Thanks for the love on the last blog post, and for those of you who read the post and gave no love – half thanks.
Some blogs coming soon to get anywhere from bemused to hella excited about:
- A trial run at “ecoblogging”
- Little Faith
- Summer Reading List
- My Soft Spot for Hitler
- How to Overcome Procrastination (pending)
While you wait, here are some things I’ve found to be very interesting as of late:
Now go enjoy your day. Go on. Git.
Filed under: Clearing the Air
Most of you, like me, at least caught bits and pieces of last night’s debate on ABC concerning the existence of Satan. Panelists included philosopher Deepak Chopra and Bishop Carlton Pearson debating Pastor Mark Driscoll and founder of Hookers for Jesus Annie Lobert. Chopra and Pearson defended the non-existence of Satan while Driscoll and Lobert based their arguments around his imperative existence in the midst of humanity.
From the instant anyone hears about this volatile topic, they have an opinion – a staunch one, at that. E-mails poured in to Nightline, Twitterville was in upheaval, and I can very safely assume that I am nowhere near the beginning of the list of bloggers to weigh in on this topic. Here, I’d like to list a few of my talking points and some interjections I felt while watching the debate.
Before that, though, I’d like to – briefly – broadcast my distaste for the way the panel operated. Granted, it was a debate over a hot-button issue, but at several times one or all panelists ceased debated and reverted to grade-school bickering. Unsurprisingly, Driscoll made several (although witty) personal remarks about both Chopra and Pearson, attacking their personal and religious backgrounds, neither of which were on the topic of the debate. Chopra was equally hostile to Driscoll and Lobert, the only difference lying a more well-defined argument. Pearson, to me, seemed to be the most collected, open, and logical member of the panel, possibly due to the fact of his once die-hard reliance on the devil’s existence that he has since abandoned.
Okay, now some questions and statements I have as the self-nominated fifth panelist:
- Is it possible to call yourself a Christian and not believe in Satan? Absolutely. I happen to be proof. Or, at least, I don’t hold to the opinion that Satan as an entity exists. The Bible is many things, one of those is a work of literature. In literature, authors use literary devices to illustrate a point. Jesus spoke in parables and much of the Old Testament is comprised of stories told mostly in the oral tradition and written down generations later. The latter example is what some refer to as folklore. Considering this concept, I come to the conclusion that Satan (as referred to in the Bible) could quite possibly be one such literary device used by authors and storytellers for centuries to personify humanity’s choice against God. If Satan does exists as an entity, I argue that we created him, not God. Which leads into the next question:
- Did God create Satan? and, If so, why?
Bishop Pearson brought up a very good point early on in the debate: He said that if God is good, and everything he creates is good, how could he have created Satan? If one is to believe in Satan and that he is the enemy of God and the embodiment of evil, then one cannot simultaneously agree that God himself created such a thing. For several reasons: 1) Why would God, who is ultimately concerned with showing us love and offering us salvation, create a being to directly oppose his own efforts especially after we cursed ourselves with separation from him in the garden? 2) If Satan is literally a fallen angel, why would God not only take his power away upon his attempted mutiny, but allow him to have more power after defecting, thus posing an actual threat to God’s ultimate power and position in the universe? 3) If God did, in fact, create Satan and he did so for Satan to be in direct opposition to him, Satan would only be fulfilling his God-given purpose, thus glorifying God by his loyalty and service, making him “good.”
- Do God and Satan define each other? No, I don’t believe so. God is partially defined by many things and, in many ways, utterly undefinable. He is love, safety, infinite, engaging, frustrating, curious, jealous, the list goes on. But one thing that has to stand alone here in this argument is that God is not defined by the evil he isn’t. However, it seems that Satan – to our knowledge – is defined by how not God he is and nothing else.
- To believe in God, do you have to believe in Satan? This question is eerily similar in phrasing to my first, but it is entirely different. It is in response to a question an audience member asked the panel near the end of the debate. To paraphrase even more, he basically asked “Do you have to believe in both God and Satan or neither, or are they mutually exlusive?” And I have to respond with: Again, I don’t believe so. I guess it would depend on your level of arrogance, to be curt. What I mean by that is that the debate here is not whether or not evil exists, it’s over the existence of Satan. And I think that what makes this issue so contentious is that we can all unanimously agree that evil does exist, but if it doesn’t come from Satan, where can it come from? Those outside the Christian faith have no problem admitting that it comes from God, which is a viable option once you throw Satan out of the picture, but what about those of us inside the Christian faith who believe that no evil can come from God? The only other place evil would have to come from would be ourselves, humans. There seems to be such an aversion to accept the responsibilities and consequences of the choices that we make as humans. We thank God for blessing us and curse Satan for our tribulations. Why, then, do we preach accountability? If Satan causes evil, then why do we feel guilt? Apparently he’s powerful, right? The master deceiver? Why, then are we so disappointed when we’re “deceived” by him into doing evil? If you believe in Satan, shouldn’t the blame go straight from God to Satan? If all we ever were was tempted and deceived by a master deceiver, what do we repent from in order to receive salvation? Gullibility?
Those are a few of my interjections, and now I open up the blogging floor to you. Feel free to continue this discussion.
Filed under: Culture, Theology
There’s a lot on my mind lately. A lot in my life is going on, and not going on, and in both of those truths I’m losing things, people, feelings, and gumption. A couple months back, a friend of my poetically described life as “a collection of seasons,” to which I so wittily replied: “yep, it’s hurricane season.”
There are some ideas I’d like to run by you guys. Or guy. Or girl. Or the vast emptiness that is my lack of readership due to my own sporatic posting habits.
These ideas are listed here:
- I’m thinking of opening up my blogging format. Normally I just wait until I’ve written a little piece then post it out of left field for others to read and (hopefully, but not usually) comment on. The opening up of the blog format will make room for new categories of posts including personal, theological, philosophical, political, media, and whatever else I feel would be interesting. I will still post bits of my writing whenever they come, but for the sake of the reader, I’d like to make a visit to my blog a little more rewarding than that. I think the avenue for feedback would be far wider and much easier to navigate, should you so choose to.
- For anyone who’s noticed, I slapped the subtitle “A Conversation in Storytelling” as a subtitle to my blog because I didn’t much care for the cookie-cutter “…just another WordPress.com weblog” tag. But there’s truth here, even in the subtitles. I want this to be an area of conversation, where people can be open to state their opinions on things and be free to express their honest feelings on anything, even in disagreement with me. As a promising conflict theorist and fencepost postmodern, naturally I love this idea.
Those two are mostly all I have to share at the moment. If you are in favor of the more open blog format, then you’ll be bombarded with many more “Clearing the Air” posts and much more exposure to who I really am as a person, not just an aspiring writer. In order for me to determine a course of action, though, I need your feedback. Let me know how you feel. You can do that by leaving me a comment, sending me and e-mail, @reply to me on twitter, or by some other means that I can’t really think of at the moment. I look forward to hearing from you in the next few days and am excited to hear your feedback.
Filed under: Clearing the Air
SocialVibe