Sorry that this one was so long in coming, but here it is.
Authenticity, Authority, Authorship, Bible, Canonicity, Catholicism, Christianity, Error, Faith, Gospel, Hermeneutics, Hermeneutics of Suspicion, Historical Jesus, Inerrancy, Jesus, Jesus Seminar, John, Leningradensis, Manuscript History, Masoretic Text, New Testament, New Testament Canon, New Testament Criticism, New Testament Introduction, Old Testament, Paul, Religion, Reza Aslan, Scribes, Septuagint, Sinaiticus
People distrust the Bible, and the Christian faith, generally. It’s a thing. There are plenty of good reasons for this (the most obvious being that Christians spend a lot of time behaving like hypocrites, petulant children, or judgmental a**holes), but there are also a lot of utterly awful reasons for this hanging around in anti-theist circles today, and it is frequently difficult to separate the good arguments against Christianity from the bad. Christianity itself being largely unable to differentiate between the two, and occasionally being strait-jacketed by its own theology to emphasize certain approaches to defending itself over others, I find that a lot of perfectly reasonable and intelligent arguments made by sensible people earnestly curious about or struggling with the Christian faith and the Christian Bible, go utterly unnoticed.
So let’s talk about some of the biggest issues standing between smart people and belief in the Bible and what it has to say.
It’s been some time since my last post, largely because I spent a semester writing >8 pages a week for various assignments, and transitioned directly from that into the busy Christmas season, sickness, and various familial and domestic catastrophes. I won’t say that it’s all over, but things seem to have settled a bit, and I’m looking to restore some status quo. But I’ve also had a lot of time to reevaluate the purpose of this blog, so without any further ado let’s talk openly about that.
A New Hope, Art, Auguste Dupin, Batman v Superman, Battlestar Galactica, canon, Doctor Who, Doctor Zhivago, Dungeons and Dragons, Edgar Allan Poe, Empire Strikes Back, fans, Game of Thrones, George Lucas, Gesamtkunstwerk, Imperial March, Intellectual Property, J.J. Abrams, J.R.R. Tolkien, James Joyce, Lara's Theme, Legend of Zelda, Lord of the Rings, Luke Skywalker, Man of Steel, MCU, Michael A. Stackpole, Middle-Earth, Minecraft, opera, Phantom Menace, Ride of the Valkyries, Ring Cycle, Scarlet Pimpernel, Shadowrun, Sherlock Holmes, Star Trek, Star Wars, Starcraft, Starcraft II, Stephen Dedalus, Steven Moffat, Superman, Timothy Zahn, Wagner, Warhammer 40000, William Faulkner, Yoknapatawpha County
I’m feeling bored, so let’s talk about some broad-scale cultural conventions, art, and learn a new German word while we’re at it.
So, these days, I find myself more and more often having discussions about fictional worlds, continuity, and the apparent misuse of such things. Most recently, I found myself discussing the particular case of Starcraft II, and its serious storytelling inferiority (and retconning) of the original Starcraft, but this subject has become more and more relevant in recent memory, what with the frequent rebooting in Hollywood (such as the J.J. Abrams reimagining of Star Trek and the upcoming Batman V. Superman movie), the upcoming Star Wars movie, the ubiquitous Marvel Cinematic Universe project, the now-fixed Zelda continuity, the much-maligned Moffat era of Doctor Who, and many other projects frequently scrutinized in the pop cultural awareness. I have several friends who get worked up over numerous aspects of these various issues, usually to the effect of: “THEY’RE RUINING x” where x is whichever beloved franchise du jour is being apparently maligned by newcomers to the beloved artistic world in question.
My usual response, though, is not to be very concerned. I don’t tend to think of art in terms of worlds, but in terms of individual works, and therefore my defense tends to be: “They cannot take y away from us,” where y is whatever original work began the franchise in the first place. That is to say, Starcraft II cannot “ruin” Starcraft; The Phantom Menace does not “ruin” A New Hope; Man of Steel does not “ruin” Superman, and so on. But I’m beginning to think that this might be an antiquated way of looking at things, based on an aesthetic that is more appropriate to the nineteenth century than the twenty-first.
Anna Karenina, Art, C.S. Lewis, Casablanca, characters, Citizen Kane, Clock Town, Deku Scrub, Dungeons & Dragons, Dunsany, Edward Plunkett, fantasy, film, Final Fantasy 6, Final Fantasy 7, Goron Elder, H.P. Lovecraft, Ikana, J.R.R. Tolkien, Kaepora Gaebora, Kokiri Forest, Legend of Zelda, Link, Majora's Mask, Mortality, N64, NES, novels, Ocarina of Time, Papers Please, questions, Roger Ebert, Silent Hill 2, Skull Kid, Snowhead, Spec Ops: The Line, Stone Tower, Super Mario Brothers 3, The Avengers, Theme, themes, video games, Woodfall Swamp, Zelda
I’ve been writing heavy-duty posts on theological applications and tough issues since mid-July, and it’s time to lighten things up a bit. So here’s a post in which I will proceed to gush over how much I love The Legend of Zelda: Majora’s Mask.
The late Roger Ebert once argued that video games could not possibly be art, by their very nature as an interactive medium, a point which I suspect stemmed from his lack of experience in the medium. But one of his most compelling arguments on the subject was that video games have failed to produce a work as monumental or as powerful as the great works of other media, such as Anna Karenina among novels or Citizen Kane among movies. And in some ways, I suspect he is right to say that. Anytime I hear somebody compare a video game to these great works (and I admit I have done it erroneously myself) I am suspicious, and usually disappointed. Whether it is because the business of making games interferes with their artistry, or because our age regularly fails to produce a work of that magnitude, I don’t know, but video games have yet to achieve something so rich and replete with insights into the human condition.
After mucking about with various issues of faith and finally getting around to scripture last week, let’s finally get at the core matter of loyalty – loyalty to the local church, the church community, and the particular strain of faith operating in one’s backyard.
Buddhism, Catholicism, Christianity, Church, Confucius, Ecumenism, Feuerbach, Hermeneutics, Hinduism, Inerrancy, Islam, Judaism, Loyalty, Pantheism, Protestantism, Religion, Scripture, Synthesis, Taoism, Textual Criticism
Up until now I’ve been trying to treat all religions, faiths, and systems of belief from the dubious perspective of an all-inclusive objectivity. No, though, we must change our perspective to treat Western, Abrahamic-based religion exclusively, by which I mean Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The reason for this is that these religions demand an act of loyalty which is unusual among religions or other faith-based systems of belief, namely the act of total submission.
I have recently started a new site where all my fiction will be located from now on – you’ll find a link at the top of the page for future reference. The sheer quantity is a bit staggering, but there’s a lot of good stuff there, and if you’re interested, you should check it out.
I’ve also moved the story Eric McMallus’s Miracle there, and replaced it with my bachelor’s thesis: “The Moral Fiction Writer”, in celebration of the new organization. I will continue to update both sites, so check them both out frequently for new stories, musings, and other philosophically-minded nonsense. Generally, the non-fiction work or meditative musings will continue to appear here, but fiction will appear on the other site.
Perhaps a month or so ago my wife and I were watching one of her favorite old musicals – Summer Stock – which she enjoyed as a child and I had never seen before, what with being a complete ignoramus with regard to classic movies. I rather off-handedly (and cavalierly) mentioned, at the conclusion of a musical number, that there was a rather suspicious lack of black people in the cast. And though I suspect that I could’ve been more diplomatic about it (and should have been), the conversation that observation gave rise to was a worthwhile one that I have touched on before but would like to investigate more carefully now. Namely: are there merits to works of art that do not practice or demonstrate the sort of equitable values we practice today?
Aristotle, Bad Faith, Buddhism, Christianity, Coherence Theory of Truth, Correspondence Theory of Truth, Faith, Hypocrisy, Loyalty, Metaphysics, Pragmatic Theory of Truth, Religion, Subjectivity, truth, Wisdom
Last post, I wrote (at length) about the necessity of submission to some kind of worldview, be it scientific naturalism, religion, a vague sort of philosophy, or some conglomeration of different viewpoints. This time, I mean to tackle (again) the subject of good and bad faith – what differentiates a good system from a bad system.