des

Anyway, I was rather amused how many people were making a big deal about the supposed year 666, because even if it mattered it would really be 06/06/06. I think that no. doesn't quite carry as much "weight". A friend and I saw the Da Vinci code. We didn't get struck by lightening. --des

But isn't it quintessentially Christian to blend? After all, Christianity started that way-- mixing up Judaism and pagan symbols and ideas. Also around the world, various people have added their own elements. I just heard about Christians in Iraq-- yes, Iraq-- who have Babylonian elements in their rituals. For example, the priest at one point in the mass goes down the aisle with a bowl of fire. Africans added elements of ancestor worship (as did those in South and Central America), for example "Dia Del Muerte" (Day of the Dead). And Native Americans have added elements of Native traditions. I'm not sure that Buddhism and Hinduism were involved- but maybe I just don't know as much about them. Btw, to me it stands to reason that you are the sum of your experiences. So in your own quest, you would add those elements that have seen you thru, so to speak. --des

Hmm, it is a strange comment coming from a Pope. I would think also it would be under the category of "mysteries not understandable by mere humans". And I thought Catholism was quite comfortable with such things. The surprise that God didn't interfere with it, makes me wonder why he made that comment? I would doubt that the Pope would be making statements questioning faith, i.e. God should have interfered but did not, so is God so powerful. That would be an odd statement coming from a priest. Or was he saying God didn't interfere because God in some way wished it. God forbid!! I hope he wasn't saying that! It could have been some sort of muse on his part, I don't believe it came out so well. But public figures often say things that make them sound bad if you think about them too much. It is difficult to be under the microscope and he hasn't had that much experience. I hope it is in that category. --des

Chad, there are a few terms that I think have been so damaged that I wouldn't touch them. "Savior" is one. It has been so mixed up in the idea of "personal savior" ie one who will make sure I don't burn in hell for all eternity (what a concept!), so I just can't touch it. I could think of some other things to associate with the term but it's too much trouble explaining myself. They've almost done this with Christian. Where the term Christian almost always means "born again" and fundamentalist. I think this is fairly recent. But if one says one is a Christian, one has to make sure that the other party doesn't think you mean born again fundamentalist. --des

Yes, I think the character of the albino monk, can't get any more characterized than that, wasn't even portrayed as a full character. He was supposed to be an extremist and not typical of anything. He used the conservative order, but wasn't really following it either. And I agree the real Opus Dei misses the point. But I think they feel that whenever Opus Dei is mentioned people will think of him, which they might. I don't know anybody from Opus Dei and just heard of them in passing, I think. One interpretation of Mary's name is not "of the town of Magedela" but means "tower". Otherwise, if she were married to Jesus she would have taken on his name. --des

I think that Dan Brown choosing Opus Dei was a stroke of brilliance. If someone WOULD have covered up such a thing, they seem the perfect group. BTW, I have heard them defending themselves of late. You'd think it was a soccer group or something. One thing I thought was pretty odd, one of them said well no one would misuse the silus (sp?) or "discipline" as this would be frowned upon by their spiritual director who directs all their activities, said that right after saying they were free in all things. Hmm. I also heard an interview by a woman who was "rescued" from Opus Dei by an intervention. While she felt Dan Brown sensationalized O.D., the total obedience thing struck a cord. Not that I think they DID cover up anything. The biggest thing to cover up these days is priests molesting little boys. And OD isn't doing that. BTW, I see no problem with Mary being Jesus' wife and think that the idea of the sacred feminine (and a hidden tradition of this) is one of the major draws of the book. BTW, can't claim this quote is at all original but... "Personally, I think it's hilarious to see attempts at "de-bunking" The DaVinci Code made by people who believe in talking snakes and virgin births." :-) --des

Yes I had a problem as well but of course Christian Science has its own vocabulary that means nothing but what they say it means. --des

This Debbie needs to do the following: Immediately learn coptic (sp??). Write in Coptic on papyrus. Cover it with lemon juice and put under low heat in the oven. Try to use natural inks. Change her name to St. Deborah. Put it in an ancient looking stone box. Go to some cave in Eygpt and bury it there. Imply she is on the family tree of Jesus Christ. Dan Brown might even write a book about her. :-) --des

I just saw one that totally shocked me: God is my pilot. Or something like that. It's supposed to be "Dog is my co-pilot". I think the guy has dyslexia. :-) --des

What was that town in France that resisted Hitler wholesale. SInce the whole town stood up to the Nazis they could not do their deeds. Not sure everyone could have done this though. And true many evils were done in that war, some quite equal to Hitler (including the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki). OTOH, I still do think that the concept of "just war" has some merit, but I would agree that the no. of cases are exceptionally small. --des

Well as far as a whole guide I don't know. But you should get Marcus Borg's book "Reading the Bible again for the first time". --des

Both UCCs I have attended refer to the Sanctuary. In the case of Wellington, they actually *did* provide sanctuary to refugees from Central America during the Reagon administration's illegal war. I have sometimes felt the area referred to as a Sanctuary and sometimes not. --des

It depends on just how "knowledgeable" or savvy your folks are as to whether they would necessarily be "fooled" by such things. I have the same problem with my sister. She does know (I think) about UCC but not about Congregationalists. It is easier from me to pretend with her, I don't like it, but my life is definitely easier than consistently being "witnessed to". The UCC is just about as liberal (certain members at least) as the UU, otoh, some are quite conservative. The same thing can be said for just about any other more or less liberal/progressive church--with some individual churches being more liberal and some more conservative. Other possibilities might be Episcopal, United Methodist, Certain Lutherans (ECLA particularly), Presbyterian USA, etc. My sister would ask what "branch of Presbyterian" say but your parents might not. It's the people that make up the church, so if the group is one you like to be with, then you might find a happy match, even if they might not be entirely suited to your theology. OTOH, it might be uncomfortable, however fine the folks to be in a group's theology is way out of sync with yours. --des

It's better to word petitions positively and without using "demands" language. Make them more legalistic. For instance, something like 'whereas the war in Iraq has killed _____ nos. of American troops and Iraqi noncombatants, etc etc." You turn off the people you are addressing if you make it too confrontational. Take a look at the kind of petitions www.sojo.net has out or just get on his action list and go with his. I think they are very good. --des

I heard the Judas Gospel described as revisionism. IMO, The Gospel of John is prob. the most revisionistic of Judas as it makes him the most evil of all the gospels. --des

I don't know what to think of it, but Spong talks about the I AM as sort of a pun (I don't think he used that word) of "I AM" as God, ie the Great I AM. So when "Jesus" (ie the John writer) says "I AM the way" he is talking about God and not Jesus. There are all sorts of references to the I AM. So I think it is interesting. --des

"Born Ok the first time" --des

Oh gee, I loved some of those (didn't see others). Have to add a few. In no particular order. Not necessarily peace and justice but hey we are off topic over here. October Sky Flight of the Navigator (ok I know not so heavy, as are some of the others here) ET Searching for Bobby Fisher Contact To Live (Chinese) Little Man Tate Close Encounters of the Third Kind --des

Yeah, I think there is a bit of a stigma on the word "liberal". I said I was a liberal Christian to someone and she said "I hate that word 'liberal'." Why would she feel this way? It seems that conservatives have made it a "bad word". There is also a term a liberal problem with the word liberal. For example, a "white liberal" is a bad thing, or at least perhaps a well-meaning but not particularly smart one. OTOH, there is a long running feeling for the word "progressive" that goes way way back in US history. Personally I am comfortable saying I am liberal though. I think the word progressive means to me a little more than liberal. I also think the social gospel is a big part of the message Jesus. --des

Sometimes they are the same thing. I have also heard that progressive might imply more of an attempt to encompass or include the "spiritual" and "personal" aspects of Christianity vs a more or less basically just being socially liberal social gospel. --des

Yeah, funny thing but in thinking about the death penalty, I don't think too many people think of the name Jesus. However, he was the most famous death penalty victim. My old UCC church was very active anti- death penalty and I dont' even think I heard that discussion. --des

I don't think I would fight in the military, though I don't think of myself as a pure conscientious objector. I would use that term to imply someone who is opposed to war for any reason. I'm opposed to most wars, but I think they are mostly fought for reasons that aren't good enough imo. That includes most conflicts (or "police actions") during my lifetime: Korea, Vietnam, Persian Gulf, Iraq, etc. I have a bit of mixed feeligns about Afganistan and Bosnia-- which I think were more justifiable. But I do believe in war when the consequences of not going to war are unthinkable. I think World War 2 is the best example. I think Christians of good conscience can have many different views on this, from a much more activist military to total conscientious objection. Didn't Jesus' life sort of tip over the "eye for an eye" idea? He certainly didn't practice that. --des

No doubt that Masawi isn't a nice guy, but I actually think that he might just be a wannabe who is sorry he really isn't (or can't be) more involved. He says pretty bizarre things, like the whole idea that Bush (that is GWB, Mr. put retarded people to death, highest rate of capital punishment in the US) will exonerate him. Come again? However, regardless of his guilt on innocence. I am opposed to the death penalty. a. We are the only western modern country that does it. (I think it tells you something that when South Africa became a democracy they abolished it.) b. Innocent people (not talking about Masawi, not sure he was that involved in 911 but he isn't "innocent") are put to death. Illinois almost used the death penalty on 13 people later found innocent. There are scores of people on death row that have been let free on the "innocence project". Most of the these people are discovered by some law student or something that has the time to find out they are innocent.If all these innocent people have been let off death row we know that there are logically many more that haven't been. I don't think the "system is working", if they are discovered innocent by some law student. c. The death penalty is expensive. The various appeals that are fair and logical if you don't want more innocent people put to death tend to make the system more costly. It is cheaper to lock them up and throw away the key. d. It is one thing for murders to commit murder but must we stoop to their level? e. Revenge isn't something to base social actions on, even though we can understand it. f. There is no credible evidence that death is a deterent. In fact, I think states with the death penalty have higher murder rates (that might be more the result of the states which have the least progressive social policies-- but it still shows that it isn't a deterrent.) BTW, I think that there are plenty of people who are rehabilitatable. Maybe not on death row, but the going trend lately has been away from rehabilitation, even of children. --des

Heeehehe. Well I'm not as addicted to suduko as I was. However, I now play the recorder over a half hour each night. I am also learning how to play the Native American flute, which is just a gorgeous instrument. However, I sliced my left thumb with a knife last night. I sure need my thumb for the recorder, but can prob. play the NA flute tonight. The cut isn't so serious but it smarts (wasn't smart but smarts :-)). --des

They have a free CD demo disk. I think it is actually very good. I may do it, but there is another expensive thing that I think may have priority. There is no one to correct your pronunciation (the thing older learners would have the most trouble with) but I am thinking it is pretty brilliant in its approach. --des