Beloved_Spear's Xanga

All Future Posts Will Be Here

Sat, 14 Mar 2009 17:25:45 GMT

WWW.BELOVEDSPEAR.ORG

CATCH THE FEED AT BLOGGER.

Yeah, Yeah, I Should Help the Downtrodden, But What's In It For Me?

Fri, 13 Mar 2009 18:46:21 GMT

Read it here.

The Inviolability of Israel

Thu, 12 Mar 2009 19:20:28 GMT

Read it here.

In Washington, Even the Telemarketing Is Different

Wed, 11 Mar 2009 12:35:26 GMT

READ THE POST HERE

----------------

After having noodled around on xanga for just a tick over four years, I think I'm a-ready to be blogging somewhere else. Yeah, I know. In an effort to survive, xanga has all these nifty newfangled social subsections microtargeting it's primary readership/writership. I could, I suppose, have drifted over to revelife with my other co-Jesus-ists. I'm not well positioned for datingish, given that polyamory just ain't my thing. And...what's their new one...travelicious? Travelumptious? I barely ever leave the house.

As a platform for blogging, well, it's kinda meh. I mean, gracious....no "save a draft" function? No easily plugged in widgets or doohickeys? And...eprops? Eprops???

Ultimately, I think what I'm just done with xanga is that it's replicated the AOL business model for blogs. It's a vast, immense, dynamic multiplatform blogosphere out there. There are brilliant folks blogging on Wordpress and blogger and elsewhere....and xanga just doesn't provide an equivalent interface. It comes across as insular. Or, at least, I perceive it that way.

On the other hand, it is a blog. It's a log. On the web. You write stuff on it. That's simple. I suppose I could just stick around. But I follow folks via feed now. Xanga is...superfluous. So I'm going to gradually migrate away to my blogger site. It can be accessed at belovedspear.org, too.

Relational Ethics

Tue, 10 Mar 2009 16:16:19 GMT

Post is here today.

Every Church An Island

Sat, 07 Mar 2009 14:29:49 GMT

Several times in the past week or so, I've come across a similar thread of theological thought as I've wandered through the web presences of other congregations. I found it yesterday on a local Church of Christ site. I found it in my recent deep reading of the theological underpinnings of the Jeezilla Bible Church that rains atomic breath on the tiny fleeing congregations in my area.

That thread is one of the primary underpinnings of the nondenominational movement. It asserts that individual churches...that's the local organization of a church...has the complete right to make any decisions about it's spiritual life that it sees fit. No outside forces have any right to assert control over a local congregation.

The individual church, in essence, exists as an utterly distinct entity, as separate from other churches as you and I are separate from one another. Any unity comes from the Holy Spirit, but the final authority rests in the leadership of the church you're in. As a significant proportion of nondenominational churches are also deeply conservative and thus "Bible-based," there's got to be some scriptural warrant for this approach. And there are plenty of scriptures used to justify this approach. To quote from the exhaustive teachings of Jeezilla Bible Church:

We teach the autonomy of the local church, free from any external authority or control, with the right of self-government and freedom from the interference of any hierarchy of individuals or organizations. We teach that it is scriptural for true churchesto cooperate with each other for the presentation and propagation of the faith. However, each local church through its elders and their interpretation and application of Scripture is the sole judge of the measure and method of its cooperation as on all matters of membership, policy, discipline, benevolence, and government (Acts 15:19-31, 20:28; I Corinthians 5:4-7, 13; Titus 1:5; I Peter 5:1-4).

There is, if you've read these passages (which I have) and understand their context (which I do) an almost unbelievably rich irony in their being used for this purpose. Take, for instance, the passage from Acts 15. What's happening here? A Council of the church...meaning the whole church, not just one individual church...is giving instruction to individual congregations. If you bother reading it in context, you'll notice that it makes the completely opposite point. As a reference, it's a swing and a miss. Strike One.

Let's take a look at 1 Corinthians 5. In it, the Apostle Paul is challenging the Corinthian church for it's inclusion of a guy who's sleeping with his father's wife. They don't have a problem with it. The Corinthians were seriously into both leather and hanky panky. Don't you click on that link. Don't do it. But Paul..who is not a part of the local leadership at Corinth...is telling them, you know, dudes, that's way uncool. As an argument for the autonomy or local congregations, it's another whiff. Strike Two.

How about Titus? Well, we get just one prooftext verse in Titus, but what's happening in that one verse? "Paul" (we will, for the sake of time, not talk about the issues of authorship) tells Titus that he's left him in Crete for the sole purpose of selecting elders to lead the local church. So this guy from outside the local church is guiding the process of picking local leadership. Why? Well, because the locals are, in the words of the author of this letter, "..detestable, disobedient and unfit for doing anything good." (v. 16) You could not find a worse argument for local autonomy if you tried. Strike Three.

But heck, this ain't baseball. How about 1 Peter? This one's a little better. "Peter" is delivering instructions to a group of congregations. This passage introduces one of the Petrine Epistle's key terms...which is rendered "overseer" in many bibles. That term is, in the Greek, the word episkopos, which gives us the term bishop. Yes, da Bishop. But it does talk about the equality of the office of elder with that of bishop, and seems to be alluding to them being more or less the same thing. Not quite a complete fail, but given it's clear indication of the interconnectedness of the church, it's not a solid foundation on which to build an argument for complete local autonomy. Shallow Foul to Left Field.

In fact, best I can tell, there is no meaningful foundation for nondenominationalism in scripture. This is, I'm sure, something of a bummer. It doesn't work real good with our cultural desire to create an Ayn Rand Bible Church, and plays well to the sense of radical isolation from one another that defines our consumer society.

That doesn't mean that the local church isn't important. In fact, I think the relationships and bonds we form in our local contexts are where the rubber meets the road in the life of the church. But if we radicalize that ethic, we're not really being true to what both tradition and scripture teach.

Rush Limbaugh and the Conservative Pretenders

Fri, 06 Mar 2009 14:53:49 GMT

With Herculean effort, I managed to force myself to watch large portions of Rush Limbaugh's recent speech to the CPAC. It was impressive. I cannot, for a moment, doubt the man's ability to entertain. The gravitic pull of his ego is such that no light escapes, and he knows it. He's happy to poke fun at himself, because if he is, he's talking about himself...and that's what counts.

What whumped me hard about the beginning of his monologue...all hour and a half of it...was the bizarre song they played when he came on stage. It was "Back to Ohio" by the Pretenders. The Pretenders? I'm fairly sure that Chrissie Hynde is not one of the icons of free-market conservatism. You introduce yourself with an anti-corporate/anti-growth screed by an Obama-supporting leftist vegan? A song that mocks a weak government that doesn't have the integrity to resist endless, pointless growth?

Only the mightiest and most robust of egos can pull that one off.

Then, it was on to the speech, which was booyah Red State red meat at it's finest. What got to me about it was just how radically self-oriented it was. This was not just because of El Rushbo's epic ego. It was because of the way that he articulated the core tenets of conservatism...which are, apparently, summed up by the mantra "It's all about me." There's more to conservatism than that, but this was a festival of self-esteem and self-promotion, not a time for reflection.

Any common good or common purpose outside of insuring that government doesn't get in the way of our completely unfettered individualism was nowhere to be found. Any sense of the necessary balance between the poles of anarchic market forces and the oppression that comes from stifling state control was missing. Expecting balance from a self-admitted firebrand is silly, of course. That's not what gets the ratings.

Limbaugh went on to celebrate the joys of competitive capitalism. Competition is generally a good thing. It contributes mightily to technological progress and dynamism in the culture. But...and this is a significant caveat...it only works in times of resource abundance. In times of resource scarcity, competitive forces become revealed as more obviously Darwinian. The "weak" are weeded out. The "strong" are rewarded, taking what they need from those who aren't able to compete. In times of crisis, the choice is to band together and survive, or to continue to struggle for dominance over one another...and fail.

Unless it can moderate it's free-market Darwinist rhetoric, I'm not sure that American conservatism will be able to survive as a movement...particularly in times like these. Lib'ral though I most certainly am, I'll feel that loss. There are too many thoughtful voices on the right that raise legitimate concerns about individual liberty.

The Sixteen Types of People You'll Find in Hell

Wed, 04 Mar 2009 20:54:22 GMT

I've always been fond of the Myers-Briggs personality test. It's got some nice depth to it, and while it isn't a perfect instrument, it does beat astrological signs when you're trying to come to understand a person and their motivations. That's primarily because it's...well...real. It interweaves the way we approach the world with our processes of decisionmaking in a way that I find really quite elegant.

But as I've used and taken the test over the years, I've been struck by something. The personality descriptions for each of the 16 different types in the Myers Briggs test are all described as basically..well...functional. Being the Calvinist that I am, I'm bothered by this. Aren't we all...fallen? Irredeemable sinners worthy of the fires of heck, no matter what our personality type?

In an interesting coincidence, I learned from my recent readings in the field of demonology that Satan actually uses the Myers Briggs to sort sinners into the different planes of Hell. Take the test yourself by following this link, then check below for your Hell Personality Type:

HELL TYPES
---------------------------

ISTJ

Hopelessly stern while simultaneously uncommunicative. Obsessed with order, rules, and obedience. Can tune others out completely. Prone to quietly supporting fundamentalism, fascism, or other oppressive systems. Finds current implementation of death penalty too "namby pamby." As relentless as an automaton, grinding over the skulls of those who oppose them. Will not hear their cries. Too busy moving towards the goal.

ISTP

Likes doing dangerous things, or whatever makes them feel good in the moment…like, say, meth, but only if heroin and cheap wine are unavailable. Likes the adrenaline rush they get bungee jumping naked from their hang-glider. Thinks mostly with their lizard brain. Uses higher brain function mostly to pick locks and/or hack your computer to get at your credit card information. Will have no qualms popping a cap into you when the need or whim arises.

ISFJ

A hopeless patsy. Does whatever you tell them. Usually puts the needs of others above their own needs, which makes them prone to working themselves to death just because the boss needs that memo really badly. Terrified of the unknown or the different or the stranger. Keeps their surroundings obsessively tidy. Worries endlessly about what others think, to the point of madness. Makes an excellent house slave.

ISFP

A quivering mass of terror. Drops into a fetal ball whenever there’s even the slightest whiff that someone might not like them. Can be like a sad little puppy who follows other people around. Hypersensitive, and prone to mooning over mediocre watercolors or self-indulgently abstract sculpture. Useless in a crisis, as is completely unable to come to a decision and stick with it. Artsy, but in an annoyingly scattered way. Completely unprepared for what tomorrow may bring.

INFJ

Live only for themselves and their own hopelessly convoluted “understanding” of the world. Will cling doggedly to lost causes and/or tilt against windmills with a single-mindedness that would embarrass Don Quixote. Subtle as a serpent and emotionally manipulative. Approaches the world using arcane standards that only they grasp and that they’re never quite able to articulate. Can appear “wise,” and knows how to work that misconception to their advantage. A relentless egoist, wrapped up so deeply in their own emo world that you may as well not exist at all.

INFP

Incompetent neer-do-well. Spends all their time thinking about important things to do and writing about important things to do, but never actually ever does anything. Imagines they’re important. Has vast array of ideals, all of which they fail to live up to or express in their day to day life. Prone to succumbing to cult leaders and/or following hopeless political causes, ie: Ron Paul/Ralph Nader. Appears to be easygoing, but will surprise you with the suddenness with which they lash out when you question the basic insanity of their worldview.

INTJ

Quietly developing a robot army to conquer and dominate the world, a plan to which they’ve dedicated their entire lives. Finds the processes of eating and breathing to be irritating distractions. Does not tolerate lesser mortals, and would go mad if asked to contemplate the light playing across a dew-speckled leaf at sunrise. What does not kill them makes them stronger…than you. Will assume that dominance over you is their right, unless you are unusually skilled at martial arts or can beat them at chess. Would make an excellent Sith.

INTP

Lives utterly within the realm of obsessive, pointless study. Gloms on to the ethereal and dithering minutia, and couldn’t care less about practical realities. So wrapped up in their own little world that they may not have showered in several weeks. They don’t care. You do not exist for them. Either that, or you are too stupid to be anything other than an annoyance that should go away as soon as possible so that they can retreat back into the world that they’ve created for themselves. May as well be an inanimate object.

ESTP

Wants what they want, and they want it right now. Yesterday? They don’t remember it. Tomorrow? It doesn’t matter. Prone to maxing out their credit cards and/or getting venereal diseases. Thinks Adam Sandler movies are the height of cinema. Gossipy and trivial, they’ll take the money from any wallet they find on the street before returning it…assuming they don’t decide on the spur of the moment just to keep the thing. Ooh! It’s so pretty! Will try to sell you all kinds of pointless crap you don’t need.

ESTJ

Utterly conventional American suburbanite, whose moments of greatness came in high school. Tends towards jockliness and mindless physicality. Completely lacks imagination, to the point at which it’s not clear if they’re human or some kind of animatronic device that escaped from Disney World. Sees the world in simple terms, and if female tends to be the kind of relentless drudge who takes over most local organizations. If male, will happily give you a swirly/wedgie.

ESFP

Endlessly, distractingly chirrupy. Hopelessly hypersocial, the sort of person with 3,700 Facebook friends they don’t really know. Easily amused by fart jokes and unembarrassed by the crazy stupid things they do when drinking. Flit from thing to thing to thing without a care in the world. Aren’t good at math, and don’t read the news, unless InStyle and/or Maxim count as news. Volunteered once, but never stuck with it. Insists on being the center of attention, mostly through their highly loud and annoying laughing at unfunny things. May overtly worship Oprah.

ESFJ

Really, really wants everyone to like them. Unspeakably tedious to be around, as have no ideas of their own. Tend towards reflexive patriotism and the use of flag/doily/feng shui-based decorating. Faithful reader of PARADE magazine. Very emotionally needy, and may be prone to repeated bouts of cosmetic surgery or relationships with sociopathic people from whom they hopelessly struggle to get affirmation that will never come.

ENFP

Your “fun” uncle who never got around to growing up and makes your mom crazy. Tend toward medieval reenactment as a hobby/profession. Utterly unable to get motivated to do their taxes/pay their bills/raise their children. Remember the story about the busy ant and the grasshopper? This one is the grasshopper. Sings all day when the going is good in summer, but when the winter comes, it’s grasshopsicle time. Will end up living on your sofa.

ENFJ

Serious drama queen. No inner life, and thus immune to things like conventional psychoanalysis. Being alone with own thoughts terrifying. Utterly unable to get beyond their own paralyzing hyperemotional responses to a situation. Can be completely overbearing. You are unlikely to get in a word edgewise. High maintenance. So consumed by their terror at not meeting the perceived needs of others that at times it seems they don’t exist at all.

ENTP

That annoying guy on the high school debate team. Knows it all, and tells you so. Will never admit that you are right, not even for a second, even if they know you are. So busy deconstructing everyone and everything around them that they never actually finished high school, and may not ever finish a complete sentence. That doesn’t stop them from talking, though. Oh, how they love to talk.

ENTJ

Totally, utterly full of themselves. Take over every group they encounter. Tend to be management consultants. Great at convincing your boss that they know all the latest business paradigms, and are equally great at spouting off the most potent buzzwords. Will inevitably come to the conclusion that you are dead wood and aren’t adequately motivated and/or educated and/or competent. Will be sure you’re fired during the next round of downsizing.

Yeah, So I'm A Bit Socialist

Tue, 03 Mar 2009 17:28:08 GMT

Over the last year or so, the drumroll of economic woe hasn't just been an abstract thing in my teensy church. We've got folks whose families have had their homes foreclosed upon. Several have recently found themselves out of work. Some are working for family businesses that have had their revenue flows dry to a trickle. Things generally bite. Unless you live in imaginaryland, you know this to be true.

My sense of this mess is that we're still on the leading edge of it. There'll be some bump when the umpty-bazillion dollars we're borrowing from China hits the ground, but the prognosis is grim. We've been living above our means for a decade, and the time has come to pay the piper. Without question, times will be rough.

If they are, one thing our society is just going to have to come to terms with is the degree to which government does...or does not...represent and defend the interests and well being of the people in times like this. There is a significant portion of America that has come to believe that government is inherently the problem, and within that portion of our culture, the idea that anything good can ever come out of government is just not something that computes. Any hardships particular individuals are facing should be solved 1) by the marketplace; 2) by churches and charities; and 3) by families and networks of friends. For many, that approach is a dogmatic baseline.

As a nation that has an unusually short memory span, we've more or less forgotten that this approach don't work so good all the time.

The free market, which is driven by the ethic of self-interest, is what has gotten us into this mess in the first place. It was the ethic of corporate and consumer self-interest that stripped this country of it's industrial capacity and shipped it to places where you can get away with paying folks $10 a day. It was the ethic of self-interest that drove the cycles of leverage and debt that brought about our lil mess. Eventually, markets do correct. But they take their own sweet time about it, and they honestly couldn't care less about what happens to the human beings impacted by their cycles in the meantime.

Churches? Well, we're called do what we can. Back in the 1920s and 1930s, churches were on the front lines of providing care for those who suddenly found themselves with nothing. What we don't remember, though, is that churches and charities were completely overwhelmed during the Depression. Their giving dried up. Their own members were struggling. And though the desire to help was there, their resources and reach were simply too limited to deal with the scope of the problem. What did they do? They turned to the government, and demanded help.

Families? Again, we do what we can. We provide support. We take loved ones in to our homes. We send them what money we can. I mean, heck, we're family. But when your older brother loses his job and insurance, and is then diagnosed with a melanoma...how does your family manage that? The cost of care exceeds the cost of a home...not that you could sell that house in this market anyway. When entire systems collapse, families can only do so much.

At a certain point, significant systemic problems need to be dealt with by more than just individuals or small groupings of individuals. The mechanism by which that gets done is government.

Little Big Church

Sun, 01 Mar 2009 13:37:49 GMT

My boys are seriously deep into the PS3 game Little Big Planet. It's one of those games that I'm very comfortable having them spend some quality time with...because it is quality time.

What's so freakin' excellent about this game isn't that it's in High Def, or that it has a cute yet customizable main character. What makes the game so endlessly and infinitely schweet is that pretty much all of it's content is generated by users. The game designers designed tools first, and made sure that all of the tools they used to make the game were 1) intuitive and easy to learn and 2) available to everyone who plays the game.

That means that while the game has some general artistic and design parameters, the "levels" that you play aren't prepackaged by a team of paid designers. They're created by the community of individuals who actually play the game. The only purpose of the infrastructure of the game is to facilitate creativity, from which the game gets it's richness and depth. Having seen some of the amazing things that folks have done with a pretty basic design tool set, I can affirm that it works. It is a game that is constantly changing itself, and constantly growing. It's almost a living thing.

In this era of branding, doctrinal control, and corporate churches that carefully manage every aspect of their message, what strikes me is just how much richer the church would be if we took those basic tools we're all given and let people run with them.