the people
And the.. Hip-Hop won’t get better until the people get better
Then how do people get better? (Hmmmm…)
Well, from my understanding people get better
When they start to understand that, they are valuable
And they not valuable because they got a whole lot of money
Or cause somebody, think they sexy
But they valuable cause they been created by God
And God, makes you valuable
And whether or not you, recognize that value is one thing
You got a lot of socities and governments
Tryin’ to be God, wishin’ that they were God
They wanna create satellites and cameras everywhere
And make you think they got the All-Seeing Eye
Eh.. I guess The Last Poets wasn’t, too far off
When they said that certain people got a God Complex
I believe it’s true
I don’t get phased out by none of that, none of that
Helicopters, the TV screens, the newscasters, the..
Satellite dishes.. they just, wishin’
They can’t really never do that
When they tell me to fear they law
When they tell me to try to
Have some fear in my heart behind the things that they do
This is what I think in my mind
And this is what I say to them
And this is what I’m sayin, to you check it

All over the world hearts pound with the rhythm
Fear not of men because men must die
Mind over matter and soul before flesh
Angels for the pain keep a record in time
Which is passin’ and runnin’ like a caravan freighter
The world is overrun with the wealthy and the wicked
But God is sufficient in disposing of affairs
Gunmen and stockholders try to merit my fear
But God is sufficient over plans they prepared
Mos Def in the flesh, where you at?, right here
On this place called Earth, holdin down my square
‘Bout to represent in your whole atmosphere
‘Bout to represent in your whole atmosphere

(* - means In the Name of God, the Most Merciful, the Most Compassionate)

\

Wise. Now replace “hip-hop” with “church.” Read again.
\

True.

\

It was the line about the giant living in the hillside that got me. How often do we say or hear things like “What’s happening with the church?” or “I wonder what the church will be like in… years?” or “Why doesn’t the church do such-and-such?” as though the the church is something other than you and me. Mos is great, turning the question around; what’s happening with you? What will you be like in X years? Why don’t you do such-and-such?

\

Like church, hip-hop isn’t the sound of the music, the look of the fashion, or any of the multitude of things you can point to. Hip-hop is a spirit; a way of being in the world, a lens through which we view everything else. A culture. A frame. If I’m in the spirit, anything I can do can be hip-hop.

\

Now replace “hip-hop” with “church.” Read again. -h

Not Orthodox

by Merrill

@Duck and Decanter

~

I posted a new thread on the message board I mentioned last week. The post is in the welcome section. As a non-Christian I can’t post just anywhere but the welcome section is OK. Here is a copy of the post.

~

Iwojimakid

Member

Are you a Christian?: No, I am not a Christian.

Join Date: Jul 2008

Posts: 1

iwojimakid is a new member, showing promise.

Hello you all

I ran into this forum last week while researching for a blog I write and decided to join. I registered and without thinking placed myself in the “Yes, I am a Christian” category. I am after all a follower of Jesus as I have been for 54 years after “making a decision for Christ” at the age of 12. Over the course of those 54 years I have had occasion to revise my theology from my original fundamentalism (although we did not call it that at the time) to what I believe is a more accepting, loving, and reasonable Christianity. Never in those 54 years have I found it necessary to identify as a non-Christian. Until now. So here I am. Hi you all.

Merrill

~

Iwojimakid is my screen name for this message board. I suppose I could have mentioned that I later changed to “No, I am not a Christian” but since all posts are labeled under the member designation I thought it unnecessary. So far there are three comments to the thread. They are all pretty generic and just welcome me. No comments about me being a non-Christian. Just in case you are wondering their definition of Christian is:

Definition of “Are you a Christian?” in profile

For the purpose of posting as Christian on this board, we believe:

A Christian is a follower of Jesus of Nazareth, referred to as Christ or Messiah. Christians believe Jesus to be the only Son of God, who lived a sinless life. He is eternal, uncreated God, and has always been and will always be God, the creator of the universe. At the end of his earthly life He was crucified, on the third day He rose from the dead, and later ascended into heaven.

Christians further believe that Jesus alone offers salvation, and that it is only possible through and by Him. Apart from Jesus Christ, there is no salvation. Ephesians 2:8-9 states that “It is by grace you have been saved, through faith, and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God that no one should boast”. Humans cannot save themselves through good works, only Jesus can save them. Good works, however, are a result of living according to the Word of God.

Christians identify themselves as monotheistic, believing that there is one God

~

When I first read this I immediately thought of Martin Luther (Yes, I am STILL working through the lectures) who would have agreed that with the “It is by grace you have been saved…”. But he would also have had something to say about “Have you made a decision for Christ?” (which is a question that was posed where you checked your choice on the Christian thing). I believe that Luther would have labeled that asking or answering that question as “works” of man!

~

It is worth noting that the message board has some specific rules regarding some Christians:

IV. Specific Rules

Unorthodox teachings or discussing specific doctrines of ANY of these religions will be moved to the “World Religions” Forum:

Teachings of ANY of these religions and discussion of specific doctrines may be discussed only in the World Religions forum in the interest of seeking factual representation and refuting any doctrinal differences from mainstream Protestantism:

1. Seventh Day Adventist (SDA)

2. Jehovah’s Witnesses (JW)

3. Latter Day Saints (LDS)

4. ANY non-Christian religion, such as Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Wicca, etc.

5. Roman Catholicism.

6. ONENESS (DENIAL OF THE TRINITY/DEITY of Christ)

7. Universalism of any sort to include Universal Reconciliation

This is not just for posting messages on the open board. If you use the various systems on the message board to promote these doctrines (such as Private Messaging or Rep system etc.) then we will take appropriate action.

~

I think it is kind of funny that Roman Catholics are included with the non-orthodox (in that in previous centuries – and even today - they fought to define being a Christian almost exactly the same as the message board’s definition). Of course they also would have narrowed the field by excluding all non- Roman Catholics.

~

How many points in the definition do you think a heretic, like me, might disagree with?

~

PS Howie’s sacrilegious post probably would not have been appreciated on the message board but I appreciated it. Thanks, Howie.

This Week’s Moment of Sacreligion Brought To You…

by Howie

“Well they showed you a statue and told to pray, they built you a temple and locked you away

But they never told you the price that you pay, the things that you might have done…

You might have heard I run with a dangerous crowd, we ain’t too pretty, we ain’t too proud

We might be laughing a bit too loud, but that never hurt no one

So come on Virginia, show me a sign, send up a signal I’ll throw you a line

That stained glass curtain you’re hiding behind never lets in the sun

You got a nice white dress and a party on your confirmation,

You got a brand new soul and a cross of gold

Well Virginia, they didn’t give you quite enough information

You didn’t count on me, when you were counting on your rosary

And they say there’s a heaven for those who will wait,

Some say it’s better but I say it ain’t

I’d rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the saints, the sinners are much more fun

You said your mother told you all I could give you was a reputation

She never cared for me, but did she ever say a prayer for me?”

\

Who in our faith tradition criticized religiosity when it gets in the way of our doing what needs done?  Who ran with a “dangerous crowd,” laughing with the sinners?  Who proclaimed that God’s Kingdom is at hand, here and now, and that those who follow should not wait for it but start becoming a part of it immediately?  “Trust me; follow me, believe in me, count on me!” - Who said that?

\

If you guessed Billy Joel…  partial credit.

\

I was listening to The Stranger yesterday, and in the middle of “Only the Good Die Young” on the second side I was struck by the thought that “This is a Maundy Thursday song.”

\

Slowed down and turned minor… Or is that too sentimental?  …Joel’s earnest attempt at a lighthearted, mischevious seduction started sounding to me like a call to leave the trappings of faith* and start a journey toward new life.

\

Maybe it would work.  Maybe in the context of worship, this familiar zippy pop tune - re-arranged or not - has the potential to shake us up a little.

\

My attitude is that it can’t hurt to try; the rest of the stuff I’m hearing lately isn’t shaking me at all. -h
\

* Of course, but in case you’re reading me for the first time, I understand the particularly Catholic imagery in universal terms.  All religious systems have their symbols that for some people stop pointing toward what they’re intended to symbolize.  This is about when a person’s faith becomes divested of meaning, not about Catholicism.

Bad News

by Merrill

@Duck and Decanter

~

I ran into a message board while looking for information about Ronald Weinland this past week. I decided to register because I thought it might be interesting. To register for the forum an applicant must pick one of three categories:

~

I. Yes, I am a Christian.

II. No, I am not a Christian

III. No I am not, but I am seeking Christ.

~

Without hesitation I clicked on Yes, I am a Christian. Later while confirming my registration – an email is sent and you click on a link in the email to complete registration – I read the definition and decided that I failed the definition of “Yes, I am a Christian”. Being ever (well, mostly) honest I immediately changed the self-identification to “No, I am not a Christian”. I suppose I could have identified as “No I am not, but I am seeking Christ” but I think that my definition of seeking Christ would not match theirs. Besides which my choice would probably result in fewer attempts to convert me being emailed. I think that is the first time I have ever identified myself as a non-Christian. Feels kind of strange. Currently I am debating about posting about that subject on the board. I suspect that the people who read (and operate) the message board would have a problem with Affirmation One. I’ll let you know.

~

That wasn’t the bad news. This next isn’t ether. I was I was checking on Ronald Weinland because I found a reference to his latest book, 2008 - God’s Final Witness, and I was somewhat curious. If you are interested, you can download a copy from the site. Our boy Ronald is not only Pastor of the Church of God – PKG (PKG stands for Preparing for the Kingdom of God) but he is one of the Two Witnesses spoken of in Revelation. Alternately, you might believe that he is a false prophet (which he said he would be revealed as if his prophesies did not turn out to be true).

According to God’s Church, COG – PKG, the following timeline was started this year:

- Feb 2: 1335 days begins until the kingdom of god will return.

- March 18th: 1290 days. This marked the opening of the seventh seal.

- April 17th: 1260 days. This marks the date of the beginning of the end of the Great Tribulation and the blast of the first trumpet (again from the book of Revelation).

~

Even as I write this he and his wife, Laura, are in Jerusalem. You may or may not remember that the two witnesses will be slain in the streets of Jerusalem at end of the 1260 days (according to a literal interpretation of revelation) started April 17^th (according to Weinland). Or maybe not since COG – PKG (and Ronald) are now saying that the events originally scheduled for March 18^th and April 17^th (I am not quite sure what events but I think destruction of the United States was supposed to begin and maybe nuclear war – in any case were we sure not to be able to miss them) are now being said to be “spiritual”. One thing did happen on April 17^th and that was that the name of the second witness was revealed (by Ronald). It is his wife Laura. Presumably that is why she is in Jerusalem with him. Hard to be slain in the streets of Jerusalem if you aren’t there. Which makes me wonder why they have trips planned for July and August in the US and Canada.

~

OK, that’s old – and mostly discredited – news. Now, here is the bad news. It turns out that the real end of the world, according to some - for example -, is due to occur on December 21 2012. This is the date (again according to some – there are other dates) that the Mayan “long count” calendar resets after 1,872,000 days. Since that calendar started on August 11, 3114 B.C. it is due to reset on December 21^st, 2012. About 3 ½ years from now. Isn’t that peculiar. That is pretty close to the final 3 ½ years that Ronald was predicting.

~

There are alternate understandings of what will happen on December 21^st 2012. I guess we shall see. I would be more impressed if the Maya had been able to predict the demise of their own civilization (as mentioned in the example of alternate understandings) partly due to their own activities.

~

I wonder: why are some so quick to believe in the destruction of the world (as we know it) even if it doesn’t make much logical sense?

Determinism, Etc.

by Howie

My “Nothing is Random” post from Mark Helprin’s “Winter’s Tale” sparked an email conversation with my dad, which I’ll share below, starting with his message in response to the post.

Howie,

Of course I’ve read writers on free will and predetermined, and if they are on one side or the other they are usually understandable. But then there are those in the middle who seem to take a position that you can have both at the same time, and it seems that the writer you quote on CWA blog is one of those. He says nothing is random and nothing is predetermined. I can’t quite get my mind around that.

Love, Dad

Hey Dad.

\

I started dealing seriously with determinism after reading Daniel Dennett’s “Freedom Evolves.” I didn’t buy his argument completely, but he made a couple of strong points. First, he points out that no one has been able to satisfactorily explain how IN-determinism can lead to freedom, and in fact that true chaos (indeterminism) is a bigger threat to freedom than determinism is.

\

Second, what we call freedom may not be exactly what we imagine. Dennett sort of says that freedom is the sum of things we can choose to avoid in the universe. A rock can’t avoid anything; a bug can avoid a few things; a dog can avoid many things; and humans can even look into the future and avoid a vast number of things that have never even happened, but are just things we imagine might happen. We are extremely complex avoiders, and that gives us a measure of something compared to rocks and bugs that Dennett thinks is worthy of the name freedom. (”Free-from” communicates the idea better, but is awkward.)

\

Another thing I’ve read much more recently is the Overcoming Bias series on quantum mechanics. Eliezer engaged in a project to explain quantum mechanics from the ground up to an amateur audience, avoiding many of the standard explanatory tools that cause confusion. What’s remarkable is how consistent it is with Helprin’s prose rendering in “Winter’s Tale.” Among the conclusions at Overcoming Bias are 1) Existence itself is a static mathematic object 2) Everything happens; all potential is realized in this universe or another (Helprin’s eternal “moment of perfect justice”) 3) The multi-universe interpretation of quantum mechanics - that at every quantum event, both probabilities are realized in branching universes - is by far the best explanation we have.

\

The fun part is, it all adds up to normality. This is the way things have always been - only our knowledge is changing. And our knowledge may change again, but reality has been the same all along.

\

Now then, as a person who experiences freedom and love and God, I re-interpret my experiences in light of what I’ve learned about reality. Because if my God is the God of truth, no truth can threaten God. If I am free, learning about what my freedom really is and isn’t will make me more free than before. If I have known love and meaning, and am then convinced that reality is determined, then I will seek love and meaning within determinism.

\

Time is a slippery thing, and I need to revisit Eliezer’s explanation of why the math is static and works in all directions but we only ever see eggs getting scrambled, never unscrambling.

\

“Nothing is random” means that everything is determined, which is good news for us; chaos is an illusion, and order is reality. We are ordered beings. We can avoid some things when they’re ordered; we can’t do anything but suffer true chaos. And what is the first thing God does in Genesis? Brings order to chaos.

\

“Nothing is predetermined” means that even though everything happens, we don’t know which corner of the Everything we’re in! Our actions still have consequences, and my actions are still determined within the boundary of “Howie.” Sensory information and energy enters my body/me, gets tossed around inside my brain, and output as action - whether I can find any freedom or meaning in that or not, I’d better be prepared to accept that my output has an impact on others and on the universe.

\

I could go on and on, but I’d better stop for thoughts/comments/questions before going any further.

\

-h

Howie,

I see what Dennett is saying about avoiding things, but can’t we just as readily choose to engage in things? Or is he saying that engaging in something is really avoiding something else?

I’ve read your blogs on quantum mechanics, but I haven’t tried to understand it. If I’m going to understand it I think I need to read the book, but I’ve been looking forward to reading Lost Christianities, and I figured I would read Trueblood, Tillich, or Johnson’s “Emergence” after that, so I don’t know if I will get to it very soon. But I do see “Winter’s Tale” relating to this. Is Eliezer saying that at least to some extent we can react (or choose) and that reaction sends us into one of the universes and another choice would send us into a different universe? And Helprin talks about choosing: the milkman chooses, the rat picks, etc. But if we can’t choose at random, how can we choose? Maybe it’s in the definition of the words.

And I don’t understand about reality not changing, only knowledge. Things change - we didn’t used to have computers - so doesn’t that change reality?

You can tell I’m not getting this, so probably my questions don’t make any sense. I have more, but I think I’ve asked enough for now. And I don’t expect you to answer them in email (maybe some on the blog?). I understand things better when we are face to face and can interact frequently. I look forward to the blog.

Love, Dad

Avoidance - Dennett develops this idea further, but the main point is that we cannot make anything happen that is not fully determined at the quantum level.  For example, I just reached out for my glass of water and took a drink; if we could crunch all the data of all the relevant quantum-level amplitude flows, we would see that this event was entirely determined; nothing chaotic or un-determined entered the system of me, my cup, and my environment.

\

The truth we’re circling around here is slippery because it’s almost tautological; it adds up to saying “You can’t do the impossible!” where the impossible is “anything un-determined.”

\

To answer directly, what you’re thinking of when you say “engaging” is very complex avoidance.

\

Multi-universe quantum mechanics - The branchings between universes happen at a much simpler level than human choices.  When amplitude flows interact, the outcome is expressed as a probability.  (We’re talking at a level of reality even deeper than atoms, here!)  Both sides of the probability are realized, in different universes.  Take a second for that to sink in; it implies that reality is mind-bogglingly bigger than we tend to think!  If every side of every probability branches…  trillions of universes branch from your pinkie finger every second.  There aren’t words.

\

This is what Helprin means when he writes “The universe is still and complete. Everything and ever was, is; everything that ever will be, is - and so on, in all possible combinations.”  Everything happens.  All potential is realized.  It is terrible and beautiful.

\

Choice unfolds within this context.  To grasp it, I think of myself as a complex configuration space of amplitude flow.  Amplitude enters the “Howie” system through my senses from the universe, gets shuffled around with the “Howie” amplitude, and is output as action.  What happens inside the “Howie” configuration space is 1) determined (because how could it not be?) and 2) properly called my choice (or my freedom) because the determinations are made inside the boundary of “me.”

\

Reality not changing - You and I are talking about reality at different levels.  Computers changed historical, social, and cultural reality.  But we’re discussing quantum reality; we’re trying to dig down to the foundation of the universe (multiverse!).  That doesn’t change.

\

I remain astounded that everything that I’m trying to elaborate on here, Helprin wrote in his piece.  Going on thirty years ago.  Amazing.  -h

Computing forgiveness.

by Merrill

@Macy’s in Flagstaff

~

There was another thought provoking post, Manson, Murder and Mercy, in the On Faith section of the Washington Post. The article is about Susan Atkins-Whitehouse (and here) asking for compassionate release from prison because of terminal illness. You may remember that Susan was the right hand person of Charles Manson and was convicted of murder in the slaying of Sharon Tate (and others). Reading between the lines I got the feeling that Mathew N. Schmalz, the author of the On Faith post, doesn’t think she should be released although he does have some qualms and eventually washes his hands of the matter in that he is glad he doesn’t have to decide.

~

When I considered the matter, I surprised myself by my opinion. I think enough is enough. 36 years in prison and she is dying? Time for mercy and forgiveness I think. Maybe my judgment was influenced by having looked up what Jesus had to say about forgiveness earlier in the week. The passages I looked up were Matthew 18: 21-22 and Luke 17: 3-4. The parable of the Unforgiving Servant (Matt. 18:24) and the Dishonest Manager (Luke 16) also seem to have something to say about forgiveness. It is easy enough as a follower of Jesus to say it is time for mercy but what of the relatives of Sharon Tate and her unborn child (who Atkins confessed to have killed)? None of the references say anything about forgiving a murder.

~

I am surprised by my present feelings for several reasons. I remember in 1974 when Susan claimed to have had a visit from Jesus in her cell. Convenient, that, I thought at the time. Maybe it was. By all reports, that experience changed her. She became a model prisoner, school, good works and everything. I can’t help thinking of Martin Luther’s theology (yes I am still doing Luther: Gospel, Law, and Reformation). Luther would say grace comes by hearing an external word (Atkins claims that Jesus told her she was forgiven) resulting in an inward change. Today I am willing to accept that change and call her “sister” and hope for her forgiveness. How would I feel if I were a relative of Sharon Tate? I don’t know for sure but I would hope that after 36 years I could let go of some of the hate and bitterness. I believe that hate is corrosive and eats at those who have it. Forgiving someone rarely does anything for the other person but it changes me for the better.

~

Mathew: 18

21 - Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother when he sins against me? Up to seven times?”

22 - Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times. (Or seventy times seven).

~

The reason I read Matthew 18 was that I was thinking about numbers in the New Testament (because I was reading Revelation and Bruce Van Blair’s most excellent The Book of Revelation - a Paper for My Friends) and thinking of multiplying numbers in Roman numerals. I wanted examples of numbers outside of Revelation to try and multiply (in Roman numerals). I remembered the seventy seven (or seventy times seven) of Matthew 18. Now it happens that the Romans had a trick for multiplying numbers with their numerals. It turns out I know this trick because it is one I learned about from programming computers (in the 60s)! Basically the trick is to set up the two numbers side by side, then halve the one on the left (ignoring the remainder) and for each result double the number on the right. For each odd result by halving add the result of the doubling column. I used the trick and here it is in Roman numerals with Arabic numbers in the outside columns:

~

The computation of forgiveness

~

One thing you might note is that the people of Jesus’ time did not use the “XL” for “XXXX” (40) because that trick (yes another one) was invented later - in the middle ages - and so those of the first century could not have used it. That is why I included the equivalent numbers in brackets in two places. One other thing is that in this example all of the results of halving are odd so that all of the results in the doubling column are used. For a better explanation and example go to a trick for multiplying numbers. For our purposes the “Halve” and “Count” columns show how it would have been done in the first century. It is still hard enough to halve, double and add “LXX”, “CXL” and “CCLXX”. Too tough for me which is why I included the Arabic numbers on both sides. One final point. Only educated and literate people would have been able to do this. Most people of that time were not literate.

~

Do you think Jesus intended for us (or those of the first century) to count up to 490 - or 77 - when forgiving a brother – or sister?

Committment and Tolerance Go Hand-in-Hand

by Howie

A slideshow of photos from St. Peter’s recent house-building mission trip to Tijuana is available here. (Images from days 1 and 2 will be up later this week; I exhausted our free bandwidth at Flickr!)

\

Survey Shows US Religious Tolerance from NYTimes.com

Although a majority of Americans say religion is very important to them, nearly three-quarters of them say they believe that many faiths besides their own can lead to salvation, according to a survey by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life.

The report, the U.S. Religious Landscape Survey, reveals a broad trend toward tolerance and an ability among many Americans to hold beliefs that might contradict the doctrines of their professed faiths.

For example, 70 percent of Americans affiliated with a religion or denomination said they agreed that “many religions can lead to eternal life,” including majorities among Protestants and Catholics. Among evangelical Christians, 57 percent agreed with the statement, and among Catholics, 79 percent did.

Among minority faiths, more than 80 percent of Jews, Hindus and Buddhists agreed with the statement, and more than half of Muslims did.

The findings seem to undercut the conventional wisdom that the more religiously committed people are, the more intolerant they are, scholars who reviewed the survey said.

Three cheers for us for bucking “conventional wisdom,” which isn’t wise it all.  People who are faithfully committed to a religious path aren’t threatened by others who believe or practice differently.

Three cheers for us believing what Love calls us to believe, instead of doctrines.

Three cheers for the use of the phrase “eternal life,” which can be interpreted as a life lived in relationship with Infinity in this world, here and now.

What a boost for we who affirm Phoenix Affirmation #1!  -h

More Hope

by Merrill

@home

~

This morning there was another article, Dobson vs. Obama, in the opinion section of the Washington Post by Peter Wehner, a conservative evangelical. Another conservative talking about reason and issues. Wow!

Hope

by Merrill

@Duck and Decanter

~

Four month ago I was pretty pessimistic about the Presidential campaign. But then four months ago I thought John McCain was an Episcopalian. Who knew? I am not sure why I though McCain went to Trinity Cathedral but I did. There you have it. I have a little more clarity on why I was pessimistic about the campaign. It seemed to me that religion (of the extreme right variety in this case) was going to be a major factor again. Then when I found out that McCain is a Southern Baptist the gloom deepened. Please, not again, I prayed. Now it seems I worried without reason. At least about the mixing of politics with religion. I want to be absolutely clear about my gloom. I don’t care what James Dobson’s or John McCain’s (both in particular) theology is, even if I don’t care for it. I do object to votes being solicited – and cast – because of it. This past week I read four points of view in the Washington Post’s On Faith and one in Campaign Stops in the New York Times that encouraged the sprouting of hope.

~

Francis Wilkinson wrote about the Reverend McCain in the New York Times. If Wilkinson had not made a point of McCain’s SBC connection it would have been easy to return to my delusion of McCain belonging to the Anglican community. The article goes into detail about McCain’s view of the separation of Church and State. Maybe the view, “of what belongs to Caesar and what belongs to God”, would be more accurate. None the less I think I know more Episcopalians than Southern Baptists that would share his views. Maybe that is biased; I went to Episcopal churches for 30 years and only two or three to a Southern Baptist. Still… The article was doubly interesting because it was written by a former Democratic consultant (communications, I believe). I think CrossWalk missed an opportunity to ask for McCain’s endorsement of our affirmation on church and state separation.

~

Meanwhile it must be bash James Dobson week in the Post’s ‘On Faith’. The four posts I read were all pointed directly at Dobson. None of them were complimentary. Rev. Jason Poling, the founding pastor of New Hope Community Church, an evangelical congregation in the Baltimore area, wrote (in ‘McCain’s Need for a “Sister Souljah” Moment’) that evangelicals don’t want to be told how to vote by Dobson even though his Focus on the Family is a great resource. Nor do evangelical pastors read books by Pat Robertson, Hagee, or other sources generally thought to be spokespersons for Christianity. Zounds, here is an evangelical taking CrossWalk’s (also TCPC’s ?) position on objecting to who is speaking for Christianity. Poling even went so far as to praise Clinton’s (Bill not Hilary) standing up to Jesse Jackson and suggests that McCain should emulate him (with the religious right)!

~

‘Dobson hears Obama’s footsteps’ by Jacques Berlinerblau is a fairly calm discussion of what Dobson and other conservative evangelicals don’t like about Obama and why they should be afraid.

~

‘Right Guilty of “Grand Theft Jesus”’ by professor and author Robert S. McElvaine has some very interesting quotes in it. The quotes range from Roger Williams, founder of Rhode Island, to the most iconic quote of the sixties –“different strokes for different folks”. I always wondered who said that. His point is that the religious right should get their noses out of politics. Amen brother.

~

The post I enjoyed the most was ‘James Dobson: Out of Step with Evangelicals?’ by Rev. Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite, president of Chicago Theological Seminary. Thistlethwaite takes Dobson to task for his assuming that God is part of Focus on the Family. She also uses the word “hubris”. I like that. I believe that humility is a much more Christian attitude than hubris. Now if we can only get Dobson, et al, to agree.

~

Is it possible that we might have an election determined by the issues?

Nothing is Random

by Howie

Hey guys, thanks for sticking around through my trip to Mexico (photos next week!) and to Merrill for rocking steady with the blogness. The trip was fine, we built the house, everyone is safe and healthy, I learned a bunch from construction Group Six.

Shepherd just finished Mark Helprin’s Winter’s Tale, which I’ve raved about before, but she added a discernment piece; one page of text stuck in the middle of the book that points toward a great truth. I want to share it with you this week (from pages 401-402 in my paperback edition). I find it consonant with both my faith, and with the new method of explaining quantum physics that’s been ongoing for the past couple months at Overcoming Bias. -h

Nothing is random, nor will anything ever be, whether a long string of perfectly blue days that begin and end in golden dimness, the most seemingly chaotic political acts, the rise of a great city, the crystalline structure of a gem that has never seen the light, the distribution of fortune, what time the milkman gets up, the position of the electron, or the occurrence of one astonishingly frigid winter after another. Even electrons, supposedly the paragons of unpredictability, are tame and obsequious little creatures that rush around at the speed of light, going precisely where they are supposed to go. They make faint whistling sounds that when apprehended in varying combinations are as pleasant as the wind flying through a forest, and they do exactly as they are told. Of this, one can be certain.

And yet there is a wonderful anarchy, in that the milkman chooses when to arise, the rat picks the tunnel into which he will dive when the subway comes rushing down the track from Borough Hall, and the snowflake will fall as it will. How can this be? If nothing is random, and everything is predetermined, how can there be free will? The answer to that is simple. Nothing is predetermined; it is determined, or was determined, or will be determined. No matter, it all happened at once, in less than an instant, and time was invented because we cannot comprehend in one glance the enormous and detailed canvas that we have been given - so we track it, in linear fashion, piece by piece. Time, however, can be easily overcome; not by chasing the light, but by standing back far enough to see it all at once. The universe is still and complete. Everything and ever was, is; everything that ever will be, is - and so on, in all possible combinations. Though in perceiving it we imagine that it is in motion, and unfinished, it is quite finished and quite astonishingly beautiful. In the end, or, rather, as things really are, any event, no matter how small, is intimately and sensibly tied to all others. All rivers run full to the sea; those who are apart are brought together; the lost ones are redeemed; the dead come back to life; the perfectly blue days that have begun and ended in golden dimness continue, immobile and accessible; and, when all is perceived in such a way as to obviate time, justice becomes apparent not as something that will be, but as something that is.