More on KJV Origin of Species

Even though he seems to think that I'm a secularist, I want to give Ian Monroe's King James Version of The Origin of Species another mention. I had some money to spend, so I bought a copy. A nice novelty purchase and I imagine I'll pull it out every once in a while for some enlightened humour.
As Ian points out in the foreword, the book isn't designed to be read. The redaction is so extensive that it can't be read. That, of course, is the point. The message is clear: If the Bible is your standard for what goes and doesn't go in science, you're left with something that's completely indecipherable and utterly nonsensical. More sinister overtones are also in there somewhere: There are people who actively redact and censor science because it, in their opinion, doesn't accord with the Bible. They sit on education boards in Texas and run faith schools in London.
The book also raises questions of language. How do we speak religiously and how do we speak scientifically, and how do these two modes of speech relate? Can religion and science communicate without redaction and censorship happening - not only of science by religion, but also the other way around? Can they help trampling all over each other? Can we ever hope for mutually enriching communication? The book asks these questions starkly.
Specifically, I think the question of origin of religious language is asked most seriously. Darwin proposed a (very persuasive and successful) explanation about the origin of species, of life in the natural world. But just like some religious people, fundamentalists specifically, reject Darwin's findings for the idea of special creation of each individual species, they also reject what Biblical scholarship has found (and, really, the tradition has always known) about the origin of the Bible for a sort of Biblical special creation. Like the birds in the air and fish in the sea that just popped into existence, so the Bible just popped into existence. For me the KJV Origin raises the question of the origin of the Bible in a very vivid way. Why do we presume that the Bible simply appeared ex nihilo, like a fax from Heaven? Why do we presume that that the Bible is different from life? Just like Darwin discovered the evolutionary origin of life by looking at life itself, so the "evolutionary" origin of the Bible has been discovered by looking at the Bible itself, in addition to extra-Biblical archeological and historical data. By evolutionary, I mean that the Bible is quite human and was composed, edited, redacted and canonised over centuries. That's not the whole story, as is the case with biology too, but it is certainly a very important part of the story. The Bible is not simply given.
Most Christians consider the canon closed. It is fully evolved, you could say. But our understanding of it isn't. It evolves too. The belief, though, of some is that their doctrine is set in stone. I should elaborate more in another post, but it's a peculiar belief of some more fundamentalistic Christians that their doctrine has its direct origin with God, via the Bible. This makes them blind to the fact that their doctrine is in reality their interpretation. God didn't come up with it. They did. The message of KJV Origin can be said to be that doctrine should evolve too. Because it does so already. The fundamentalists just don't know it or want to know it. Just like scientific language, religious language evolves. It is wrong, then, to censor Origin of Species because of doctrine.
This was, by the way, my first purchase from Lulu. I am, then, somewhat of a late comer to the self-publishing revolution. I'm happy to support it though. It's the future.
Oh, my original post about the book is here.
Finally! A Darwin safe for Christians!

Haha.. This is genius! Journalist Ian Monroe has removed every word in The Origin of Species that doesn't also appear in the KJV Bible.
Now, you can see what all the controversy is about for yourself, without fear that you may accidentally damn your immortal soul to hell.
For the first time, Darwin’s dangerous ideas have been published, with every word which doesn’t occur in the King James version of the Holy Bible safely redacted. By removing more than 33,000 references to non-KJV terms, we have finally succeeded in translating this demonic work into a safe manuscript, appropriate for high school biology classes, as a text for homeschooling, and even for discussion in Bible study groups.
Seriously, this is the purpose according to Monroe.
I wanted people to reflect on the nature of language, and particularly on fundamentalism, and the notion of ‘the Bible said it, I believe it, that settles it,’ which seems to preclude most concepts in a modern worldview. I also thought it would be pretty funny to actually see what it would look like if you could visually remove all those modern concepts.
Very cool.
Minimalist nativity
German, very German, artist Oliver Fabel has made this post-modern, minimalist and rather beautiful nativity scene. Very cool.
Semi-daily tidbits 14/10/2009
Crucified Ape Unveiled in London (Times Online)
More edgy - more likely to offend, at any rate - is The Privilege of Dominion, in which a waxwork ape appears nailed to a cross. "At the rate we're killing them all the lowland gorillas will be dead by the year 2020," says Fryer. "Do animals have souls? What a question. We should be asking the same question of ourselves."
The Assclown Offensive: How to Enrage the Church of Scientology (Wired)
"Hello, leaders of Scientology. We are Anonymous," the clip began in a robotic, software-generated voice-over accompanied by stock footage of clouds rolling over desolate cityscapes. "Your campaigns of misinformation, your suppression of dissent, your litigious nature: All of these things have caught our eye," the voice explained. "For the good of your followers, for the good of mankind—and for our own enjoyment—we shall proceed to expel you from the Internet and systematically dismantle the Church of Scientology in its present form." The message ended, as it had begun, on a pitch-perfect note of sci-fi comic book menace: "We are Legion," the robot voice intoned. "We do not forgive. We do not forget. Expect us."
The ecocidal moment (Guardian.co.uk)
Rowan Williams: "How do we live in a way that honours rather than endangers the life of our planet? Or, to put it slightly differently, how do we live in a way that shows an understanding that we genuinely live in a shared world, not one that simply belongs to us? This would be a good question even if we were not faced with the threats associated with global warming, with the reduction of biodiversity, with desertification and deforestation, with fuel and food shortages."
God in the Box
Synopsis: God in the Box is a documentary film, which explores the mystery and controversy behind what God looks like and means to us as Americans in the 21st century. In the midst of today's fractured and confusing claims on God, the film asserts two basic questions: What does God mean to you? What does God look like, to you?
The filmmakers embark on a cross-cuntry journey with their small, mobile studio (and main character), The Box. they invite people to step inside and share what they see in the mind's eye, and if possible, draw what God looks like to them. Along their journey, the filmmakers set The Box up on iconic street corners and diverse locations across America.
A remarkable collection of scholars, archeologists and religious leaders help examine the material and put it into a historical and relevant context. The surprises and revelations about our current interpretations of God come to light, as small glimpses inside the minds of others helps illuminate a much bigger picture.
Abortion Foes Tell of Their Journeys to the Streets (NY Times)
Together, these street activists make up an assertive minority of a few thousand people within the larger anti-abortion movement. Neither the best financed nor largest element in the mix, they are nonetheless the only face of anti-abortion that many Americans see. Indeed, persistent provocation is their defining attribute: day after day on street corners from California to Massachusetts, they stand like town criers, calling to women walking into abortion clinics, or waving graphic signs as disturbing as they are impossible to ignore.
Believing in God and Evolution (Inside Higher Ed)
[T]here is ... a theological and scientific struggle taking place at Christian colleges. Some professors, with support from prominent scientists, are trying to defend the teaching of evolution and to make it safe for those who teach biology and the Bible to talk about ways in which belief in evolution need not represent an abandonment of faith. Many Christian colleges have statements of faith -- which in some cases must be followed by all students and faculty members -- that endorse the literal truth of the Bible or of specific parts of the Bible (six literal days of creation, for example, or that Adam and Eve are the parents of all humans). So teaching evolution as scientific fact, which would just be taken for granted at many non-Christian colleges and universities, raises all kinds of delicate issues.
The Salvation Army has toppled Google to become the most trusted brand in Australia
One Baptist Church To Celebrate Halloween By Burning Bibles
Quote of the day
Yo, God, this creation thing is great, and Imma let you finish, but I just wanted to say that Phil Collins had the best Genesis of all time.
Worlds collide
Andrew Sullivan posted this beautiful image of a planetary nebula in the Scorpius constellation, some 3,800 light years away.

It reminded me of this.

Saatchi on redemption and infinity

Famous art collector Charles Saatchi has an interesting and compelling, though semi-Pelagian, idea of how redemption is achieved. And what infinity might mean, relating to Rothko.
I believe God must be very disappointed in his handiwork. Mankind has clearly failed to evolve much in all these years; we're still as cretinous and barbaric as we were many centuries ago, and poor God must spend all day shaking his head at our vileness and general ineptitude. Or perhaps, we might just give him a good laugh. But of course, I hope God likes our art enough to forgive us our sins, particularly mine.
...
My understanding of infinity goes something like this: every 100 years a sparrow flies to the top of a large mountain, and cleans its beak by scraping it on the highest rock. By the time the mountain has been scraped away to a small pile of dust, that would be the equivalent of the first second of infinity. I thought of that the last time I stood in front of a Rothko and neither felt an overwhelming sense of infinity, nor had a mystical experience of any kind. Maybe I've just seen too many Rothkos and they don't pulsate with ethereal splendour for me anymore. Or perhaps I never quite got the wonder of Rothko.
Photo: Wikipedia. Quotes: The Guardian.
Another image of theodicy
Tying in with my previous post where I outlined the redemptive theodicy, partly by quoting Eric Reitan comparing it to a discordant note in an ultimately beautiful melody. The note, as unpleasant as it might be on its own, is not only meaningful, but beautiful, in the context of the melodic whole.
I've often thought about theodicy in much the same way, only with images. Here's what I mean.
See this?

Just a collection of pixels. Not beautiful in any way. Quite possibly ugly. It makes no sense.
Now look at this.

This is Mattias Grünewald's Crucifixion. Completed in 1515, it broke with the conventional classicism of the day and portraid Christ's suffering in vivid, expressive detail. It's one of the most famous and influential paintings of the crucifixion ever (for example, you might have seen Dali's Corpus Hypercubus, his other crucifixion painting - he was deliberately protesting the all too human Christ of Grünewald there).
Maybe, if you're perceptive, you might have noticed that the pixels above are an extreme close-up of Christ's left index finger (to the right on the painting). Let me tell you a story about those fingers. When I was 8, I was in an accident. This accident triggered latent epilepsy in my brain and I would regularly wake up in the middle of the night, seconds before a full body (grand mal, as they call it) seizure. The experience was terrifying and every time it happened, the following many nights I would dread falling asleep, because I might have a seizure. Those seizures felt like electricity going through my entire body, starting with my arms and legs and gradually taking over all my body, until it reached my head and I fell unconscious. What I remember most clearly (it's been many years since my last seizure - thankfully) is the feeling of losing control over my fingers and seeing them stretching and bending backwards, like they were going to snap from the electric force.
I have a distinct memory of seeing Grünewald's Crucifixion for the first time. I was totally caught off guard when I saw it, at some point in high school, maybe 16 years old, not long after an especially traumatic seizure. Although there is plenty of symbolism in the painting, I was struck by the literalism of Christ's fingers. And I recognised those fingers. That's how my fingers felt during aforementioned seizure and the many before that. Exactly like that! I truly felt a connection to the painting and through it to the scene it depicts. I participated in Christ's suffering, as Peter put it.
Like that pixelated, nonsensical and ugly image above, my epilepsy - my suffering, the evil that befell me time after time - made no sense. But as part of a bigger picture its meaning was revealed. It was transformed, redeemed, into something ultimately beautiful. Through my suffering I encountered a suffering God and realised, because of the pain, the deep solidarity which God has establish with his creation in Christ.
They say that Grünewald's Crucifixion, which originally hung in the chapel of the Monestary of St. Anthony in Isenheim of then Germany, had healing powers. The monks, who treated sufferers of skin disease, would place the sick in front of the painting and they were, reportedly, healed. While we can hardly attribute anything that lofty to a theodicy, speaking from personal experience, the redemptive theodicy goes a few steps longer than most in doing just that.




