Sunday, November 30, 2008

Couple of Funny Items

I found a couple things I thought I'd share.
1) Bringing back the extinct. They reckon they can create a mammoth from an elephants egg for a mere $10 million. If I had that much to spare I would consider it, imagine being the first person in thousands of years to have a pet mammoth to ride.

2) Deep sea oil divers found this large squid trawling the ocean sea bed. It has long as tentacles, pretty cool to see something like this as actual video footage!

3) And what I got a big laugh from, a perfectly executed flower-in-the-hairdryer prank. Just watch it yourself!

Cheers

Philip

Friday, November 28, 2008

The Sleepy Bear...

A mate Dean posted this on Facebook and I thought I'd re-post it here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5c0X4MW_zE

Cheers

Philip

Prince Caspian

Briar and I finally watched Prince Caspian last night. Despite what others have said I think it was alot better than the first. Mainly because the four of them could actually fight and contributed to the war. Edmund (if that's how it is spelt) was the man throughout, I think he is definitely developing his ninja skills.
When the Prince and Peter were arguing and about to fight I had to comment to Briar; Peter is the conservative - he wants the Narnians to rule and the Talmarines to bugger off. The Prince is the liberal - being a Talmarine himself he supports a Talmarine presence in the country. Both of them fought so much over their ideals they left little room for Aslan. We just needed a Karl Barth in there who could bring the liberal and the conservative together with a primary focus on Aslan.

Cheers

Philip

Thursday, November 27, 2008

We Call Him Skinny...

We call him skinny; but that's only cause the other turtle he lives with is fatty.


"Wat chya lookin at..."

I think he burnt his nose on the heater.
Posted by Picasa

Bird vs. Straw

"It's a showdown between Bird and Straw..."

Actually he was just checking me out through the window and my camera focused on the straw. He always comes by at night and cleans out our bark garden of any bugs hiding in there. He(or her?) leaves the bark over our lawn.
Posted by Picasa

What is Classical Theism?

I recently did a post on Open Theism, so here is Classical Theism (or Orthodoxy). Once again this is my understanding of it and feel free to correct or question it. This view has been the dominate view since the beginning of the church and perhaps before then. Some people track its roots back to Plato and other Greek philosophers. They came up with a bunch of propositions that they thought would be needed in order for God to be truly 'God'. This is also affirmed throughout church history as well; for example Calvinism and even Arminianism to a point affirms many of these.

- God is eternal.
- God is absolute.
- God is all knowing.
- God is all powerful.
- God is perfect.
- God is the cause of the universe, but he himself remains uncaused.
- God is unaffected by other beings.

God doesn't need us, but we need him. He is outside of time, and as such knows everything past, present and future. He is unchanging, thus prayer is not so much us appealing for him to change his mind or intervene in a situation - because he has already determined what will happen - so much as prayer is about changing us; prayer helps us understand what God is doing. He has the ability to do whatever he likes, whenever he likes because he has complete sovereignty over everything.

When this is put side by side with Open Theism it is easy to see the differences and tensions between them. I find myself more on this side of the fence as opposed to Open Theism, but I like dancing with people from all sorts of walks and am trying to constantly challenge classical theism. This way of understanding God can seem quite sterile and distant.

Cheers

Philip

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

The Emergent Hitler....

If anyone follows the Emergent Village, or anyone like Tony Jones or Scot McKnight then this video might be amusing. To anyone sensitive about Hitler and WW2, perhaps don't watch.

View Video

Jimmy

Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Thomas Spurgeon

Hey I just found this while reading some stuff on Wikipedia. Thomas Spurgeon, the son of the famous Charles Spurgeon, was a pastor/preacher at the Auckland Baptist Tabernacle. Talk about a small world.

Philip

Monday, November 24, 2008

The Supremacy of Christ and ....... [fill the blank]

A little while ago I was reading a book by John Piper and Justin Taylor The Supremacy of Christ in a Postmodern World and posted on it. Well I've just come across the audio files of the conference that the book was based on. I haven't listened to them, but I'm sure they're good. It's good solid reformist theology type talk (if you like that stuff) as they look at Christ in our postmodern world.

Click here to follow through to them.

Philip

Friday, November 21, 2008

What is Open Theism?

Here I will try and give an honest but brief glimpse at open theism.  Also note that this is my understanding, so if I leave stuff out or get it wrong feel free to comment and correct me.

Open Theism
- God changes.
- God experiences the pain and pleasure of other beings.
- God exists in the 'now'.  That is, he is not timeless.  He does not exist infinitely in the past, present, and future for all eternity.  He only exists in the now and the past.
- Humans are complete free agents.

Largely this views seems to be a reaction to Greek philosophical understandings. The Christian synthesis of Greek philosophy taught that God was unchangeable, unaffected by other beings, outside of time, all knowing, and as a result humans are not complete free agents.  I guess that open theism came from some people who were looking at this and thinking 'what if God's not like this?'  Thus open theism explored the four points listed above and came up with the four most foundational aspects of God:

1) He is living
2) He is personal
3) He is good
4) He is loving

Thus God is a relational God.  This may seem like nothing, but this is the basic understanding of God that is read when reading scripture.  For example, at Mt Sinai Moses appealed to God and God changed his mind (Exodus 32 & 33).  This is opposed to the traditional understanding that God already knew what was going to happen and Moses was just appealing out of necessity of what had already be predetermined.  Thus God did not change his mind, he did not benefit from it, and remained unaffected.  The only people it did affect and benefit were the Israelites and Moses.
   So what we have is a relational understanding of God who exists within the constraints of time.  He exists in the present, ever calculating the future with extreme intelligence that is unlike anything we know of.  As a result humans are complete free agents.  Our actions affect the course of history and God.  Because of the relationality of God he is affected by the pain and pleasures of humans.  There becomes a sense of risk involved in the actions of God as humans are able to refuse to do what is asked.  For example; there was the risk that Jonah would not go to Nineveh.  But God is influencing the world as he is moving it towards the second coming of Christ.
  I guess one of the biggest things about it is that it cuts into God's sovereignty. He cannot do what ever he likes, whenever he like.  He does not have supreme power over all things throughout all time.  He is not outside of time where he is in the past, present, and future at the same time.  Instead he is a relational God who is here now with us.  He is affected by those he loves supremely, and this love he pours out into the world.  He does not know the future, but he lives in a more dynamic relationship with his creations.

I hope this has been helpful.  This is a view that I appreciate, however don't fully imbrace.  I think perhaps that what is said in Open Theism is stuff worth listening to.

For furthur reading:
http://www.opentheism.info
There is also this article written by Jonathan Erdman who did a Master's thesis on Open Theism.

Stay Gold

Philip

Thursday, November 20, 2008

Rome and the T.V.

As I was driving to Blockhouse Bay last night I was thinking about the media and violence.  How long has the T.V. been around for? 1961 I think it was created, and then it would have been a few years before it was common in everyones house.  Now it is a given part of the furniture, like it comes with the wall.  I can't help but think about the naivete and stupidness of 'tough people' in films set in the 70's, 60's or earlier.  I mean, how tough were those T-Birds from Grease!  Compared to the senseless gang activity today they haven't got much of a show.  While it was definetely present back then, it feels like violence is always round the corner now.  I remember getting told off by some Islander mates one night after work for walking home in the dark.  So what's the difference between then and now?  Is there a difference? I think the media has had a large part to play in the perpetuation of action and violence. The T.V. is like the modern day Colloseum. Back in the day of the Greeks they ran the Colloseum.  At first watching two men kill each other was fun, but then the crowd got bored so the organizers had to up the ante.  Next thing you know they are chucking in Lions, Tigers, big armoured men, Chariots and anything else they can throw into the mix.  Consider the T.V. today, there used to be stuff like Get Smart, Cheers, Dad's Army, Freddy Kruger, Jason X, and IT.  The last three were frightening horrors back in the day.  Many young people today would find the first three boring and laugh throughout the last three.  Now the T.V. peeps are having the same problem the Colloseum organizers did back in the day, the crowd is getting bored with the same old, so up the ante.  Hence the large reception of the Saw movies!  A movie of a sadistic twisted genius and his disciples who conjure up ingenius killing contraptions.  Once the crowd get bored of this, what next?

These are just a few thoughts.  I watch movies alot, but perhaps the media is having a bigger impact than I'd care to admit.

Philip

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

258 Questions and Answers: Theology

Found this page by Michael Patton that has a large range of questions and answers to do with theology.  The few answers I have clicked on have come up with a guy talking to a bunch of people in a lecture type setting.  Easy to understand and helpful.

Check it out here.

Jimmy

A Lazy Day In The Tank

Posted by Picasa

World Peace?

I've been thinking about a few things involving how so many people are wanting world peace.  While it is definitely a goal to strive for I also feel that 'world peace' is perhaps epitomized too much.  Genesis 11:1-9 (story of Babel) is what I have in mind here.  This was a bunch of people who all came together to build a tower in self-glorification.  We all know what happened, God managed to see the minuscule idol of the humans and scattered humanity across the earth and confused all their speech - thus the birth of multiple languages.  So in a sense, these guys had achieved world peace with each other, but they were missing something - relationship with God. 
   However, through Christ all believers are united again as one people sharing the same language - the gospel (see Acts 2).  Together as the church it could be said that we represent the unity of all people under the one God following Jesus' second coming.  So what does this mean for 'world peace' in the sense that it is thrown round today?  For believers (and I should say even for non-believers) it is something to strive for, but under the right pretenses.  Jesus taught that we are to live in peace with each other, if this were to occur on a world wide scale there would definitely be 'world peace.'  So peace flowing through a relationship with Christ as we love God and our neighbour is what we should strive for.  Peace without relationship with God is still not enough as evidenced in Genesis 11.  It is by this I mean that 'world peace' is being epitomized.  If it were the epitome, then it would be enough, but it's not - Christ first.

Jimmy

Monday, November 17, 2008

Urban Word for the Day: Clapathy

Definition: When an audience grows weary of clapping, either at a ceremony or musical performance.

"That graduation ceremony was so long, I got clapathetic!"
"I was clapping at the beginning of the song, but I quit when I got clapathy."


Reminds me of some pentecostal churches where they clap for ages after every song.

Link to Dictionary Here

Saturday, November 15, 2008

NZ is almost number 1 in Gender Equality

Found this article this morning.  Out of 130 countries we hold to fifth place for the close gap between male and female.  I often wondered how we ranked against other western nations in term of women's rights - now we know.

"New Zealand has closed the entire gap in educational attainment which measures the literacy rate and enrolment of males and females in primary, secondary and tertiary education. It has closed over 97 per cent of the gap in health and survival measured by sex ratio at birth and healthy life expectancy. It has improved from 58 per cent of the gap, closing to more than 77 per cent in economic participation and opportunity which is measured by labour force participation; wage equality for similar work; income levels and numbers of managers, professional and technical workers and law and policy makers."

Australia has moved backwards to 21, the States has moved forward from 31 to 27. The only ones ahead of us are Norway, Finland, Sweden and Iceland.

Read the article here

Movies and Toys

Spent a good part of today at Big Boys Toys. Most of it was great, I will post photo's up in next day or so.

A couple of mates and I went and saw May Payne the other day. Was a rather dark movie, I think 95% was set at night, and every outside scene was snowing. Overall I enjoyed it. Afterwards we were talking about some theological themes weaved throughout the movie. I have to admit it was hard to place anything christian, like redemption, in the film because of it's darkness and focus on evil (not that I'm a great film analyst or anything). But one thing did come to mind. It was that if Max Payne was the Christ-like, redemptive figure in the movie he went out against the illusions of the world and Satan. He goes up against this guy Jack Lupino (a crazy, amped up, power hungry, delusional, killing machine) and Lupino dies. Not by Max's doing, but by BB who I will come to next. Lupino represents the illusions of the world, for example power, wealth, possessions, selfishness, all fed by this guy who we call Satan. Through Max's encounter with Lupino, Max reveals the illusion for the shallowness that it is. That it is in fact thin, volatile, and the power that it esteems is, in the end, all in vain.

In this movie BB is Satan, the one feeding Lupino, the illusions, drugs to keep him going on the streets. When Lupino fails to serve him anymore BB shoots him. Max Payne discovers that BB is the cause for all the current grief and loss in his life. This loss is what drives Max's. Perhaps much like a similar loss of relationship drives the redemption plan behind God. Max confronts BB after pushing through many trials and hardships, get's shot multiple times by him, but in the end shots BB. Here he overcomes BB, or Satan. Thus bringing an end to the grief over the loss in his life. However, Max differs to Christ, in that Christ can restore the loss. Max cannot restore his dead family. Christ is about love and restoration, Max was about revenge.

These are just my thoughts, let me know if you guys have any of your own!

Stay Gold

Philip

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Levinas and the Transcendance of God

It's exam time and I'm mainly studying except for when I'm counselling. However, I am trying to at least read a few pages a day of books I would usually otherwise read. I read this passage today by Bruce Benson talking about Levinas's view of the relationship between human's and the metaphysical 'other.' In this passage 'other' can be taken to be God.

"Attempts at mastery of the other are often manifested by way of cognition. Here we come to a complication in Levinas, one difficult to resolve. On the one hand, to recognize the other as truly other is to recognize the other as a subject rather than merely an object of my cognition. On the other hand, in an important sense I do not "recognize" the other at all, according to Levinas. The other is not merely some phenomenom that submits to consciousness and cognition. I want to control the other by defining the other as I wish, but the other simply refuses that control and continually disrupts it. The other comes to me in a direct and unmediated way - not mediated by my categories. Thus the other is truly transcendent." pg 116. Graven Ideologies by Bruce Benson.

I like the bit about the 'other' coming to us unmediated by our categories. However I do wonder whether God does sometimes in order to reach us, to try and define God is to at the same time lose him.

Cheers

Jimmy

Monday, November 10, 2008

Theology of George W. Bush

Well I read a chapter on 'George W. Bush's Theology of Empire' by Jim Wallis in Bruce Benson's Evangelicals and Empire. While I exist in New Zealand it was at least slightly interesting as the States have quite an influence on the world. It has been a hard call - a call in which I have avoided to make - as to whether the wars in Iraq or Afghanistan were honestly a call of God or not. Caputo has written about 'just wars' and stuff, but I have found Wallis' perspective of Bush to be interesting. Bush is quoted saying:

"If we are an arrogant nation, they will resent us. If we're a humble nation, but strong, they'll welcome us." pg 27

However since then the two wars have come into being, as well as the war on terrorism. Not to mention the numerous tactical strikes that pass by in the news and their ever lasting presence in foreign lands. I'm not trying to be an authority on what Bush should have done, but the actions of the States gone past don't really sound like a 'humble nation, strong and welcomed.' In fact I feel that the States have come under alot more criticism.
Perhaps the more interesting point Wallis points out is the National Idealism within North America. As a part of his speech at a conference in 2001 Bush said:

"This ideal of America is the hope of all mankind...That hope still lights our way. And the light shines in the darkness. And the darkness has not overcome it."

Sounds good, but it comes from the Gospel of John. In the Gospel the light shining in the darkness is the Word of God, and the light is the light of Christ - not America. There is a large difference between a nation, and Christ (or the gospel). Perhaps Freidrich Neitzsche - if he were still around - would have a field day on their idolatrous use of their Nation as a representative of Christ. What comes to mind recently when thinking about this was when we were watching the news and seeing avid Republican supporters speaking out against Barack Obama merely because he is deemed less patriotic than his rival McCain (I think one comment was around the fact Obama doesn't salute the flag enough, as if that's what it takes to lead a country or even true).
I hope and pray that people don't react to Bush's use of theology in the wars overseas (and other areas of his administration) by ditching theology all together, but by responding to it with good theology.

Take Care All

Jimmy
Posted by Picasa

Sunday, November 9, 2008

More Election Results....Bill and Ben

Was just reading through some news and came across this. The Bill and Ben party actually received 11,000 votes!  Which is about 10,000 more than I thought they would receive.  Quoted as saying:

"Honesty is the best policy, and honestly we don't have any policies."

I hope that either people stop voting for them and/or they start doing something a little more productive.  I find this quite amusing and on some levels their relaxed 'party-like' attitude is a fresh breath in the serious stale air of parliament.  On other levels I don't think I'd want them making decisions for the country.

Read the article here and watch the video here.

Saturday, November 8, 2008

A New Government

Well the election results are in and National are the new governing party.  I don't mind old John Keys, but I'm not sure about Bill English.  I have to say I'm happy with the first article I read this morning over Keys' plans to build a united broad based coalition.  He only needs Act to take parliament, but he has chosen to talk with Peter Dunne from United Future and the Maori Party and suggested they that have a role in the new government.  I think it would be cool to have someone like Pita Sharples in cabinet.  By this I am happy.
  
Also it seems that Winston Peters (New Zealand First) is no longer in parliament! I wonder how this come-back-kid will come-back. [Read Article Here].  He lost his electorate (Tauranga) to the young Simon Bridges.

I hope that everyone will support the new government, and that the new government will serve us well.

Stay Gold

Philip

Monday, November 3, 2008

The Nature of Deconstruction (Part 3)

Well the book What Would Jesus Deconstruct? by John Caputo has been a good read. He plays off the popular phrase "What Would Jesus Do?" by stating the ambiguity generated in such a statement/question.

One of the many things I've taken away from the book is another tool to add to my hermeneutical repertoire - deconstruction. When reading about Jesus in the Gospel's it is good to keep in mind what it is the Jesus is deconstructing and responding to - for example, the religious hypocrisy of the Pharisee's. What is it about what the Pharisee's are saying or doing that he is deconstructing and responding to?

I have been asked a couple of time's something along the lines of 'Isn't that what liberals do?' I guess in a simplistic understanding it is - only because questioning tradition (and everything else) is in the nature of deconstruction. However I do not consider it to be aligned at any particular point across the spectrum from Conservative to Liberal. Think of it along the lines of 'critical analysis,' it questions 'why we do things the way we do', or 'why the way things are the way they are.' I would like to think this is something all people do rather than taking things for granted. I don't think it descends order into chaos, rather if done in the Spirit of love and justice, it has the ability to improve, move forward, and brings 'ways of doing things' into alignment with beliefs and values. I suggest that in order to change, we first deconstruct, and then construct. I thought to finish off I'd include Caputo's second to last paragraph of the book:

"But what, then, is the Kingdom of God? Where is it found? It is found every time an offense is forgiven, every time a stranger is made welcome, every time an enemy is embraced, every time the least among us is lifted up, every time the law is made to serve justice, every time a prophetic voice is raised against injustice, every time the law and the prophets are summed up by love." pg 138.




It's how I like to think I'm doing theology.
Photo from Lomography.com
Posted by Picasa

Sunday, November 2, 2008

Another Update

This is a mere update in the scheme of things. I'm thinking about changing the layout again, but that all depends on what else is available. Having only one side-bar is proving limiting. I've also added Twitter for family and anyone else interested in what goes on from time to time during our days. The Blogroll has been updated, I've put a couple more on that aren't as emerging(ent) related.

Jimmy

Saturday, November 1, 2008

Church Services for Men

A couple of mates were telling me about an article in the paper out west Auckland that talked about making church more suited for males - 'magnetizing males' or something. I haven't read it but it got me thinking bout a couple of things. Firstly, we could get rid of the flowers and replace them with chains and grease. We would also have a squad of church motor bikes for community team building and evangelizing. I think it would also need to be on a lifestyle block with a couple of paddocks out the back for us to worship God in - let our creativity fly - one for paintballing and the other for diggers. We could also install flamethrowers on the edges of the stage so that when the singing hits a crescendo they fire. And finally, throughout the service - I got in mind sermons in particular here - we have some bbq's off to the side that have sausages, eggs, steak, and onions cooking and being served with Watties Tomato Sauce throughout the service. I think this would be a solid start to creating a more 'manly' service!

God Bless

Philip