Conversations With a Skeptic #3
Hope you enjoy it!
Conversations With A Skeptic 3 from Mars Hill College Mission on Vimeo.
Son comes out as atheist
This posting does not constitute an endorsement by SSU of the event or its organizers.
Seattle Atheists/Agnostics Political Town Hall
This posting does not constitute an endorsement by SSU of the event or its organizers.
On Saturday, Novermber 1st, in the afternoon, there will be an Atheists/Agnostics Political Town Hall at the Capitol Hill branch of the Seattle Public Library. See the Meetup.com event page (no login required) for more information.
History of Christianity…
Disclaimer: Kristin's opinions which may or may not be supported by the SSU.
So, I'm just now listening to Conversations with a Skeptic, and yeah, history of early Christianity would help with this.
For anyone who enjoys discussing belief and religion with Christians, I would suggest learning more about the early, Medieval, Renaissance, Enlightenment, etc. church. If you happen to have time for a 5 credit class in the winter, Prof. James Felak teaches HIST 209: History of Christianity every year. This year, it's 2:30-3:20 MTuWThF. Last year it was 8:30-9:20, and I still took it. I had Felak for 209 and 113, and he's a very good professor. He is Catholic (though one of the theologically laid-back ones), but teaches the class from the perspective of someone who is familiar with all of these events but minimally biased. Non-Christians (and even Christian Non-Catholics) may find themselves struggling a tiny bit at a couple points of the class, but it's certainly doable. I ended up with a 3.7 without ever stressing.
Without the class, I would recommend skimming The Theological Tradition. It does not appear to be in the UW library system, though there is an "article" by the same name with the same authors. The Christians as the Romans Saw Them was an interesting but heavy book on the Christians before Constantine accepted it as a legitimate, even favored, religion. It is currently available in both the Suz and Ode stacks. Reading it completely front to back would be a little excessive, but read the parts that interest you. The third book for the course was not particularly good or memorable, but the fourth was one of the best textbooks I've ever read. Summer for the Gods is about modern American culture wars, not ancient Christianity, but is essential for those people who insist on arguing about evolution so much. You think you know the Scopes trial. You do not.
Sitting here for the last couple days, however, most of the real pithy information I have batting around in my head came from lecture. I plan on hunting down the notebook for that, but meanwhile...
-No, Matt, the real take-off of Christianity was totally Constantine. It also diluted the average level of devotion of the group, as people joined for political reasons, and eliminated women from any roles of leadership.
-The Council of Nicaea (325) helped solidify the relationship of Christ and his Father; whether they are equal, or the Father is superior. The Arians essentially believed that the Son was less than the Father because he was created. Arianism was declared heresy (even though I believe there may have been an Arian pope?), and the winning side proclaimed that the Son and Father were one in being, homoousius.
-The Council of Constantinople (381) completed the Trinity by declaring the Holy Ghost equal to the Father and Son.
-The Gnostics (in this incarnation, anyway, there is more than one sect referred to as Gnostics) believed in two Gods, not one. The supreme God and the creator God (Good God and Bad God, New Testament God and Old Testament God, loving God and corrupting God). They considered phyiscal matter to be pretty much bad, and so insisted that Christ never became a man, he only appeared to be so. Most modern Christians would not even recognize the Gnostics as Christians, what with the polytheism and the Jesus was not a man ideas.
-Two more fun sects: Donatists and Manicheans.
So, remember folks, the trinity did not exist until late in the fourth century.
Mars Hill Part II: Management
Disclaimer: This entry contains the views of an SSU member, and does not necessarily represent the views of the Secular Student Union.
Financial:
In October of last year, the church purchased the building that formerly housed the Tabella nightclub for $3.95M, keeping all details secret from the congregation until the deal closed. Why? Whose money were they spending? Who is this church serving, if it needs to bully its members? The church leadership had stopped publishing and distributing weekly financial updates to the congregation, and while members worried, they were given no details on the churches financial situation...until...
Last December this appeared on the church website:
"Multiple pastors request prayers for our financial state. With the deep deficit, it is a test for all the staff to choose Jesus over anxiety when ministry funds are cut short and the possibility of lay-offs and additional budget cuts is on the horizon. Please pray for repentance by those who are disobeying God in their giving, and pray to Jesus to make generous and faithful hearts of our body."
Manipulative. Ludicrously manipulative, passive aggressive, just childish...
Mars Hill Bylaws
In September of last year Mars Hill fired one pastor and placed another on probation. At the time the church was in the process of rewriting the church bylaws. According to Mark Driscoll, these two men “curiously were among the least administratively gifted for that task, and chose to fight in a sinful manner in an effort to defend their power and retain legal control of the entire church.” In a sermon shortly after, he also talked about the men: "There are a few guys right now, if I wasn’t going to end up on CNN, I would go Old Testament on ’em. There’s no, like, attorneys and blogging, just like I punched you in the mouth, now shut up. That’s clean; it’s simple."
Here is a discussion of the bylaws point by point from a legal perspective:
http://prayingheart.wordpress.com/2008/01/18/lets-discuss-the-new-by-laws-of-mars-hill-church/
The author provides a summary of what the bylaws do:
*The full council of elders has been reduced to only 5 ruling elders.
*These Ruling 5 are self-appointed and serve for life without effective accountability.
*There is no effective oversight of Mark since he serves as his own supervisor on the Ruling 5.
*These by-laws were voted in by the former full council of elders thus revealing the inability of these men to critically read, voice any comments, or express any substantive opinion.
*Since a quorum is only 50%, effectively only 3 Ruling elders govern the church.. These Ruling 5 may only be supervised by those whom they hand pick, as they also control the slate of those who may be appointed.
*No scriptural basis is necessary to discipline any member of the Mars Hill body.
*There remains no protection and no recourse for any member so disciplined, as has already been demonstrated when our very leaders have been subjected to having their character inpugned in public.
My personal favorite quote from the bylaws:
"Please respect the sensitive nature of a document like this and do not distribute it outside of the membership. There is nothing to hide, but our intent is to answer the questions of our members only, and not take the massive number of hours that would be required to also answer the questions regarding our legal governance to people for whom Mars Hill Church is not home."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Zm1vzM2FAc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6mmTXVTil8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kayRXtITyw&feature=related
I don't think I need to go into some of the serious issues with this form of church governance. Secrecy, unquestioned authority, unchecked power...
Mars Hill Women’s Issues
Disclaimer: This entry contains the views of an SSU member, and does not necessarily represent the views of the Secular Student Union.
I do not believe that it is over the line to say that this church is, frankly, beyond misogynistic. This is abusive. This goes against everything preached by Jesus in their gospel. Believing that women should be submissive is not just a cultural difference. It's about recognizing women as intelligent human beings. It is very, very frightening to me as a female, and just as a human being, that this sort of hateful rhetoric and outright abusive treatment of women is going on here in Seattle. My prayers for all the young women of this church.
An interesting blog post:
http://www.monkfish-abbey.org/blog/20060308/grid-blog-for-international-womens-day-hammer-time/
Quotes from Mark Driscoll's "Spiritual Gifts VI: (1 Corinthians 14:26-40)" sermon:
"No woman wants a man to treat her like another man because if we do, you cry.
Men are horrible to other men. And they don't cry. And if they do we mock them and tell everyone. That's probably not what you want. True story, right men? Right? My wife she tells me all the time, "I'm not one of the guys," which means I do not treat her like a man, does that mean I treat her with-- no, I treat her like a lady. See this whole gender conflict is if men-- you know, we're not about chauvinism, we're not about feminism, we are about chivalry. Men loving women in their femininity and not treating them like men but treating them like ladies. That's what we're about.
The problem with women, though, who want to be treated like men, is as soon as you do, they say, "You know what, you hurt my feelings. I'm a girl."
Does it say, "Ladies, don't have any questions"? Does it say that? No. Does it say, "Ladies, don't disagree." No. Does it say, "Ladies, don't think for yourself." When you disagree, when you're super-theological, when you're all fired up, the first thing you don't do is start yellin' at the pastor and yellin' at the church, firin' nasty e-mails, and declarin' war and puttin' together a, a, little group of, you know, feminist women with guns who are gonna make a difference."
"If you're married, you go talk to who? Your husband. You say, "Sweetheart, I was readin' The Bible, I think it's ridiculous." And he would say, "We should probably talk." "Honey I was readin' the Bible, I don't understand." He should say, "Let's, let's study that together. Let's take some time, and study -- together. Now some of you will protest and say, "THAT is SEXIST!" As a married man, I will tell you, it is sexy. That's what it is. There is nothin' hotter than a wife with a great new testament, commentaries, concordances, and questions. That is theological foreplay. It's awesome. Because now you're connecting at the level of then heart and the soul and god is honoring of that."
Other Driscoll quotes:
Women's place is in the home
“Women will be saved by going back to that role that God has chosen for them. Ladies, if the hair on the back of your neck stands up it is because you are fighting your role in the scripture.”
Women should not hold leadership positions
“There is no occasion where women led a society and were its heads and the men complied and followed. … It’s a matter of Biblical creation”
Women are responsible for their husbands' infidelity
"Most pastors I know do not have satisfying, free, sexual conversations and liberties with their wives. At the risk of being even more widely despised than I currently am, I will lean over the plate and take one for the team on this. It is not uncommon to meet pastors' wives who really let themselves go; they sometimes feel that because their husband is a pastor, he is therefore trapped into fidelity, which gives them cause for laziness."
Apathetic atheists, the naturalistic fallacy, and our budding theocracy
For Atheists, Politics Proves to Be a Lonely Endeavor
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/18/us/18religion.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=religion&st=cse&oref=slogin
Using Biology, Not Religion, to Argue Against Same-Sex Marriage
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/nyregion/12marriage.html?scp=3&sq=religion&st=cse
Bush Aides Say Religious Hiring Doesn’t Bar Aid
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/18/washington/18discrimination.html?scp=2&sq=religion&st=cse
Conversations with a Skeptic Pt 2
Hey there folks!
So, with introductions over, we launched into a conversation about Christianity. It was interesting to me to try to understand why Matt feels the way he does.
Overall, I found the conversation frustrating. We would drift from topic to topic without seeming to come to a good understanding of what the other thinks and feels, and I thought we got caught up on the historicity of Jesus for much longer than I felt was necessary.
Hopefully next time, we will be able to more clearly find what we have in common, and what we differ on.
Conversations With A Skeptic 2 from Mars Hill College Mission on Vimeo.
Lawsuit against God thrown out because defendant has no legal address
Some of you might have already seen this, but I think this is really interesting. Nebraska State Senator Ernie Chambers filed a lawsuit against God. Chambers "seeks a permanent injunction ordering God to cease certain harmful activities and the making of terroristic threats." Here is an article discussing the lawsuit.
Now the lawsuit has been thrown out, on the grounds that "because the defendant has no address, legal papers cannot be served." Here is the article discussing the judge's ruling.
This is the kind of story that would seem more at home at The Onion, but it's always interesting to read this stuff from real news organizations.