Skip to content

Monthly Archives for June 2008

All this, and Heaven too

I am in the middle of reading Bishop N.T. Wright’s book Surprised by Hope, which deals with the doctrine of Heaven and what Wright calls “life after life after death.”  It’s blowing the minds of some evangelicals who don’t like being told that Heaven isn’t necessarily the goal.

I was quite surprised to hear that Bishop Wright was interviewed last week on The Colbert Report, a somewhat dangerous place for nearly anyone in which to find themselves.  In the interview, Wright dialogues with Colbert about Heaven, dogma and other fun stuff.  Check it out, Wright is on about the 13:30 mark. (And, Cookie Monster is a surprise guest earlier in the show!)

Written on 26 June 2008 by me under Church, Faith, Science & Doubt, NT Wright with 2 Comments

Words

I should start by clarifying that this post is not about the song by Neil Young (a very good song, by the way) or the song by the Bee Gees (an okay, but not great song).  Just in case you wondered.

For some reason I subscribed a few years ago to Dictionary.com‘s “Word of the Day” service, which means that every day I get an e-mail from Doctor Dictionary giving me the definition of some word that I may never use. I enjoy them, anyway.  I also subscribe to a Theological Word of the Day, which I find even more interesting. But, this post isn’t about that.

Today’s Dictionary word was the transitive verb, “defenestrate.”  I know that it’s a transitive verb because the e-mail told me. However, I would not have ever guessed what the word means.  I do know, however, what “fenestration” means, which added to the problem. Fenestration, which is a noun, refers to the design of windows. I know this because my job once required me to know alot about windows, and I worked with an architect who specialized in windows who used the word in his company name.  It’s kind of a cool word, fun to say, but it’s not something that most people have opportunity to use that often.

Fenestrate is a bit more odd in that it is an adjective that looks like it should be a transitive verb.  Most people say “fenestrated,” but apparently it’s also appropriate to say something like, “that wall is lined with fenestrate openings.”  It is derived from the Latin word fenestra, which by now you probably could guess means “window.”

Which brings us to “defenestrate.”  I typically think of the prefix “de-” as meaning to undo, as in, “I need to defrost the refrigerator,” or “he was rather decomposed.” However, it doesn’t always mean “undo;” I read (on Dictionary.com) that in Latin, it typically means “down.”  That still doesn’t explain “denude,” which does not mean to put clothes on. But, that’s grist for another mill.

Putting the prefix “de” in front of “fenestrate,” knowing what we do about “de,” could mean just about anything, including to remove fenestrated openings, to close a window (the “down” definition), or as is used in denude, to simply be a window. I should mention here that denuding in front of a fenestrated wall is not typically a good idea, unless you’re an exhibitionist.

By now, you’ve probably looked the word up already and stopped reading this very interesting post. But for those of you who have stuck it out, here’s the real definition: defenstrate means “to throw out of a window,” as in, “the bouncer defenestrated the drunken reveler.”

Words. Don’t you just love them?

Written on 19 June 2008 by me under Random Thoughts with 1 Comment

Clashing Culture

My friend Mike has become involved in a new co-op blog entitled Clashing Culture. It is an interesting concept, as the authors consist of 2 people who identify themselves as atheists, and 2 people who identify as Christians. Their logo is especially catchy, featuring both the new Atheist scarlet “A” in Clashing and a cross for the “t” in Culture.

However, as I read through some of the posts and the authors’ bios, it seems that they may have more culture in common – and therefore less “clash” – than they think. Certainly the question of God is a big issue; however, in this case it may simply be a disagreement within a culture than the clash of different cultures. Before I explain what I mean, let me say that there are some very interesting posts so far, and I don’t in any way mean to speak negatively about any of the authors or the blog. If you’ll notice, I’ve even added it to my blogroll and (possibly to their dismay) will likely be a regular reader and commenter. It will indeed be interesting to see where this blog goes, and I wish them well as it is a very clever concept.

So, here’s what I mean by “culture in common:” Two of the authors, my friend Mike and Anastasia (whose own blog is Genetic Maize) are by their own admission atheists (not that they need to be ashamed of this, it’s just that I want to clarify that I’m not putting words in their mouths); both were raised Catholic, and down the road decided that there was no empirical evidence of God and the supernatural. I presume they would both be okay with the descriptor “philosophical materialist,” meaning someone who has a worldview where all that exists is the material world, which can be seen, tested, prodded, and so on. Both are rationalists and committed to the scientific approach to knowledge. Both of them are also modernists, the predominant worldview of the 20th Century Western world.

The other 2 individuals are perhaps harder to categorize (and I do apologize, I am being very modernist in my analysis, but it’s just a tool, albeit a flawed one). Thomas Robey is a well-known blogger at Hope For Pandora and a MD/PhD student at the U of Washington. He is a professing Christian of the Presbyterian persuasion, who says he believes in the “basics of Christianity” but admits having trouble with the concepts of eternal life and miracles. He is an evolutionist, not believing in either young Earth creationism or intelligent design. He states, “When it comes to interpreting the Bible, I see scientific understanding as trumping metaphorical stories – particularly in the Old Testament.”

Steve Matheson is a developmental cell biologist who blogs at Quintessence of Dust. He teaches at Calvin College, attends a Reformed church, which I presume makes him a Calvinist. From his own blog, I gather that he is an evolutionist who believes in common descent. I haven’t read enough of him to know where he stands with regard to Intelligent Design except that he’s critical of some aspects of at least some aspects of it. (I have to say that I have a hard time seeing how a Calvinist could not believe in ID!) In any event, his states that the main theme of his blog is scientific explanation.

My intent is not to misrepresent or even criticize anyone, and if I have misunderstood anyone’s position, I apologize. My point here is this: While the 4 authors are split 50/50 on belief in God, they are all modernists. That’s not such a big surprise, as most Americans are, including most evangelical Christians. In looking at the blogs of Matheson and Robey, it appears that in keeping with modernist philosophy they are rationalists, approaching things – even religion – from a scientific culture and viewpoint (if anyone, Matheson would seem the most likely to clash with the others). This now places all four authors within a smaller subculture (which at least borders on scientism), as a large percentage of Western Christians – especially among evangelicals, Pentecostals and fundamentalists – would part ways in holding science to that level of authority (which tends to result in fractured worldviews on both sides of that fence). So, it would seem that at best, what we have is a clash between sub-cultures, if not sub-sub-cultures.

Again (and I want to make this abundantly clear), it is not my intention to be critical of the Clashing Culture site or its intent. As I mentioned recently I’ve been thinking lately about epistemology and worldview so this site just prompted more thinking. Congratulations to the CC crew on a great-looking blog. I have high hopes for you, so don’t disappoint me!

Written on 15 June 2008 by me under Faith, Science & Doubt, Philosophy, Reviews with 5 Comments
Tagged with , , , , , , ,

A Night fan

Reading the reviews and blogs, you’d think people universally disliked M. Night Shyamalan’s films. The critics obviously dislike him, and reviews of The Happening appear to be following that trend, with the Tomatometer currently showing 20%. I haven’t seen it yet, but I probably will try to catch it in theaters. Oddly enough, as much as I love Night’s films, I’ve never seen one in the theater.

Shyamalan is definitely an interesting filmmaker, in my opinion one of the best since Hitchcock (I know I’m in the minority here, but what else is new?). I love his slow, deliberate style, as well as his use of color and setting to achieve the feel he wants. It seems to me that his movies end up just the way he wanted them to, and that’s pretty rare.

One of the things that critics seem to dislike about him is his continuing themes of faith and purpose, rooted in the worldview that we are living in an open system, where there are things that we will never quite understand. And, his movies are just plain fun. I’ve read some blogs that claim that he is a Christian, but I see no indication of that. However, it is apparently true that he chose Mark Wahlberg to play the lead character in part because of Wahlberg’s Christian faith (which was also a factor in Mel Gibson playing the priest in Signs). In The Happening, apparently there is also hints of Intelligent Design, which is probably to be expected with his purpose theme. I suspect that the film won’t get the thumbs up from evolutionists.

I haven’t seen Shyamalan’s pre-Signs films, but I own DVDs of everything since, and they are among my favorites to rewatch. Here are a few thoughts on each of these movies, just in case you cared about my opinions. (I’ll pretend, anyway.)

The Sixth Sense

This is, of course, one of the best end-of-the-movie-twist films ever made. The tight script and directing gives no hints as to the ending.

Unbreakable

While one of his least-known films, also starring Bruce Willis along with Samuel L. Jackson, this is perhaps one of his best. While he wanted to market the movie as a comic-book superhero story, Walt Disney Studios insisted on a thriller marketing approach, which Shyamalan has counted as one of his biggest mistakes. It is, in reality, a very good, dark, superhero film.

Signs

Signs is just a fun movie, perhaps going a bit over the top in its exploration of purpose, with faith-issues prominently featured. Mel Gibson is wonderful as an Episcopalian priest who has lost his wife in a freak accident, and losing his faith in the process. Joaquin Phoenix is perfect, as are the 2 kids in the film. This is one of what I call “the dead wife films” that came out about the same time. For whatever reason, it seemed that this was a popular theme, used in The Mothman Prophecies, Dragonfly, and one other I can’t recall at the moment. Perhaps White Noise?? The movie would have been much better had the cheesy alien stayed out of site. Perhaps his 2nd biggest mistake?

The Village

This is one of my all-time favorite films. The cinematography is excellent, as is his use of color. Like his other films, the directing is very tight. It’s another movie with a twist, moving a bit away from his purpose/faith theme, instead dealing with how we deal with the evil in our lives.

The Lady In the Water

I hesitated to see this one after seeing the previews and hearing it was based on a bedtime story he made up for his kids. When I finally saw it, I was blown away. It is simply a hilarious movie, starring Paul Giamatti and Bryce Dallas Howard (Ron Howard’s daughter, who also starred in The Village). Full of incredibly quirky characters, Lady is very, very fun to watch. The concept of purpose is again key in this film, which seems to parody the script-writing process itself, especially with Bob Balaban’s character. Balaban plays a film critic, who presents an ongoing critique from within the film itself. I think it’s pretty clear that Shyamalan was having a lot of fun with this character, while making it clear what he thought of film critics as a whole.

Well, that’s it for my mini reviews. I’ll pose a review after I see The Happening, so check back.

Written on 14 June 2008 by me under Faith, Science & Doubt with 3 Comments

10 Reasons why I haven’t been blogging lately

A few of your (and I mean a few) will have noticed that I haven’t been blogging much lately. In fact, a week or two can go by without so much as a youtube link. It’s not that I don’t have anything to say or haven’t been thinking important thoughts. I’ve actually been doing a lot of thinking, about important issues like epistemology (how we know what we think is ture), politics (how we know what we know is not true) and the price of wheat. But, I have a list of valid reasons why I haven’t been blogging:

10. I’ve been working a lot lately in the evenings. That’s not a bad thing, it’s just the way it is.

9. Blogging doesn’t pay well.

8: My dog ate it. (I don’t think that worked in elementary school, either.)

7. My computer dies repeatedly.

6. My computer’s also gone senile. Truly, it has. It tends to restart whenever it darn well feels like it, and it’s usually not at a convenient time. To make matters worse, the switch broke, so I have to actually hot-wire it to get it started.

5. It’s been way too cloudy. This is actually a valid excuse. Besides making me depressed, it’s chased me out of my north-facing office where the sun cannot find me.

4. I’ve so many things to say, I can’t decide what to say first.

3. I have adult-onset ADD.

2. I actually have a real life that exists outside of cyberspace. Seriously.

1. I’m trying to build the suspense.

I never said it would be a funny list, just valid.

I really have been thinking considerably about epistemology, and will start blogging on that sometime soon. However, I keep reading new things and changing my opinions, so it’s probably best that I’ve waited. And, I just purchased a new, high-powered laptop so I don’t have to be stuck back in my north-facing office. It’s fast, it’s got mega-memory, it’s got Vista – well, 2 out of 3 isn’t bad. Actually, I haven’t minded Vista, yet.

So, bear with me and don’t cancel your rss feeds, there’ll be more great posts coming. Trust me.

Written on 13 June 2008 by me under Random Thoughts with 2 Comments