I Think I Believe I am Jesus' little brain cell

17Aug/1027

A “solution” to divine violence: Jesus as the sun of the Bible

The problem:

In the Old Testament, God is violent. He is portrayed as not only ordering his people, the Israelites, to wage wars, but wage wars that, on the face of it, seem disturbingly unjust.

In the New Testament, God is not violent. He is love incarnated. When Jesus, God himself, is violently tortured and killed, he responds by forgiving his torturers and killers. His nature, apparently, is self-sacrificially loving, not violent.

Christian theology has overwhelmingly affirmed that the God of the New Testament is one and the same as the God of the Old. Indeed, Jesus said so and so do the rest of the NT authors. This, of course, creates a lot of problems. Problems which the tradition has been aware of since day one, basically, ever since Marcion pieced together his Bible.

In light of the quote from Greg Boyd's upcoming book and my friend Stephen's recent posts on the topic, I wanted to share my two cents.

I start with the assumption that Jesus is the self-revelation of God and that Jesus is divine revelation at its most complete. If we want to know what God is like, our best source is Jesus. Hence, God is not violent. In his incarnational self-revelation in Jesus, God proves himself as decidedly non-violent. Jesus not only preaches non-violence and lives non-violently when there was amble opportunity to do the opposite - he lays his life down in solidarity with those who suffer at the hands of violent power. Jesus is love and God is love, not violence.

Luther said somewhere1 that Jesus is the sun of the Bible. It is thus in the light of Jesus that the Bible should be read. Just like when the sun rises over a landscape, not all parts of the Bible receive as much light as other parts. There are mountains and valleys, the former receiving more light than the former. Luther said, if I remember it correctly, that the Epistle of James was a valley in this regard, in contrast to Romans, for example, where the latter presented the Gospel much better than the former.

I take this image of Luther's one step farther. I believe some parts, some mountains, of the Bible are so prominent in the landscape that they throw their shadow over certain other parts and valleys. Here love is the mountain and violence is the valley.

In short: Because of Jesus' revealing of God as loving and non-violent, I must view those accounts that portray God as violent as false.

They might be false for a number of reasons. Maybe the scribes who wrote and edited those accounts were politically motivated to portray the nation of Israel as triumphant in exilic times of national failure. Maybe they honestly thought God was like that. I leave it to the Biblical scholars to figure that out. I think we can be pretty sure that most of the violent accounts are not historically reliable and are either fictional stories of wars that didn't actually happen or gross embellishments. Whatever the case, God is not violent, God is love - and so didn't send anyone to war and didn't help anyone win any wars. I made this point last year in regards to Zionism.

I know and understand why a lot of my more conservative friends aren't willing to make these moves and want to hold on to a "high" view of scripture. Not to sound glib, but I'm more invested in a high view of God.

  1. I wish I knew where! I had the source and thought I knew where it was, but I can't for the life of me find it. If someone more familiar with Luther's writings can point me in the right direction, I would appreciate it most greatly!
17Aug/100

Behemoth not helping themselves (NSFW)

If you're not familiar with European blackened death metal, this is Behemoth, a Polish band fronted by a certain Mr. Adam "Nergal" Darski. In March of this year he was charged under Polish blasphemy laws for ripping up a Bible onstage and thus denouncing religion. His girlfriend, pop star Doda, was charged similarly, for saying, and I quote, "it is hard to believe in something written by people who drank too much wine and smoked herbal cigarettes." Darn those herbal cigarette smoking scribes!

Anyways. Charges against Darski were dropped in June, something that obviously didn't please the Almighty: The 8th of August, Darski was rushed to the hospital because of a mysterious illness that remains undisclosed. Divine retribution?

No, probably not. But whatever the case, with their latest video, above, called "Alas The Lord Is Upon Me" the boys in Behemoth aren't doing themselves any favours, either with God or the Polish courts. Fornicating priests, harlot popes, abused children and an evil angelical creature tearing down the church with his screaming - that's all kind of blasphemous, right? Oh, and pixelated boobies.

I can't say I enjoy the thing, but in dark metal terms, it's pretty effective. The music is dark and menacing, and quite scary. The video is well made and though there are some inconsistencies (hockey masks, really?), the imagery is inventive and well executed. Interestingly, though I'm sure Behemoth hate Protestants as much as they hate Catholics, the imagery of the Catholic church as a whore and of its priests as decadent and perverted is quite Protestant, historically speaking.

Don't watch if you're easily offended. Catholics, especially, might find the video offensive.

Watch the uncensored version here, if you dare.

17Aug/104

The naïve perception fallacy

I just finished reading this superbly written and extremely interesting article about itching, called, well, "The Itch." I recommend you read the thing - it's great stuff.

While reading it, though, I had a thought, somewhat unrelated to the topic at hand. The article discusses perception, about how neurologists theorise that the brain does most of the work involved in our perceiving the world around us. It contrasts this with the old, so-called "naïve view".

The old understanding of perception is what neuroscientists call “the naïve view,” and it is the view that most people, in or out of medicine, still have. We’re inclined to think that people normally perceive things in the world directly. We believe that the hardness of a rock, the coldness of an ice cube, the itchiness of a sweater are picked up by our nerve endings, transmitted through the spinal cord like a message through a wire, and decoded by the brain.

Science is increasingly finding this view lacking. When looking at the raw sensory input it is clear that our brains do a lot of compensation.

The images in our mind are extraordinarily rich. We can tell if something is liquid or solid, heavy or light, dead or alive. But the information we work from is poor—a distorted, two-dimensional transmission with entire spots missing. So the mind fills in most of the picture. You can get a sense of this from brain-anatomy studies. If visual sensations were primarily received rather than constructed by the brain, you’d expect that most of the fibres going to the brain’s primary visual cortex would come from the retina. Instead, scientists have found that only twenty per cent do; eighty per cent come downward from regions of the brain governing functions like memory. Richard Gregory, a prominent British neuropsychologist, estimates that visual perception is more than ninety per cent memory and less than ten per cent sensory nerve signals.

Here's what I'm thinking.

Some critics of religion say that because they can put a God helmet on your head and conjure up a felt presence or because you can take certain hallucinogenic and perceive transcendent dimensions, then religious experience is reducible to the brain. Because there is no "liquid or solid, heavy or light, dead or alive" external thing there to be perceived, and the experience, as far as science is concerned, only exists in the brain - then there is no external thing there and the experience only exists in the brain.

But what about this emerging consensus among those in the neurological know that perception is much more than simple sensory input. The distinction between what is out there and in here (or out here and in there) is apparently not so clear cut as is sometimes assumed. Maybe, just maybe, this lends some legitimacy to experiences where no empirically verifiable correlate to sense or perceive exists. Or, at least the assumption that only those kinds of experiences are real might be said to be weakened. Aren't these critics then not committing what can be called the naïve perception fallacy?

Of course, it's a two edged sword. The critic might respond that since so little of our perceived experience is based on actual sensory input, the hard empirical stuff of the world, the case against religious experience is not weakened, but strengthened. If 90% of our perception, according to that last neuropsychologist there, is down to the brain compensating for poor sensory input, how much more so is our so-called religious experience a product of the brain working overdrive with poor data - or no data at all except our imaginations?

Just thoughts. What do you guys think? How does the this change in our understanding of perception affect the idea of religious experience?

17Aug/100

Leaving the 99

From What Fundies Like.

16Aug/101

This reviewer is truly plugged in

It's a truly constructive premise: If something goes against your beliefs, stay away from it, call it anti-Christ and feel sad about the people who watch it. Of course, the redemptive violence of Karate Kid is recommended. (Not that I mind the film, because it goes against my beliefs - I just hate Jackie Chan.)

16Aug/100

Derrick blogging through Cavanaugh

Derrick over at agreatercourage is blogging through William Cavanaugh's The Myth of Religious Violence.

Cavanaugh argues that "the only way I can hope to refute the myth is to do a genealogy of these contingent [historical] shifts [which led to the creation of a division between something called "religion" and something called "the secular"] and show that the problem the myth of religious violence claims to identify and solve--the problem of violence in society--is in fact exacerbated by the forms of power that the myth authorizes."

I've been wanting to get this book, but it's just too damn expensive - £28 for 300 pages! I'm keeping a look out. Maybe an offer turns up somewhere. In the mean time, Derricks excellent summary of the main points will have to suffice.

15Aug/105

The Sublime Philip J. Fry

I don't know if embedding this is illegal. If it is, someone tell me.

It's just that I just finished watching the seventh episode of the new season and I think I might just have watched the best Futurama episode ever. At least it's up there among the best, like "Godfellas". "The Late Philip J. Fry" shows perfectly what so amazing about Matt Groening and the people he has working around him: While they are rarely not funny, on their best days, they make cartoons that are simultaneously deeply beautiful and deeply funny. Somehow, they manage to avoid being corny and are almost sublime. This episode gets it right on so many levels.

I don't want to spoil it for you. Just watch it.

Tagged as: , 5 Comments
14Aug/106

Hans Tausen, reformer and forefather

I'd like to tell you about one of my ancestors, the Danish reformer Hans Tausen, often called the Danish Martin Luther.

Hans Tausen was born in 1494 on a farm in Eastern Funen. Twelve years old he had had enough of the cows and ploughshares and ran away from home, seeking knowledge from books. He eventually ended up in Antvorskov monastery, which at the time was the principal Roman Catholic monastery in Denmark. There they recognised the young man's talents and in 1523, after several similar journeys where he among other things acquired a master of arts degree, Tausen was sent to study in Wittenberg. There he met Luther and heard him preach. Hans Tausen was converted to Lutheranism. When he came in 1525 he took to the pulpit of the monastery church in Antvorskov, where he preached that man was saved through faith alone and not by works.

This sermon marked the beginning of a strong opposition and persecution of Tausen by the Roman church in Denmark. He was thrown into prison in Viborg at one point, where every day crowds of people would gather outside his cell to hear him preach through the barred window. Despite the scandalous nature of his preaching, Tausen was a diplomat and made friends with the local Catholic authorities who allowed him to preach in the parish church Sunday afternoons after the regular service had ended. Soon the church proved too small and Tausen preached to crowds outside in the market place from the church tower. The popularity of Tausen's gospel soon created tensions though and when he and his followers were barred from using local churches, they simply broke down the doors of one, where Tausen would preach from the pews.

Though his relations with the Catholic authorities understandably proved strained, Tausen developed friendships with the secular authorities of his day. King Frederick I (1471-1533), a Catholic, took Tausen under his wing. His successor, Christian III (1503-1559) implemented the Reformation in Denmark, working closely with Tausen among others. It was Frederick I who brought Tausen to Copenhagen for the first time and soon his preaching had so revolutionised things there, that monasteries had to close because of the lack of public support. There was a two year period after Frederick's death where Tausen's fate was uncertain. But thank God for violent regents: After two years of civil war, the Protestant Christian III took over and started reforming Denmark from the top down.

There's a story about the early period in Copenhagen. Once during high mass, a Lutheran trouble maker walked up to the priest, took the chalice out of his hand while he was transsubstantiating it and threw it on the floor. As he ran out, a monk chasing him and the congregation laughing, Hans Tausen stepped forth and, like a true Reformer, loudly recited the first verses of Revelation 18.

"Fallen! Fallen is Babylon the Great!
She has become a home for demons
and a haunt for every evil spirit,
a haunt for every unclean and detestable bird.
For all the nations have drunk
the maddening wine of her adulteries.
The kings of the earth committed adultery with her,
and the merchants of the earth grew rich from her excessive luxuries."

You've got to love anti-papal apocalypticism!

After Christian III made Denmark Protestant, Tausen was initially a bit overlooked. He continued on with his regular priestly duties in both Copenhagen and Roskilde. Only 1542 was he elected to be bishop in Ribe. There he spent the remaining 20 years of his life, until he died from illness the 11th of November 1561.

Hans Tausen was called the Danish Luther. 10 years before the Reformation was officially adopted in Denmark, Tausen was one of the first, if not the first, to preach salvation by grace alone in Denmark. He was the first to preach in Danish, rather than Latin. He also stopped using his religious habit early on in his career. It's said that he was a better preacher than writer, but apparently his translation of the Pentateuch was a masterpiece. He taught Hebrew in the University of Copenhagen. He composed over 100 hymns, the first ever in Danish.

In addition to that, he was the first Danish priest to marry, which greatly annoyed his Catholic detractors. In fact, he married twice. His first wife, Dorothea Sadolin, to whom he was married in 1527, died ten years later in 1537. Later that year he married Anna Andersdatter. It's through their children that Hans Tausen and I are related.

Hans and Anna had Lisbeth Hansdatter Tausen in 1552. With her husband Anders Madsen Pars she had Hans Tausen in 1575. When he grew up he became a priest in Løssing, where he married a women whose name we don't know. They had the son Niels Hansen Tausen in 1605. Niels Hansen Tausen travelled to Støren in Norway where entered ministry. There he married Kirsten Nielsdatter Balg, and they had a son, Hans Nielsen Tausen, in 1631. Hans Nielsen Tausen married Birgithe Pedersdatter Schielderup. Together they had Nicolai Hansen Tausen in 1661. Nicolai Hansen Tausen was the first Tausen to travel to the Faroe Islands, where he worked as a surgeon and sheriff until he drowned in 1705. This happened after the captain of the boat he was travelling with didn't take his advice and steered to close to the shore, crashing the boat and killing all but one man, including, of course, Nicolai Hansen Tausen. Nicolai was Hans Tausen's great-great-great-great grandson.

Anne Malen Zachariassen, née Tausen

I won't bore you with the details, mostly because I can't be bothered to write them out, but fast forward through the generations until 1914 when my grandmother Anna Malena Tausen was born in Toftir. She married Jákup Zachariassen, they had Zacharias Zachariassen, who is my father. So there is a direct line, 500 years down through the ages, from myself to the original Danish reformer Hans Tausen.

The theological line, though, is not so direct. My grandparents, Anna Malena and Jákup, were among the first converts from Lutheranism to Plymouth Brethrenism in the Faroe Islands. My father was the first child not baptised in Gøta, where they lived all their lives. The opposition from the Lutheran establishment to the new Brethrenism was fierce and there exists still to this day some antipathy between the two factions, though it is present mostly with the older generations, who still remember just how fierce it was. This, you could say, mirrors the conflict between Catholics and Protestants in the middle of which Hans Tausen lived, preached and reformed, though there was considerably less blood. Though I am denominationally Brethren and would create a scandal akin to the one Tausen created if I became Lutheran, theologically I become more and more Lutheran every day. Though I stand outside the ecclesial structure of Lutheranism, I am deeply indebted to it's theological heritage. Therefore, I am deeply indebted to Hans Tausen, my forefather of both blood and faith.

13Aug/103

Dear Brian McLaren

Thanks for reminding me why I love you. We certainly don't agree on everything, but I get you. I really do. You are a good and gracious man. You are needed. God is working through you. Thanks for continually challenging me and not letting me become too comfortable.

Also, I got that Freudian, Brethren slip :)

Q | Conversations on Being a Heretic from Q Ideas on Vimeo.

13Aug/102

Jacob Knudsen on the ethical benefits of smoking

A friend posted this quote in Danish on my Facebook. Here's a translation I whipped up right now. Don't know the source, sorry.

We must and shall all sin while we wander here in this world. But the lesser, the better. Here tobacco has its mission. Smoking tobacco is a sin, but it's a small one; additionally it is a homeopathic remedy against bigger sins. Because he who smokes sins not, it is said. By applying one's smoking to the time of day when one would otherwise be sinning more gravely, surprising ethical results are achieved.

Jacob Knudsen, Lutheran (what else?) pastor and theologian (1858-1917)