Theology

Well, it appears that I have made myself the biggest liar in all of Kenna Hall. On my door whiteboard it is written that "Daniel 'D.Lo' Lower is doing theology for fun." Since writing that on the whiteboard on the front of my dorm-room door I have done no theology, or next to none. The closest I have gotten was grabbing Orthodoxy from my room and bringing it, along with my laptop, to the library. The second closest I have gotten was briefly helping a friend with the structure of his paper regarding Thich Nhat Hahn and the Dalai Lama on peace and reconciliation. (Those of you who've followed this blog for awhile might note that this is the exact same paper I had to write this summer. It's the same teacher, too.)

So now I'm sitting with Raphael who has to write the same paper that I wrote this summer. He's distracting himeslf with happier things--or things which are happier to him, at any rate--by helping Mike (there are two Mikes; one is leaving as I type this, the other is talking with Raphael about Calculus homework.) I on the other hand still have to do my Calculus homework later. And what a joy it will be doing two hours of Calculus. What a joy.

Heh. Just kidding.

I read a play yesterday for my English class. It's by this guy named Ibsen, and it's called The Doll House. And it ends in quite a depressing fashion, but as with many plays there's a bit of drama. Well, a lot. Drama tends to involve itself. In this one there's some commentary on marriage, some stuff that could be taken as vaguely involving commentary on poverty, and some stuff that, at least from the parts of the author's notes that were reprinted in my textbook, was meant to be a commentary on morality in general, and the differences between moralities in men and women.

So my friend's doing a thing on the teachings of Thich Nhat Hahn. In retrospect I think I might have been able to be a tad more intellectually honest than I was about how I feel regarding the views of Nhat Hahn and the Dalai Lama. I know I was plenty honest here, but on the paper I think I stretched my appreciation a bit. A bit means...well, more than I should have, probably.

So here I am. They're talking about how to find a formula for the nth derivative of the function f(x) = sqrt(x). I'm listening to Mistake Theory, currently. Very well-mixed stuff. Mistake Theory, as depressing as some of their lyrics are, can be quite calming and relaxing at times. I need to get some of my MP3s from their old MP3.com site the first time I go home, or something. I haven't heard the song "Introspection" in forever, and that's one of those songs that should be heard. Not one of their relaxing ones. Anyway, I think Mike's about ready to go to lunch. Raphael is going to lunch as well. So I guess I'm going with them, or something?

And still I haven't touched Orthodoxy. I think I did more theology earlier today.

Okay, I guess Mike's going to lunch, but Raph isn't just yet. So I'll hang around here, still having someone to hang around with. I actually did read almost a chapter of last night, way too late at night. I stopped because I was falling asleep on the floor of the Kenna Hall lounge. I didn't even read it in order. I started about four-five pages in and was working my way back from the start, after having finished. But I never completed the circle. Just as well, in the previous chapter there was something about how circles were true madness.

I've got the stinkin' book right here. Why not just find the quotation? Here it is; well, rather, it's two quotations with one of those ellipses in-between: "For the circle is perfect and infinite in its nature; but it is fixed forever in its size...[t]he circle returns upon itself and is bound...the circle of the moon is as clear and unmistakable...as the circle of Euclid on a blackboard. For the moon is utterly reasonable; and the moon is the mother of lunatics and has given to them all her name." Okay, so it's more like four, strung together. The connection between circles and madness is quite intriguing. Although I have heard that the definition of insanity is to do something over and over again, the same way, and expect a different result. In a sense, then, the definition of insanity is truly to move in a circle.

I don't think I'm quite doing theology here, but I am reflecting upon a book of it; rather upon a section of a book of it. One of the better sections, however. For the verbal and visual pleasure of readers, what's playing now is a remix of a song called Veteran by a band called the Kidney Thieves. Pleasant, isn't it?

Okay, now the song's about to end...

Okay. So now what's playing is a song which (although there are no vocals in this mix) is nearly half-complete vocally and which I am in a debate about...Regarding whether I should put it on as a second song on Mike's--the other Mike, the first one to leave--on Mike's radio show on Friday. Which by the way is on during the homecoming game, making it increasingly unlikely that anybody will actually hear it. In some ways that makes me feel more useless and in others it makes me feel more empowered--like massively fewer listeners means I don't need to worry so much what people will think of me as an artist. Not that I know anybody besides myself who has listened to both hours so far. It would be disturbingly comical to find that by going on the show I had taken away its entire audience.

Was this post really about theology? No. More about trip-hop and sitting in the library. More trip-hop on now. A demo the Megazeuxer Esdemo sent awhile back that might never get vocals on it, or might sometime. But if it does it will be awesome. The beat rocks beyond rockage, and defies being classified as "techno." Sitting in the library? Not so fun to do by yourself, but more fun if someone next to you is writing a paper, and you have blogging you can do.

I'm also going to be walking to Fred Meyer's today with the person I was going to do yoga with forever ago. Sometime after dark preferably, because it's cooler then. I'll probably end up picking up a few things, not the least of which will be hot pockets. Okay, enough music in Winamp. Time for some iTunes.

Another track Esdemo sent me from back when the band had more members and was called Crystal Summer. "Dreaming in Red"--I could probably send it if someone wanted me to.

Also, I know now when Boondock Saints is happening--this Friday. I need to find the guy who's going to loan it, and that's pretty much all I have to do. Well, that and figure out what sort of time I have. Showing time, that is. I should have plenty of time on Friday. And the fact that Boondock Saints is happening on Friday is a perfect sigue into some unanswered questions and comments.

First, on stuff people said about the post two posts back:

L-Po said: Aren't you a study in contrasts? Remember the yin-yang shoe years? What is the rating on "Boondock Saints"? And, TURN YOUR EARPHONES DOWN!!!!!

Boondock Saints is rated R as far as I can tell, and apparently has drawn some comparisons to Pulp Fiction. Yes, I remember the yin-yang shoe years. Okay, I'll turn them down.

llgp said: Here's one vote for posting the theology piece, one vote for starting your laundry at 10 p.m. next time, and one vote expressing support and appreciation for the fact that you're doing your laundry at all!

Theology peice posted. Hopefully I'll get my laundry done on a weekday next time. That should help my ability to start at a sane time.

nana said: i was anonymous because i forgot to put my name in. duh. talk about a study in contrasts. smart enough to type, dumb enough to not understand techonology.i also vote for the theology piece although i may not understand it. i just like what you write.you won't run nearly as much risk of ending up with pink underwear if you do as your dad says and do your laundry at 10 rather than 1.love you big guy,let's see if i can now get the technology right. ... p.s. i didn't mean to sound as though i was making judgments on doug's choice of religion. i believe in freedom to choose. i really do. i think it is great that you have a friend who in at least one area of your life is diametrically opposed. think of all the absolutely fabulous, wonderful, stupendous, gigantic, superlative, show of shows kind of discussions you can have. it is very cool.my best to doug. i bless your friendship.

The theology peice should be somewhat understandable at least for any given reader, and I wasn't worried about having my choice of friends judged based upon their choice of philosophy.

Now on to what was said regarding the next post, the actual posting of the essay:

L-Po said: So, why do you think you're staying in college when it's such a scary, stressful place? Are there any perks ... like the Commons always has a dinner plan?

I'm staying in college because if I don't, I'll drive -you- insane instead. Seriously, there are plenty of perks. The community is great and I am making new friends,

nana said: i think you have successfully defined a paradox. Despite the 10 reasons why you shouldn't, you give every evidence of having a blast in college and being in your natural element.As far as the essay, I am greatly impressed and could not agree with you more that "exclusivism may be true, but it may never be pleasant." and "We accept the doctrine of Christ as the way because it is written in the Scriptures, aid by Christ and by others." and "Hell exists, but delighting in the fact perverts the doctrine."Very well put. I am proud to know you.

Thanks very much.

Having answered all of that, I'm going to quit blogging. Even if I don't go to lunch right away, I'll be free to now.

Porcupines and Teddy Bears

It's become a recent phenomenon in my life. When I visit someplace like my home church or my old high school that I still have connections with but that I haven't been in awhile, and talk to people, they often ask me how things are going.

I have discovered that my favorite response to this is the phrase "I'm in college." It says so much in so few words. It says:

1) I am in college. This seems self-explanatory. But from that statement follows so much more, such as:
2) I am taking harder classes.
3) I am scared out of my mind academically and socially.
4) I am adjusting to the fact that my dorm room is becoming more and more my "home."
5) I am eating commons food.
6) I am scared out of my mind, period.
7) My relationship with God is growing, albeit under stress.
8) Speaking of stress, I have much of it.
9) I am learning things.
10) I am very tired. Always. And if I'm not tired, I'll do something like doing laundry at 1:00 AM, to make myself tired.
11) There's more to add to the list, but that's a brief summary of the implications.

So you see that the statement "I'm in college" has many implications beyond simply what it says.

But I was also going to post an essay today. And so I will. Constructive criticism is welcome. I'm not sure how loosely I'm using the word "essay" here. But don't look for that 5-paragraph structure with three-pronged thesis statements. What's funny: you're forced to follow it in an almost totalitarian fashion during high school and then told, once in college, that nobody gives a crap about it. At least, your english and philosophy professors say nobody gives a crap. Oh, and they say you can use I now.

Pluralist in this essay refers to someone who believes that there is more than one path leading to salvation (i.e. Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism all lead to Salvation.) Exclusivist in this essay refers to someone who believes that there is one path of salvation (i.e. only by Christ are we saved.) I am an exclusivist. This essay is an attempt to explain how I often feel talking with pluralists, and the misconception I see in their perception of my belief system. One day I may attempt an essay dealing with the feelings of the pluralist in the dialogue. It certainly could be helpful, if I could pull it off.

"Porcupines and Teddy Bears"

When common pluralists speak of exclusivism, they often speak wrongly of it. In their view exclusivism is a theological teddy-bear which the orthodox hug at night. They see us as being somehow comforted by the notion that some persons will be saved and others will not. Of course I exaggerate. I am not seriously suggesting that pluralists always view exclusivism as a comforting prejudice. But many pluralists do, and the others have a habit of giving that impression.

The myth about exclusivism is that it is a preferred belief, taken on because one wants to believe it. But the pluralist’s own words hold the truth. A very dear and very pluralist friend of mine once remarked, when discussing the subject, that she didn’t “really like the idea of hell.” We were too young at that time to appreciate such ideas as heaven and hell. Even so, her words betray the truth: Exclusivism is a belief accepted not because of, but in spite of, its appeal. It follows that persons who reject exclusivism (unless they know a perverse exclusivist very well) are likely to reject it on the basis of its unpleasantness, not its supposed basis in sectarianism or in prejudice.[1]

It may have occurred to the reader that perhaps all exclusivists are perverse and prefer their doctrine. I offer myself as a counterexample. I don’t really like the idea of hell, either. But I take it as an article of orthodox faith, with honesty I find exclusivism the most difficult component of orthodoxy. Some days I pray to God that when I die I might discover that pluralism is the true theology, that I have been wrong all of this time about Christ being the only way to heaven. I cannot expect these prayers to change God’s mind. At least in orthodox Christianity hell is considered to be very much real. But should I die and discover that hell is a human invention, I will not be any less joyful for the fact.

The difficulty I have with most pluralists is not simply what they believe, but that often when they speak about said beliefs I am made to feel as if I am, because I am not a pluralist, prejudiced or sectarian. As if my belief system were an easy one to hold. Exclusivism is not a teddy-bear which the orthodox hug at night. Accepting exclusivism is like hugging a porcupine. It can be done, but at each turn there is a spike of doubt, sadness, or pain, which causes the believer (spiritually speaking) to bleed. There is no teddy-bear. Those of us orthodox who are sensible know that exclusivism may be true, but it must never be pleasant. Hell exists, but delighting in the fact perverts the doctrine. We accept the doctrine of Christ as the way because it is written in the Scripture, said by Christ and by others. The very last thing on the sensible exclusivist’s mind is that exclusivism should be a vehicle for mere prejudice.

[1]
A scant few might honestly say that they reject it on the basis of reason, but a scant few is a scant few. Perhaps in another writing I shall deal with that scant few; here I speak of the common mass of pluralists who, frankly, don’t do much reasoning on theological matters.

----------

That's the end of the essay. Enjoy.

More on Contrasts

I guess to start off I could address some comments from the last post...I should probably note that I did laundry at 1:00 AM last night, and so I'm a bit tired. Because starting laundry at 1:00 AM means you get to bed at the earliest at 3:00 AM.

kokosmasher said: atheism seems to be a theme...geez

Anonymous said: how very interesting. i agree with kokosmasher in the theme aspect, but i don't say geez. however, aren't most people a study in contrasts, or paradoxes if you will? Just wondering.

Aye, it does seem to be a theme. Really those three could have been, to a degree, combined. However when making the list we were stretching it as much as possible, and that one stretched to three.

And whoever anonymous is doesn't need to be afraid of letting the bloggers and readers know who they are. I doubt kokosmasher would be offended by your agreement with him. If I were offended by what he said or by your agreement, well--I posted the list on the blog. If I'm offended by the response, that's really much more my problem than yours.

Now I would urge both kokosmasher and the anonymous reader to ask themselves what the concern is behind their comments, and let me know if it is not adressed here. I will venture to guess that the concern is that I am somehow glorifying athiesm. I am not. It would be highly inconsistent and truly impossible for me as a Christian to glorify belief systems which oppose Christianity, especially where that opposition involves theology--in this case, the existence of God.

Another possible concern has been brought to my mind, which is that possibly the impression you're getting is that the major thing about Doug is his athiesm...honestly, that just happens to have been part of a series of inside jokes which led to the making of the list. Of course he's much more of a person than just that.

Anyway. On to the lighter comment:

however, aren't most people a study in contrasts, or paradoxes if you will?

That's an interesting thought. I'm really unsure which way to go on this. As I said the list posted in the last post was the result of much joking around between me, him and Colin. Some of those are stretches. But of course that doesn't answer the question. The truth is I really don't know. Although I'd venture to guess that most people have some amount of seeming inconsistency in their lives. Most people probably could stretch their inconsistencies to a top-nine, if they tried.

I really don't have much more to say on the comments.

I will note one last thing. This is pertaining to campus life. My neighbors like to play their "emo" really loud. Loud enough that I can still hear it faintly when I've got Headslider in my headphones turned up way too loud. (They're on music.download.com, possibly in the sidebar.)

Also, there's an essay on theological things that I wrote the other night at about 2:30 AM. With a bit of revision I'll probably post it. Unless there's some huge objection, which I doubt. If you want to see it, of course, let me know of that, too.

One real last thing. Anyone seen this movie "Boondock Saints"? I'll probably be seeing it sometime in the next few days. Yes, I know about the content and rating. What I'm asking about is merely someone's opinion of the quality of the movie. My understanding is it's one of those "cult" movies, which means I'll likely love it or hate it. Whenever I see it I'll make sure to say something about it.

Okay, there is one real real real last thing, which is that if kokosmasher is reading this (love ya man) I'd love to see a new post from you!

Paradoxes and Oxymorons

Don't be offended if any of these sound ridiculous or prejudiced to you. They are one part inside joke and one part just plain funny. Today Doug and I (mostly Doug) thought up paradoxes or seeming inconsistencies that he has as a person. These are very much not criticisms. These are just things Doug and I found funny about his life. So here is the top 10 list of paradoxes, in no particular order.

1. A moral athiest.
2. A man who loves to eat food and yet is very skinny.
3. Not interested in a relationship, and yet is hanging around girls all the time. (In case you were wondering he is completely heterosexual.)
4. Takes French courses and dislikes the French.
5. A conservative athiest.
6. Enjoys to a large degree both nature and technology.
7. Deals better with the heat in terms of how his body works, but likes the cold better--because it's easier for him to warm himself than cool himself in other terms.
8. An introvert who goes shirtless at soccer games.
9. An athiest who likes hanging out with conservative Christians regularly.

Hmm, I guess we only had nine.

Friday is the Best Day

Of the week? Possibly. For recording songs, at least for me, Fridays seem to be the day. I don't recall which Friday, but it was on one fateful Friday that I recorded possibly my best thing ever, The Monday Song. Today I find myself recording for another song, All My Darkness, which will probably be on KDUP's show next week, assuming it's not too dark. Pretty much anyone reading this blog has heard The Monday Song, so you know there's bound to be a contrast between The Monday Song and something entitled "All My Darkness."

"All My Darkness" deals with trying to be a consistent, complete, Christian, and the feelings one has when one is failing at that task. I feel it'd be a good thing to have a serious track on KDUP, as I don't want to come across as just being a guy who wrote a silly song about Mondays. I might have to do something next week that's somewhere in-between, and use that for KDUP instead.

Speaking of KDUP, I just took a break from blogging for a few minutes, and now I've got it going via Winamp (which coincidentally is Mike Diesel's favorite thing to plug--at least, on his last show it was.) The first song he's played is the one with the two guys playing and singing "I WOULD WALK 500 MILES AND UH I WOULD WALK 500 MORE" and etc. The next one is Greenday's "Holiday" which is actually kind of a fun song.

I called Colin and Doug about coming over to listen, but I actually got no answer on either line. Dunno what they're doing.

Now he's playing The Killers' "Somebody Told Me." You know on which song to use for KDUP it could very well be fine. Who can complain about a heartfelt, honest and consequently dark song about a not-so-great spiritual circumstance? Especially with Killers and Greenday on there. Not to suggest those bands are incredibly dirty, but rather to suggest that their music's plenty dark. Well "Somebody Told Me" isn't, but "Holiday" is. And it's political. Is religious theming worse than political theming? Should it be?

I don't feel like blogging much longer so I'll end it with this: Should either political or religious theming be censored on radio? One more than the other? And why?

Post comments or whatnot.