What does it mean when Christians say "Jesus died for our sins"? This is something I always had trouble with. I mean, I understand the official explanation: God sacrificed Himself for to pay for our sins, which we have thanks to Adam and Eve, who God created in the first place, so we wouldn't have to. But what the heck does that mean? I think the problem is in thinking in terms of cause and effect. These aren't empirical facts, it doesn't matter if these events REALLY happened like that. What is important is what they mean in our lives.
So I like to look at it like this: Jesus died to show us the unconditional love of God. What could be a more pure expression of love then for God to become human and die? No matter what you do, who you are, you are forgiven. God still loves you.
Monday, February 7, 2011
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Crunkcore and Zen
I discovered this new genre of music awhile ago called "crunkcore", which is, for those of you who don't know, a fusion of the crunk sub-genre of hip hop and hardcore punk. Let me say first of all that I'm not a fan of "fusion" styles in general. Not because I'm a purist but because they tend to sound forced. Now there are a lot of hip hop/rock fusion bands out these days, and although there are a few songs here and there that work, most are pretty awful.
Personally, I like both hip hop and rock. I remember when I first that a band was trying to blend the styles I thought it sounded great--until I heard it. It's one of those things that sound great on paper but are terrible when actually applied. I think the reason they're generally so crappy--and this goes for any fusion style--is that they are either a hardcore band that doesn't really listen to a lot of hip hop but tries to rap, or a hip hop band that really doesn't get hardcore. The musicians involved rarely understand both genres. And/or it is just tacked on--this is what happens with a lost of your new age/world music artists. Take Yanni. He gets all these different great musicians of varying styles and puts them together to form...the exact same song every time. All that he's doing is adding on a new instrument--nothing else has changed. The scales are the same, the rhythms are the same--now matter what the instrumentation the result is the same bland yet over-emotional style.
This brings me back to crunkcore. What it essentially is is crunk beats with someone screaming the lyrics rather than rapping--even the subject matter is the same, if anything more juvenile (not to say that all crunk lyrics are juvenile though). They are a bunch of kids who don't seem to understand hip hop trying to do hip hop. Or least I think that's what they are trying to do. I'm not even sure. I'm not even sure if they are sure.
Let me try to illustrate how terrible this music is. You know when you hear a bad song or movie that is so bad that it is somehow good? Ed Wood is a great example of this. Well crunkcore goes beyond this. There are not words in English, or any other language, that can describe how terrible it is. It goes off the scale of good and bad. It's kind of Zen in a way. It transcends the categories we use to judge things. I wonder... if I listen to it long enough, will I attain satori?
It really is fascinating though. No matter how much I complain I find myself back on YouTube searching for crunkcore again. Is it a joke? Do they really have fans? Are those fans zen monks? I suspect that these questions have no answer...
Personally, I like both hip hop and rock. I remember when I first that a band was trying to blend the styles I thought it sounded great--until I heard it. It's one of those things that sound great on paper but are terrible when actually applied. I think the reason they're generally so crappy--and this goes for any fusion style--is that they are either a hardcore band that doesn't really listen to a lot of hip hop but tries to rap, or a hip hop band that really doesn't get hardcore. The musicians involved rarely understand both genres. And/or it is just tacked on--this is what happens with a lost of your new age/world music artists. Take Yanni. He gets all these different great musicians of varying styles and puts them together to form...the exact same song every time. All that he's doing is adding on a new instrument--nothing else has changed. The scales are the same, the rhythms are the same--now matter what the instrumentation the result is the same bland yet over-emotional style.
This brings me back to crunkcore. What it essentially is is crunk beats with someone screaming the lyrics rather than rapping--even the subject matter is the same, if anything more juvenile (not to say that all crunk lyrics are juvenile though). They are a bunch of kids who don't seem to understand hip hop trying to do hip hop. Or least I think that's what they are trying to do. I'm not even sure. I'm not even sure if they are sure.
Let me try to illustrate how terrible this music is. You know when you hear a bad song or movie that is so bad that it is somehow good? Ed Wood is a great example of this. Well crunkcore goes beyond this. There are not words in English, or any other language, that can describe how terrible it is. It goes off the scale of good and bad. It's kind of Zen in a way. It transcends the categories we use to judge things. I wonder... if I listen to it long enough, will I attain satori?
It really is fascinating though. No matter how much I complain I find myself back on YouTube searching for crunkcore again. Is it a joke? Do they really have fans? Are those fans zen monks? I suspect that these questions have no answer...
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Gay Marriage!
Everyone's favorite topic! I saw something interesting on the topic and thought it was interesting - so I'm writing about it. I can't remember if it was a priest or pastor, but I saw an interview of this guy discussing gay marriage and Christianity.
My own view is that there is nothing about homosexuality that is incompatible with Christianity. You hear a lot of fundamentalists who say at best that it's a sin and at worst 'God hates fags' but actually there is only one line in the Hebrew scriptures that specifically talks about homosexuality as a sin - which is (if I remember correctly) the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. Other passages are pretty vague and I don't believe Jesus said anything on the subject. But even if you look at that one passage it also says something to the effect of: you should give your daughters to guests! But you don't see many Christians advocating that. People like to pick and choose the parts of the scriptures they agree with.
But actually this has nothing really to do with what I wanted to talk about (or rather what the interviewee was talking about). He felt that marriage should be handled by the state and not the church. The state should not be able to tell a church how to handle marriages - and religion should have no say in what constitutes a valid marriage. This would protect both freedom to marry who you want and the beliefs of certain churches. Although I may not agree with them, a religion does have the right to declare whatever they want as a sin.
Japan has a good system actually (although only members of the opposite sex). To get married all you need to do is sign the marriage certificate with a witness present. Simple, and no religion involved.
My own view is that there is nothing about homosexuality that is incompatible with Christianity. You hear a lot of fundamentalists who say at best that it's a sin and at worst 'God hates fags' but actually there is only one line in the Hebrew scriptures that specifically talks about homosexuality as a sin - which is (if I remember correctly) the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. Other passages are pretty vague and I don't believe Jesus said anything on the subject. But even if you look at that one passage it also says something to the effect of: you should give your daughters to guests! But you don't see many Christians advocating that. People like to pick and choose the parts of the scriptures they agree with.
But actually this has nothing really to do with what I wanted to talk about (or rather what the interviewee was talking about). He felt that marriage should be handled by the state and not the church. The state should not be able to tell a church how to handle marriages - and religion should have no say in what constitutes a valid marriage. This would protect both freedom to marry who you want and the beliefs of certain churches. Although I may not agree with them, a religion does have the right to declare whatever they want as a sin.
Japan has a good system actually (although only members of the opposite sex). To get married all you need to do is sign the marriage certificate with a witness present. Simple, and no religion involved.
Monday, October 5, 2009
Richard Dawkins is an Idiot
Well I guess my promise of writing on this thing at least once a month didn't work out... I just got back from the US and heard the most amazingly idiotic thing I have ever heard.
Summer Camp for Atheists.
WTF
And its backed by none other than Richard Dawkins - you know that guy who thinks he can prove that God doesn't exist.
The funniest thing is that the camp and Dawkins for that matter are very religious about their atheism. They are proselytizing. Trying to raise religious atheists.
Basically the camp tries to show kids the "error" of religious thinking by teaching them how to think rationally. Now I have no problem with a non-religious camp or a religious camp and would send my kid to either one if I thought 1) it was a fun camp and 2) it didn't disrespect others' beliefs. This camp sounds like fails on both counts. A camp that teaches that miracles and magic do not exist and that everyone else that doesn't think like us are wrong.
Which brings me to my next point. Atheists are bigots.
Anyone who knows me knows that I am religious but I have no problem with the agnostic. In fact most if not all religious people are agnostic to some extent. Most of us doubt or have doubted at one time or another. The agnostic says "maybe there is a God, who knows?" while the atheist says " there is no God. You're wrong." By saying that you've just ruled out all other possibilities. Now if you are religious I guess there are two ways to go, you can be open and except the possibility that you don't know everything and that other belief systems maybe right, or you can be a zealot and say "Only my religious is right. Go to Hell." hmmm... sound familiar? It's not very different from the atheists' claim is it?
If anything is irrational it is not the religious claim but the belief that there is only one truth, one possibility. Okay now an atheist might say, "I am open, just prove it to me with empirical evidence that there is a God and I will believe." No you're not because you are basing all truth on empirical evidence. If you take science to be the only means to truth than that is not being very open. You're just being a zealot, a scientific or "rational" one rather than religious one.
You can't, nor should you try although unfortunately some Christians and atheists do, prove the existence of God. God says so Himself. The scientific and religious criteria for truth are different. Of course they are not completely opposite - you need to have a kind of faith to practice science and faith is not totally blind but based in part on reason. In science you base truth on empirical and rational evidence, while in religion you base it on faith. Faith is not belief in the sense that I believe that the sun will come up tomorrow, it is trust in something beyond yourself. And if there can be any proof it is in the life of the believers.
Anyway don't send your kids to the camp.
Summer Camp for Atheists.
WTF
And its backed by none other than Richard Dawkins - you know that guy who thinks he can prove that God doesn't exist.
The funniest thing is that the camp and Dawkins for that matter are very religious about their atheism. They are proselytizing. Trying to raise religious atheists.
Basically the camp tries to show kids the "error" of religious thinking by teaching them how to think rationally. Now I have no problem with a non-religious camp or a religious camp and would send my kid to either one if I thought 1) it was a fun camp and 2) it didn't disrespect others' beliefs. This camp sounds like fails on both counts. A camp that teaches that miracles and magic do not exist and that everyone else that doesn't think like us are wrong.
Which brings me to my next point. Atheists are bigots.
Anyone who knows me knows that I am religious but I have no problem with the agnostic. In fact most if not all religious people are agnostic to some extent. Most of us doubt or have doubted at one time or another. The agnostic says "maybe there is a God, who knows?" while the atheist says " there is no God. You're wrong." By saying that you've just ruled out all other possibilities. Now if you are religious I guess there are two ways to go, you can be open and except the possibility that you don't know everything and that other belief systems maybe right, or you can be a zealot and say "Only my religious is right. Go to Hell." hmmm... sound familiar? It's not very different from the atheists' claim is it?
If anything is irrational it is not the religious claim but the belief that there is only one truth, one possibility. Okay now an atheist might say, "I am open, just prove it to me with empirical evidence that there is a God and I will believe." No you're not because you are basing all truth on empirical evidence. If you take science to be the only means to truth than that is not being very open. You're just being a zealot, a scientific or "rational" one rather than religious one.
You can't, nor should you try although unfortunately some Christians and atheists do, prove the existence of God. God says so Himself. The scientific and religious criteria for truth are different. Of course they are not completely opposite - you need to have a kind of faith to practice science and faith is not totally blind but based in part on reason. In science you base truth on empirical and rational evidence, while in religion you base it on faith. Faith is not belief in the sense that I believe that the sun will come up tomorrow, it is trust in something beyond yourself. And if there can be any proof it is in the life of the believers.
Anyway don't send your kids to the camp.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Torihada Minoru
Thought I'd write a bit about some comedians I like over here. Actually I'm not sure if comedian is the right way to describe this guy though...
I'm not sure how to classify him. I want to say 'comedian' but I don't think anyone is sure when he is serious and when he is joking. His main 'act' is a parody of Japanese ultra-rightwingers (called 'Uyoku' here). Uyoko drive around in this big black buses blaring the national anthem and shouting things like "Loyalty to the Empire" and other fun stuff. So Torihada drives around in a small van yelling things that make little sense... He has even been known to stand out in Tokyo and Osaka with a loud speaker giving 'campaign speeches.' But the funniest thing is that despite all his nonsense and outrageous monologues, people on the right and left actually take him seriously. Torihada means 'goose bumps' by the way.
He has also appeared in a few movies, namely: Space Police (his latest, haven't seen it yet), Tanaka Hiroshi no Subete, Bikyaku Meiro, and his greatest Getting Wild with Our Monkey, in which he plays a flaming gay recluse.
Mike Rogers has a great page about him too.
His suit is covered in kanji, which is also a parody of the 'Uyoku' here who often wear clothes with political statements or things like 'the soul of Yamato,' roughly equivalent to a guy wearing a 'Don't Tread on Me' T-shirt in the U.S. Torihada's sleave lists the days of the week...
Here's a sample of a campaign speech I translated into English:
This morning I awoke to find four oranges beside my pillow.
Hmmm... It's summer already I thought, and when I finished eating all four of them,
I jumped out of my futon.
42 years old, mod raptor,*
and self-styled bird trainer.
I am a member of the Communist Party of Japan and I like fruit.
I work from 8:00 in the morning to 8:00 in the evening at the bread factory,
and during my break I hold Amway meetings to recruit new members.
Once a month on my day-off, I beat the crap out of Sokagakkai members.
President of the Japanese Boomerang Association,
Torihada Minoru, 42.
I reside in a public housing development.
I can't keep up with the assembly line at work and am a Kuroyume* fan.
Walking around in Waikiki suits me,
and I only use Rappa no Mark*
Yamazaki Bread, American Football captain,
This is Torihada minoru, 42.
I've been taking Dolphin therapy for five years now,
was born premature and raised in a capsule.
I am also on welfare.
I have nothing really to say,
a politician without a message.
But I'm good at introducing myself and
am trying to improve my reputation.
I'm endorsed by the top breeders.
Torihada minoru, 42,
night-blind quarterback.
The artist I respect the most is Daisaku Ikeda.
My favorite actresses are Keiko Matsuzaka and Kayo Matsuo
My favorite saying is "Nothing but a drop in the bucket."
When I jump on my trampoline, I get dizzy.
At the Yamazaki Bread Factory, I am chief of the sandwich section,
in charge of the pickles.
Ah, making sandwiches is harder then it looks doesn't it!
Dammit I said TWO cucumbers!
Do that bread with jam over again!
There is no bread that I can't handle!
Listen, this is my career buddy.
I ain't no part-timer!
You little brats... you think you're so smart don't you?
It is now time for me to return to work.
*Raptor- I think this refers to the Hawks, which conservative politicians are sometimes referred to (?)
*Kuroyume- Japanese punk band
*Rappa no Mark- stommache medicine
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
The Resurrection
Yes another chop-full-of-fun-topic: the Resurrection.
(For those of you who don't know, that's Resurrection of of Christ.)
I read this book recently about the the subject so I thought I'd write some thoughts I had on the subject. The book was a debate between two ministers (well one is an ex-minister. Guess which one!) One took the conventional position that to claim to be Christian you are required to believe that Christ rose from the dead in the flesh three days after his Crucifiction. The other says that it doesn't matter.
When I first started reading it was - of course it matters! That's THE central teaching of Christianity! But as I read on my view changed. I find myself agreeing now with the second man.
(Most) Christians I think realize that His Resurrection cannot be proved. The idea is that it requires faith. In other words if I have faith that God is all-powerful, and if He truly is all-powerful, than something like the Resurrection is not so unreasonable. Which is fine I guess, but this opens up a bigger issue: what is faith?
I think many people tend to see faith as just a stubborn belief of something regardless of empirical facts. If this is all faith is than whats the difference between believing in aliens and believing in God. Well, I guess some would argue that there isn't, but I think there is a big difference. Faith is not just about believing that something happened or not. Its not about probability. Its about how you live your life. Its about trust and gratitude.
Is whether the Resurrection, or His miracles for that matter, REALLY happened even important? Before we ask that question we need to ask why did it even happen? What does it mean?
If I just believed that the even happened and do not take what it means to heart, I wouldn't be a very good Christian. That's the difference between religion and aliens. Believing in aliens (I do believe in them by the way...) stops at believing that they exist. It doesn't alter the way I live my life. I don't place trust or hope in them, I don't thank them for my own existence, and the can't save my soul.
Believing in God means that I place complete trust in Him and that He is the Lord of all creation. So... in that sense it IS completely reasonable that He became human and rose from the dead. But so what? He could have come down as a three-legged dwarf and commanded everyone eat their hair. But He didn't. What He did means something.
Personally I do believe it happened. Why not? But I no longer think its important. The stories of the Bible there to show us a world that you can't just express as facts and statements. The Resurrection story expresses many things: God's unconditional love for us, the union of body and soul, and leaving behind our old life to live a new life with God.
The Bible says a lot of things. Do I believe all of them REALLY happened? No. Do I believe that the human race started with Adam and Eve? No. But I also don't believe its just an enjoyable story. It tells us something important about ourselves - that we are by nature weak, and something about God - that He created the world and we owe Him thanks.
(For those of you who don't know, that's Resurrection of of Christ.)
I read this book recently about the the subject so I thought I'd write some thoughts I had on the subject. The book was a debate between two ministers (well one is an ex-minister. Guess which one!) One took the conventional position that to claim to be Christian you are required to believe that Christ rose from the dead in the flesh three days after his Crucifiction. The other says that it doesn't matter.
When I first started reading it was - of course it matters! That's THE central teaching of Christianity! But as I read on my view changed. I find myself agreeing now with the second man.
(Most) Christians I think realize that His Resurrection cannot be proved. The idea is that it requires faith. In other words if I have faith that God is all-powerful, and if He truly is all-powerful, than something like the Resurrection is not so unreasonable. Which is fine I guess, but this opens up a bigger issue: what is faith?
I think many people tend to see faith as just a stubborn belief of something regardless of empirical facts. If this is all faith is than whats the difference between believing in aliens and believing in God. Well, I guess some would argue that there isn't, but I think there is a big difference. Faith is not just about believing that something happened or not. Its not about probability. Its about how you live your life. Its about trust and gratitude.
Is whether the Resurrection, or His miracles for that matter, REALLY happened even important? Before we ask that question we need to ask why did it even happen? What does it mean?
If I just believed that the even happened and do not take what it means to heart, I wouldn't be a very good Christian. That's the difference between religion and aliens. Believing in aliens (I do believe in them by the way...) stops at believing that they exist. It doesn't alter the way I live my life. I don't place trust or hope in them, I don't thank them for my own existence, and the can't save my soul.
Believing in God means that I place complete trust in Him and that He is the Lord of all creation. So... in that sense it IS completely reasonable that He became human and rose from the dead. But so what? He could have come down as a three-legged dwarf and commanded everyone eat their hair. But He didn't. What He did means something.
Personally I do believe it happened. Why not? But I no longer think its important. The stories of the Bible there to show us a world that you can't just express as facts and statements. The Resurrection story expresses many things: God's unconditional love for us, the union of body and soul, and leaving behind our old life to live a new life with God.
The Bible says a lot of things. Do I believe all of them REALLY happened? No. Do I believe that the human race started with Adam and Eve? No. But I also don't believe its just an enjoyable story. It tells us something important about ourselves - that we are by nature weak, and something about God - that He created the world and we owe Him thanks.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
The Zen of Towels
Just as I promised, I'm going to talk about towels today.
If there is one thing I'v learned about Japanese culture in the 8 year I've been here is that Japanese people really like towels. Especially old people. It came to my attention after our son was born. Just like in the US, a lot of people gave us gifts. But here there's a catch... You have to give something back, generally something around half the cost of the gift they gave you.
So anyway, after we got the first batch of presents my wife says,
" We have to get them towels!"
"Why towels?" I ask.
"You gotta give them towels! My god man its a TOWEL for Christ's sake! Old people love towels! "
Something like that anyway. And apparently they do. Its not just that reverse baby gift either. About twice a year companies send each other and their customers towels. Towels are exchanged in new years and again in the summer, and well basically every time someone gives you something.
But with all these towels being exchanged, what do people do with them? Are they just being recycled? Its a mystery even in our house. Towels we get I never see again, and new towels seem to appear from nowhere.
And somewhat unrelated, I can never seem to use the towels we have correctly. Every time I try to use a towel, I'm told its the wrong one.
(something is spilled) "Thats the hand-washing-towel!"
or "That's the hand-drying-towel!"
or "You can't use that its the chair-which-has-been-dowsed-in- honey towel!"
or "That's the evil-clown-towel!"
And so forth.
If there is one thing I'v learned about Japanese culture in the 8 year I've been here is that Japanese people really like towels. Especially old people. It came to my attention after our son was born. Just like in the US, a lot of people gave us gifts. But here there's a catch... You have to give something back, generally something around half the cost of the gift they gave you.
So anyway, after we got the first batch of presents my wife says,
" We have to get them towels!"
"Why towels?" I ask.
"You gotta give them towels! My god man its a TOWEL for Christ's sake! Old people love towels! "
Something like that anyway. And apparently they do. Its not just that reverse baby gift either. About twice a year companies send each other and their customers towels. Towels are exchanged in new years and again in the summer, and well basically every time someone gives you something.
But with all these towels being exchanged, what do people do with them? Are they just being recycled? Its a mystery even in our house. Towels we get I never see again, and new towels seem to appear from nowhere.
And somewhat unrelated, I can never seem to use the towels we have correctly. Every time I try to use a towel, I'm told its the wrong one.
(something is spilled) "Thats the hand-washing-towel!"
or "That's the hand-drying-towel!"
or "You can't use that its the chair-which-has-been-dowsed-in- honey towel!"
or "That's the evil-clown-towel!"
And so forth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)