Soxy

Okay, so there's been some negativity the past few days and I wanted to start a fun little thread to say what we're happy about or what always makes us happy: Graduation in 27 days Presenting at the APS conference in 25 days Getting to move to New York Playing darts for two hours on a Sunday night in a deserted bar Finishing my last solo essay of my undergrad career The Sox in first place. My cousin's new baby Going to 3 Sox games in the Month of May Knowing after this month I never have to see my roommate's boyfriend ever, ever ever again Going to Perkins at 2am with friends Spring! Okay, that's a good chunk. I just wanted to start something fun and positive.

May 24th is my last final. Ick. But then I graduate 6 days later!!!! No more school for, uh, 2 months.

My mom said there was a rumor among state employees that Rod Blagojevich was shortlisted. So, he'll be my pick--a good dark horse candidate.

Thank God I bought a Ford *rowr*...

A plug for my favorite local band: Alva Star Album: Alligators in the Lobby A super cool pop rock band. Perfect cd for the summer.

Hopeless and pathetic optimism here!

Can we not argue, point fingers and not name call on the thread about that very topic?

My last comment on the subject: it is not the radicals who have hijacked the loving, forgiving, welcoming to all God that is in the Bible.

How ironic that you cited the same chapter in Luke which contains the Good Samaratian--the ultimate act of all inclusive love by a Jew. Also, that tiny snippet of the story you quoted does not show that Jesus told them to go EVERYWHER and preach to EVERYONE--Jew, Samartian, etc. The one who shows us mercy is our neighbor--go and do likewise. Also, you do not acknowledge that (unless my memory is slipping re: the contents of that verse) that Chapter 13 starts off with the story about pruning the branches that produce no one who is not without producing will be saved. So, we are saved by the compassion that Luke so often preaches--our extending of compassion and love to all and acting on that love is what makes us produce fruit and be saved for the pruner.

Actually, I did read those passages in context (i.e. all of chapter 12--the Spiritual gifts chapter). But what Paul is saying that we are all one body in the BAPTISM. So, the CHURCH is one body--great. But Jesus did not only help those who were within the coventential promise of Abraham, Moses and David--he reached out to the Gentiles and even the hated Samaratians. So, I understand the point, but Paul is not as radically inclusive as is Jesus. For what good is it if I love my friends, do not even the taxpayers do that? While I greatly respect the Pauline texts in MY PERSONAL idea of Christianity they are only to support the actual words of Christ. Yes, Paul told us to live in community to live with other Christians--but to limit our love and community only to that is flying in the face of what I see Jesus' mission to be.

Don't think I am not familiar with the Acts of the Apostles and Paul's writings. I am. I am simply arguing that too often we throw over Jesus' teaching for the justification by faith and grace of Paul. Yes, preaching is hard--but Jesus did more than preach--he lived a life dedicated to suffering service of those around him. In that aspect it is Jesus' life that is saving. And trust me I do not underestimate the power of the Holy Spirit (the advocate--is my favorite term, one who will plead our case and come to our aid in time of trial). But we have to trust the spirit of things? Isn't that exactly what I feel I have done? I have found the spirit of Jesus' LIFE as the ultimate example of Christian love and goodness. So, only when I find and believe in the same spirit as others is that when it is valid? Hm....... And NONE of the Pauline texts you cited (while very good for the evangilizing movement) talked about the importance, the supreme importance, that Jesus himself did. I understand their point and importance--but well, I think more healing can be done through our listening to the down trodded and giving them support (and that will win many more converts--if that's the goal) than by more Pauline methods.

Nope, I got your back Jim.

Shredded Wheat (currently, I switch every couple of weeks)--yummmmmmmm!

Okay, I was going to stay out of this, but two HUGE things I have to say: Is the God of the Old Testament really that much more vengeful--or is creating a hell in the NT ultimately the greatest act of vengence? Sheol is not hell, so that's a gift of the gracious and loving God of the NT. I also find it interesting that PA said earlier that we need to live like the people in Acts did or that we take Pauline ethics as the prime source. Well, lots of the stuff Jesus said were not 100% in line with Paul--and while Acts is helpful, if we all adopted the Ethics of Jesus that would be the most transforming of all (sell everything and live to help, not just convert, but help; forgive everyone no matter what--as our prayers will not be heard without that rightness we get from forgiving; listen and respect the social outcasts and attempt to help them; give up our desire for retribution; stop living by the sword; loving all of our neighbors as ourselves). The other thing I would like to point out is that many things throughout the Ethics of Christianity have been anything but moral and ethical according to JESUS (i.e. crusades, long-time--now reversed--support of death penalty, judging our non-Christian neighbors, and of course the truly disgusting fact that everything Hitler did to the Jews was based on Christian ideals or laws that were passed in Christendom). If those types of actions are what we are called and guided to do from God, then, hm, maybe athiests or non-believers are just as moral. I think that many non-Christians are guided by the power of what is best for humanity and just a general betterment of the world. Sure, they have no eternal reason to be good--but we all live in the world and have to share it with others and we want to be treated well--and that I think is a dang fine reason to be moral.

Coughhe'saminorCough Lol.

You blinded me with science! Seriously, that's more evolutionary theory/learning than I did in my dang Bio Class on evolution. Anyway, I guess I don't see why evolution and Christianity are mutually exclusive. But thanks for the Bio review, Jim. And, GO SCIENCE.

You going to any this May? I've got tickets for the Friday night game, and I might go up for more if any of my friends are willing to be conned into going...

Without the OT there would be no NT. Jesus grew up steeped in the Judaic traditions (especially, and most obviously, the Hebrew Prophet tradition with his strong focus on social justice). Picking only the NT is dangerous, as I think PA is saying, because it removes the context and background and really would chop off our understanding of who Jesus was and why he did what he did. Sorry, personal pet peeve there--you can't have the New without the Old--and gah! There is just so much more richness and fullness of understanding when looking at them together. That's all.

You may say so. And I agree it is our tendency towards apathy as a society that makes me as upset as the actual injustices. It's frustrating, sad, shocking, re-victimizing, etc. I wouldn't say we're built that way--I would say we have made it that way, we have chosen the comfort of apathy over the discomfort of change and fighting for what is right. But then again, I do count Camus and Sartre as my favorite philosophers--so I am much more inclined to the existentialist thinking. But that's an argument that I don't feel like engaging in.

Disgusting, is that seriously his? Why? Ugh. How many gallons to the mile? What's the point? Sick.

I've been around to many different places and seen many different types of suffering. My not travelling and seeing the suffering in those types of places would only make me guilty of turning a blind eye--I know, acknowledge, and care about what happens in the world. I'm not entirely sure what you're saying, but there is suffering everywhere (of which I am well aware). And I can assure you that I am always shocked and really heartbroken(a lot, lot, lot) by what happens overseas--but I can best ease some of that hurting and help people here in my neighborhood. That does not mean that what happens far away is far from my mind or conscience; it only means I help where I feel am able and where I can, I think, do the most.

Because I don't think you can look at all of that pain and suffering and not be confused that it is allowed to happen with so little noise given to it. Every time I am shocked--even when I've been staring at the same problem for ages--when I see how horribly cruel we can be and how easy it is for most to ignore suffering. I know I should not be shocked, but wow, it's always just wow.

I totally understand where you're coming from (had a huge discussion about this in Ethics today), but I was just trying to point out the violence that surrounds us--our incredible rape and homicide rate are just two big examples. I think it's absolutely shocking how people can look away from that to focus on far off places (which DO of course need our help), but there is so much suffering in our own neighborhoods that I simply can't wrap my head around not being outrage that we tolerate such things. Going to school in Minnesota (where a LOT of child prostitution is traffiked--mostly out of Mall of America and other popular places) and seeing the injustices that happen in my own "backyard" I have become acutely aware that human suffering happens everywhere, and while we might be better off than some places that only allows us to not allow compassion to those suffering right next to us because our eyes are fixed far away.

Hey guys, I was wondering if any of you used either of these words or know their "regional definitions" Raindog Clout (a verb, I know the noun, but not the verb) Thanks for any help!

Touche, fair point. But if we're talking the industrialized world I imagine we're number one--put in developing nations and we'll fall.