Priorities
Did you hear about one of the newest Reality shows on TV? Pet Plastic Surgery. This series, originating in Great Britain, features a family pet undergoing some form of plastic surgery.
In one episode a bunny gets a tummy tuck and in another a dog gets a face lift. (If it featured a bassett hound it would probably take two episodes.) Other procedures include liposuction and wrinkle removal but the most intriging to me is the testicular implant.
Apparently a dog without testicles is having a problem with low self esteem. Now my question is, "How do we know if a dog has low self-esteem?" Has Fido (or Phido) stopped attending family reunions? Is it acting like a cat--sleeping all day?
I think before a dog has testicular implants it should be required to undergo counseling. Maybe the problem isn't sexual dysfunction. Maybe the real problem is that he lives with people who think a dog can have low self esteem.
I will issue a disclaimer in the event I have offended the owner of a pet with low self esteem. I like pets. I grew up with rabbits, fish, dogs and now am the proud caretaker of two cats. If a pet has a medical problem I will take it to the vet, but cosmetic surgery?
What does it say about our society when we are willing to spend thousands of dollars to put a smile on a dog when a thousand children will die because they have no food.
Friday, July 21, 2006
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
The Da Vinci Code or Da Vinci Con
According to Dan Brown , author of The DaVinci Code, a great con has been perpetrated on the people of the world, notably Catholics. I agree a con has been perpetrated but I think Dan Brown is the con man.
Although he has written a piece of fiction he claims the documents he mentions are true. Also that the art work mentioned is authentic. So he is claiming truth is on his side. Therefore an examination of his historical fiction is in order. Who is conning who?
Has the Church been hiding documents that show Jesus was not God but just another man, a man who married and had a child? Have we been decieved by church leaders intent on promoting a new religion built on edited texts?
Is Dan Brown speaking through his character, Leigh Teabing, when he says everything we were taught about Jesus is wrong? If so, what can we see to the Leigh Teabings we meet?
First, my impression is that many people really hope Leigh Teabing is right. If everything we know about Jesus is wrong then the movement claiming him as its leader can be discredited. If Jesus was turned into God by his followers then Christianity is just another movement, another attempt to gain power, etc. And Christians can be dismissed as fools.
I think many people hope Leigh Teabing is right because Christians have not been the most gracious, loving people on the planet. Christians, in fact, have been mean spirited and judgmental--Damn them all. They are deluded and can be dismissed.
But what if, in spite of themselves, they are right? What if Jesus is God in the flesh, come to walk the earth with us. What if that is the claim Jesus himself made?
The fact of the matter is that since the beginning of the church (about 33AD) Jesus was presented as God. His deity was not approved by simple majority. The words of Jesus recorded in what are called the Canonical Gospels clearly announce his self perception as God.
Dan Brown writes that divinity was a concoction of the Council of Nicea in 325AD but there are manuscripts of the Gospels that date from 125AD and the record of the Gospels is clear. Jesus claimed to be God. In the Gospel of John (written by the Apostle who apparently missed the Last Supper) Jesus announces seven times I AM.... an expression not lost on the Jewish listeners who knew that I AM was a formula for God.
Was Jesus wrong? That is a another question. But if he was wrong can we continue to call him a great teacher and leader? What if he came to your house today and said he was God? Would you show him the door or follow him?
I for one believe Jesus was right and Dan Brown is wrong. And by the way, no where in the Bible is Mary Magadelene called a prostitute. That is another DaVinci Con.
According to Dan Brown , author of The DaVinci Code, a great con has been perpetrated on the people of the world, notably Catholics. I agree a con has been perpetrated but I think Dan Brown is the con man.
Although he has written a piece of fiction he claims the documents he mentions are true. Also that the art work mentioned is authentic. So he is claiming truth is on his side. Therefore an examination of his historical fiction is in order. Who is conning who?
Has the Church been hiding documents that show Jesus was not God but just another man, a man who married and had a child? Have we been decieved by church leaders intent on promoting a new religion built on edited texts?
Is Dan Brown speaking through his character, Leigh Teabing, when he says everything we were taught about Jesus is wrong? If so, what can we see to the Leigh Teabings we meet?
First, my impression is that many people really hope Leigh Teabing is right. If everything we know about Jesus is wrong then the movement claiming him as its leader can be discredited. If Jesus was turned into God by his followers then Christianity is just another movement, another attempt to gain power, etc. And Christians can be dismissed as fools.
I think many people hope Leigh Teabing is right because Christians have not been the most gracious, loving people on the planet. Christians, in fact, have been mean spirited and judgmental--Damn them all. They are deluded and can be dismissed.
But what if, in spite of themselves, they are right? What if Jesus is God in the flesh, come to walk the earth with us. What if that is the claim Jesus himself made?
The fact of the matter is that since the beginning of the church (about 33AD) Jesus was presented as God. His deity was not approved by simple majority. The words of Jesus recorded in what are called the Canonical Gospels clearly announce his self perception as God.
Dan Brown writes that divinity was a concoction of the Council of Nicea in 325AD but there are manuscripts of the Gospels that date from 125AD and the record of the Gospels is clear. Jesus claimed to be God. In the Gospel of John (written by the Apostle who apparently missed the Last Supper) Jesus announces seven times I AM.... an expression not lost on the Jewish listeners who knew that I AM was a formula for God.
Was Jesus wrong? That is a another question. But if he was wrong can we continue to call him a great teacher and leader? What if he came to your house today and said he was God? Would you show him the door or follow him?
I for one believe Jesus was right and Dan Brown is wrong. And by the way, no where in the Bible is Mary Magadelene called a prostitute. That is another DaVinci Con.
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
Religion in Public Schools?
The evolution/ID controversy is still in the news. The last two issues of Science and Theology News have featured the story with updates. There is still some press coverage, although the accidental shooting by Dick Cheney has pushed many major stories to other pages. But I think most coverage is still wrong.
When the topic of Evolution vs. Intelligent Design comes up it is usually framed as "Science vs. Religion". That is wrong on two counts. First, ID is only religious if God didn't create the world. Promoting something that isn't true is the stock in trade of many religions. However, if God created the world then that is not a religious issue it is the foundation for true science.
Secondly, based on the comments of several proponents of evolution I wonder who is really teaching religion in public schools.
Richard Dawkins in The Blind Watchmaker says, "Even if there were no actual evidence in favor of the Darwinian theory...we should still be justified in preferring it over rival theories.''
A telling admission I think but this underlies the comments Michael Ruse made in a presentaion to American Association for the Advancement of Science. He admitted that there are certain metaphysical assumptions in his way of doing science. He continued by adding that evolution has functioned as a kind of religion. (His entire presentation can be found online.)
An article written after this presentation was called "Did Michael Ruse give away the store?"
These comments, and others, suggest that religion is already being taught in public schools. It is scary to think that if there were definitive proof of God creating the world--say a photo, video or several eyewitness accounts--this story would never make it to a science class.
vieuxloup
The evolution/ID controversy is still in the news. The last two issues of Science and Theology News have featured the story with updates. There is still some press coverage, although the accidental shooting by Dick Cheney has pushed many major stories to other pages. But I think most coverage is still wrong.
When the topic of Evolution vs. Intelligent Design comes up it is usually framed as "Science vs. Religion". That is wrong on two counts. First, ID is only religious if God didn't create the world. Promoting something that isn't true is the stock in trade of many religions. However, if God created the world then that is not a religious issue it is the foundation for true science.
Secondly, based on the comments of several proponents of evolution I wonder who is really teaching religion in public schools.
Richard Dawkins in The Blind Watchmaker says, "Even if there were no actual evidence in favor of the Darwinian theory...we should still be justified in preferring it over rival theories.''
A telling admission I think but this underlies the comments Michael Ruse made in a presentaion to American Association for the Advancement of Science. He admitted that there are certain metaphysical assumptions in his way of doing science. He continued by adding that evolution has functioned as a kind of religion. (His entire presentation can be found online.)
An article written after this presentation was called "Did Michael Ruse give away the store?"
These comments, and others, suggest that religion is already being taught in public schools. It is scary to think that if there were definitive proof of God creating the world--say a photo, video or several eyewitness accounts--this story would never make it to a science class.
vieuxloup
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)