posted by:
LadyG (
reply)
post date:
09.24.07 (7:20 pm)
She will do anything for publicity.
posted by:
almsthvn (
reply)
post date:
09.24.07 (7:51 pm)
Kathy and Sarah Silverman are both such angry, bitter, caustic people. I have little/no desire to watch any show they're on. They certainly have the right to say whatever they like - and I have the right to hit "mute" ;)
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.24.07 (8:12 pm)
Reply to: LadyG
For an entertainer, I understand the need and pursuit of publicity. My problem is the willingness to do anything, as you have said. A person without character, yet in a position of influence, is a dangerous person.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.24.07 (8:13 pm)
Reply to: almsthvn
You are quite right. Our greatest power to negate the influence of such a person lies in the use of the off button. Thanks for the reminder.
posted by:
TheRockSays (
reply)
post date:
09.24.07 (8:36 pm)
How Christians should react to such a thing is very very tricky. Usually anything that doesn't involve quiet dignity is going to backfire. Only a very clever riposte might work, but one thing Christians are not very good at is being clever with the media. An underhanded smear campaign, seemly unrelated to issues Christians are interested in, is the sort of thing I'm thinking of. Christians just don't go for those strategies.
posted by:
kurtmaddox (
reply)
post date:
09.24.07 (9:19 pm)
I understand your POV, PD, but, you are missing the point a bit and you're displacing your energy when you'd be a better friend to your faith if you called out those "Christians" that are the reason Ms. Griffin's comments are authentically comical and courageous social commentary directed this country's dominant and often arrogant and insensitive religion -- lower case "c" Christianity.
Ms. Griffin's point is a pretty solid issue to raise to any serious Christian. Her point is that its patently absurd and completely arrogant and insensitive to plight of billions of people on the planet for some millionaire actor or singer to get up at an awards ceremony and infer that the Creator of the Universe and the God of All Things someone singled them out for their special circumstances. Furthermore, the inference that the Jesus of the lowly and the downtrodden gives a flying flip about Hollywood or about the latest hip-hop or pop single or touchdown or NBA championship should offend a true follower of the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth much more than Kathy Griffin ever could. In fact, in my reading and understanding of the teachings of Jesus, He would come closer to agreeing with Kathy Griffin's point than he would agree with movie stars thanking Him for their Emmys and Oscars.
He might tell them to sell all their possessions, take up their crosses and follow Him out of Hollywood and out of Sony records to a life of discipleship and serving humanity in some capacity.
For the record, Kathy Griffin has been very equal in her offensive comments regardless of the brand of religion.
Try seeing it from that angle and I think you'll at least find some fertile ground to explore that might be more profitable than wasting energy being offended by Kathy Griffin.
All the best!
~Kurt
posted by:
emerging (
reply)
post date:
09.24.07 (10:18 pm)
Last I checked, God's pretty amazing and doesn't need me to defend Him. Just to walk in obedience. Love one another.....sounds simple enough. It would be - if we all had a "mute" button!
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (3:58 am)
Kurt stated it better than I could. I'll assume you'll decide not to "get it," but she wasn't dissing Jesus.
posted by:
doeeyed (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (5:29 am)
Kathy Griffin doesn't discriminate in who she insults.
While I understand what Kurt and Surrogate are saying, I have to disagree that she wasn't dissing Jesus. To say "Suck It"? Uh, yep that's disrespectful.
Whatever, she'll live her life and I'll live mine.
posted by:
fractalmom (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (6:25 am)
i didn't see it. and regardless of that fact, it was in as bad taste as those who patently and off the cuff thank God for something like winning a Grammy or Oscar.
I would like to see the next person who wins say that they would like to thank their parents for giving them the foundation to succeed, and God for giving them the reality to not let it go to their heads and keep them centered and grounded.
now that would be believable.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (8:51 am)
Reply to: TheRockSays
Well, an underhanded smear campaign does not sound very "Christian" to me. Your first impressions are right on the money. A quiet dignity is the best response. Of course, most of us have the greatest trouble being quiet.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (9:10 am)
Reply to: kurtmaddox
Thanks, as always, for the thoughtful comments and challenge.
First, for the benefit of my readers, I want to answer a criticism that has come my way a few times. Please bare with me, kurt. I know you are a busy guy and don't need to invest thought and energy into this particular matter. I've been accused of playing favorites with my readers and fellow bloggers. The inference is that I will be rational and kind to some, and emotional and mean to others. And I am such a creature that can display such inconsistency at times. But why can I interact with someone like yourself, more or less rationally, and yet get into verbal fisticuffs with others? I think it is because bloggers like yourself stick to the issue, offer much more than verbal barbs, and do not attack me personally. I like interacting on subjects. kurt and I have been exchanging views here on t-Blog for over 2 years now. When I came onboard I think I was quit a bit more abrasive than now. Kurt and others gradually steered me toward a better direction with how I interact with others. It has really been a good life lesson, beneficial in all areas of life. It is one of the examples of why blogging is good, and why I invest time in it even though I'm quite busy.
I see validity in your understanding of the matter. I remember long ago hearing Michael Spinks, after he defeated Ali for the heavyweight boxing title, give thanks to Jesus Christ. I knew from the sportspage and media that he certainly did not show much interest in God with his lifestyle and general choice of words, so it seemed so out place and peculiar. I think he was using trite language, acceptable, and shallow. Now, this woman comes along and blasts such language and triviality? I think you are giving her far too much credit. In my opinion, she was speaking from her heart, and truly has little regard for Jesus Christ.
Her words do insult many Christians. Imagine, kurt, if someone were to speak with such villification toward your son or daughter? It would hurt, I imagine. It might even make you a bit angry. Knowing you even a little, no doubt you would think about it and then respond most apprpriately by ignoring the person, or by using your gift with words to bring him down to size. Well, the evangelical Christian who believes Jesus to be God and also to be a friend and indwelling presence in his life, is likewise injured by such language. I do feel the best way to respond is to follow the teachings of Jesus- turn the other cheek, go the extra mile, etc.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (9:15 am)
Reply to: emerging
It is true, and I appreciate the reminder, that God does not need me to defend Him. But, do we ever need to speak up on His behalf? We are His presence in this world. Others will come to see and know God as they view Him in our lives, and words. Words are an integral part of such. We witness. We praise Him. We instruct. And I think that sometimes we are to give a careful answer to those who challenge our faith. Reason is a gift of God, which we are to use for His glory.
Just some thoughts. Thanks.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (9:21 am)
Reply to: surrogate
You don't really think this woman was being thoughtful and philosophical with her comments, do you? I think what she said was a simple overflow, from her mind to her mouth. She has such little respect for Christians and their God that she is quite willing to insult both if it makes her sound edgy and hep. I think we should have pity and mercy for a person so shallow and mean.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (9:22 am)
Reply to: doeeyed
Yes, indeed. It's rather plain.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (9:23 am)
Reply to: fractalmom
When you win an oscar, nobel prize, or whatever- than please make that speech. I'll be in the front row with a standing ovation.
posted by:
TheRockSays (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (9:27 am)
Reply to: PastorDave
No, a smear campaign would be most unChristian. But remember that Flintstones where Fred became a teen idol? When Betty and Wilma had their fill of it, they started a rumour that Fred was a "square", and his fan based disappeared before the concert was even over. If a wholesome pair like Betty Rubble and Wilma Flintstone could do it, surely Christians could manage something.
posted by:
bawdy (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (12:34 pm)
I echo Kurt's sentiments on the matter, but understand your point of view as well.
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (3:58 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
Dave, you';ve already said you're unfamiliar with her and her stuff. I AM familiar with her and I "get it" but trying to explain it to your would be pointless. You saw or heard the clip and, as usual, jumped to your conclusion... typical, but not worth arguing with you about. Poooooooor you, always being attacked. Trust me, I doubt Jesus would have been offended. He'd have gotten it.
Please.
posted by:
doeeyed (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (4:40 pm)
Reply to: surrogate
What makes you think you "get it" anymore than any of the other folks here?
The one and only person who knows what Kathy Griffin meant when she said what she did, is Kathy Griffin.
She's rude, crude and downright nasty. I've watched her on Bravo many times. Don't get me wrong she can be as funny as all get out but, I cannot believe for one nano second that she was being anything but disrespectful in her acceptance speech. Sorry but, that's how I feel and I think I "get it"!
So there...nah nah nah nah
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (5:01 pm)
Reply to: doeeyed
Well doe, she was making fun of people who thank Jesus when they win an award, or a game, or when they get something someone else wanted too - as though the losers didn't have him on their side, AND she was making fun of people who take the awards too seriously - and she did it brilliantly with very few words. She was, in short, poking fun at anyone who's too damn high and mighty to laugh at themselves.
Now, I didn't claim no one else "got it." I said I DID and, in fact, anyone with half a brain who wanted to - would have. But there are always people who think they're the arbiters of what's crude and "downright nasty," and to them? -I say, "Knock yourself out. Feel all better now that you've got someone you think you're better than?"
Heck, people like that should thank her. She did 'em a favor - as if they need it to find fault.
posted by:
doeeyed (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (5:22 pm)
Reply to: surrogate
Sur, I completely without a doubt understand exactly the point that you are trying to make here and maybe even KG. I agree.
What I don't agree with is saying "Suck It Jesus" isn't being disrespectful. I see no way around that!
Even though I may have a brain riddled with lesions or even half a brain, I think I know when someone is being crude.
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (5:43 pm)
Reply to: doeeyed
okey-doakey.
posted by:
spook102956 (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (5:43 pm)
"Father forgive them for they know not what they do." I was angry and upset with a band director that is being ugly and rude to kids and parents. Your blog has helped me simmer down a bit. Thanks!
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (8:16 pm)
Reply to: surrogate
"Poooooooor you, always being attacked..."
I'm sorry, but this is not my approach to our interaction with this issue.
This woman is trying to be a bully with her mouth and her celebrity. I think you give her far too much credit. There is nothing big or deep about what she has done.
I don't think you are attacking me, personally. Are you?
Now, if I am coming across as whiney, PLEASE lest me know. I'll change my method of communication at once.
posted by:
FinalyFree (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (8:40 pm)
Anyone who has followed Kathy Griffin's career probably wasn't surprised at all by her. It's taken her years and lots of plastic surgery to get to this place. I think her remarks were definitely planned in advance, I mean c'mon, there's only a limited amount of fame for a 'no talent' comedian, right? A little shock-value goes a long way. Heh.
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (11:08 pm)
"This woman is trying to be a bully with her mouth and her celebrity."
And who was she bullying? You? People who think like you? Dave, I'll say it again, Jesus would have gotten it and laughed. She also said "My God is this award now!" For goodness sake, if you don't get get it, fine, but don't pretend you're defending the honor of God and Jesus, and accept that it's just sour grapes on YOUR part, not hers.
As someone who TRIES to be funny sometimes, I know perfectly well how it is to have said or written something that, for the purposes of amusement, some people DECIDE to understand - folks who've temporarilly put themselves on the same wavelength for that very self-same purpose of being amused - meanwhile the same words have offended others who are either unable or unwilling to accept the angle from which I've come at something. Oh well. That's life.
I know this, when that happens, if I worried too much about those who DON'T get it, I'd never write another word again. No big tragedy, but then how would I justify sitting here so often and for so damn long?
posted by:
kurtmaddox (
reply)
post date:
09.25.07 (11:30 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
At this point, you know that I have immense respect for the person that you are and for the human being you are striving to become through honest introspection and the disciplines of your faith. So, sure I understand that you and those who have given so much of themselves to a concept which expresses itself in you as the person and the living reality of your "Christ" would find it difficult not to take offense at Griffin's intentionally provocative antics.
If anything might dissuade you from taking further offense, just remember that your reaction is EXACTLY what she counts on to generate enormous free publicity. Griffin, more than any other near-celebrity in recent memory, has scratched her way around until she's found a gimic that really works for her. The gimmick is making people upset that a good number of Americans are already a bit sick of hearing from on issues of morality and the like.
Every movement that gains power has a point at which it "jumps the shark", to use another provocateur's (Howard Stern) phrase. In other words, everyday America has worn weary of the mix of "Christian" celebrity, politician and activist who seem to them to have a never ending need to sermonize about everyone else while ignoring or taking offense to any honest criticism of its own house. So, its just a cyclical backlash that is well-deserved, in my opinion, in the context of the public sphere.
If you want to blame someone for Kathy Griffin's traction in pop culture, then you might start with Bush/Cheney and then work you way through Jerry Falwell, Larry Craig and the good folks like those here on tBlog who suggested that God takes his wrath out on America for homosexual marriage and abortion by sending us waves of terrorists and hurricanes along with some drought and a good bit of pestulance (sp?).
If you listened to the Iranian President's speech to the UN, you could have simply changed a few words and been at any Southern Baptist Church south of Indianapolis in regard to the basic message that we are all going to hell in a handbasket and that God will reign his terror down on all those who reject His laws and refuse to submit to His will as written in his scriptures.
So, Griffin has picked up on the fatigue Americans have of all the false and hypocritical self-righteousness that's been coming out of certain quarters for over a quarter of a century now that gets expressed in popular culture in bizarre and easily ridiculed ways.
In other words, if your a sincere follower of the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth -- at least the teachings I've read and am able to comprehend -- you should just relax and be glad that arrogant piety is getting its day in the barrell!
The world will never have enough truly loving, honest, compassionate and thoughtful human beings. Trust in the inherent goodness of honest seekers be they Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Taoist, Scientologist, Mormon or Hindu. And remember, Christians like yourself will always have lots of work to do to outrun the damage done to your efforts by the Ushers of the world who wear Jesus on their sleeves like a brand name and then promote mysogeny, promiscuity, chauvinism and violence in the next breath.
Now, I'm all for freedom of speech for them all -- including Kathy Griffin. She's no Lenny Bruce or even an Andy Kaufman, but, she is pretty funny somnetimes and much smarter in her manipulation of the press than most folks will ever give her credit for.
Be Good!
Kurt
posted by:
TheRockSays (
reply)
post date:
09.26.07 (5:36 pm)
This blog, and subsequent comments, are just one ironic amazement after another.
First of all, Christians can stand a certain amount of criticism. Maybe they don't always follow their religion properly, maybe they improperly connect elements of their faith to wordly issues, or maybe they just need to be told there are problems with their beliefs. Griffin wasn't doing any of that, she said "suck it, Jesus".
Then Dave, our visible Christian, is put into a position where he has to demonstrate far more humility than I ever could with Surrogate. And so he was accused of the opposite, and
still doesn't waiver.
This all seems to me to be the twisted thinking that Griffin propagates.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.26.07 (7:17 pm)
Reply to: bawdy
I value understanding above agreement. Thanks.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.26.07 (7:22 pm)
Reply to: TheRockSays
I just don't see how we can attribute to her such brilliance and wit because she said "Suck it, Jesus." It's third-grade humor, at best. I do not see the forethought and deep religious commentary. If you praise her for such social commentary, then you are going to have to do the same with the kid who farts at the dinner table.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.26.07 (7:28 pm)
Reply to: kurtmaddox
By saying "Suck it, Jesus", she is giving the middle finger to arrogant piety? I think she is giving the finger to the little lady down the street with meager means who loves God more than anything else in life. And the Father who lost his child to cancer, and believes one day because of Christ he will see his child again. And the family who says grace together at the dinner table. She insults Jesus Christ. This is not brilliant nor needed. It is as crass as the choice of words. I hear what you say. I do not agree.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.26.07 (7:32 pm)
Reply to: surrogate
Jesus might laugh at such pettiness on her part. He would not find humor in such an unkind denigration of another person. I believe, when life is over, she will stand before Jesus Christ as King of Kings. She will not be so full of pomp and vitriol at that moment.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.26.07 (7:34 pm)
Reply to: FinalyFree
I kept looking at her. I've seen that face, somewhere... Then it hit me. Seinfeld! She was the one in the Seinfeld episode about BBQ Sauce. Jerry needed a bottle of sauce with the face of Charles Grodin on the label. He trusted her to get it. Instead, she got another bottle that she though was better. Yeah, she was rather funny on that episode.
I do not think she is very funny, now.
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
09.26.07 (7:36 pm)
Reply to: TheRockSays
Perhaps I'm not bright enough to understand your argument, but to me what she did was a lot more akin to Grandma farting at the dinner table and then pointing to and blaming Grandpa - and to me, that would be funny. Why would it be funny? I'll try to explain it for you. Grandma would know exactly what she was doing, and what sort of reaction she'd likely get. Sure, that bittie Aunt Polly would look aghast and act all offended, but frankly, that too would be expected and make it even more fun for everyone else.
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
09.26.07 (7:44 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
"I believe, when life is over, she will stand before Jesus Christ as King of Kings. She will not be so full of pomp and vitriol at that moment."
Yes Dave, I know you do. Pretty easy solution too, isn't it? She'll get hers!
posted by:
kurtmaddox (
reply)
post date:
09.26.07 (10:54 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
Hmmm... I guess if you are a Jew or a Muslim or a Buddhist or a Taoist or a Zorastrian or an American Indian that you could also be pretty offended about all the Christians running around telling their little old ladies with cancer that they are going straight to hell in a handbasket, huh?
Bringing cancer victims and little old ladies into the argument is a nice appeal to emotion, but, irrelevant to any well-reasoned argument. Perhaps no followers of any religion in the history of the world have done more to harm the little old ladies of the rest of the world than those who have marched under "Christian" flags.
Now, I don't believe such things are inherent to Chritianity per se -- its just so hypocritical to be so upset about someone disrespecting your religion when your very religion gives the ultimate disrespect to every single other faith the world has ever known and that to the heartfelt beliefs of the other 4/6ths of humanity who don't accept your doctrines.
Sometimes I believe Christians should be more honest about what it is that they actually believe before they go getting to offended by others say about them!
The fact is that your brand of Christianity gives us all the middle finger all the way to an eternity in hell simply because we aren't willing to see things quite the way you do. That's not an opinion and its not an attack -- its just a fact!
I know better than most because I used to believe the same way and preached those very words from a number of pulpits.
So, these little old ladies with cancer would do well to just turn off the TV when Ms. Griffin is on the air and not think to much about it -- after all, there is an entire world out there to save from eternal damnation and we've already wasted far too much time on Ms. Griffin in light of the fact.
Of course, that could be Satan's plan -- to divert all this energy away from soul saving by planting the curiously red-haired comedian into your midst and stirring up a big distraction.
Seriously, PD -- you're really reaching with the little old lady argument ;-)
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.27.07 (4:48 am)
Reply to: kurtmaddox
I would never stand before a Jew or a Muslim or a Buddhist or a Taoist or a Zorastrian or an American Indian say "Suck it _____________ (insert the name of his/her deity)." It would not advance dialog. It would not win converts to my faith. Even if I were immediately surrounded by others who believe as do I, and would snicker at my insult and later slap me on the back for "letting them have it". The other person deserves more respect, more dignity. I would be doing a disservice to myself and my faith with such an insult.
Heck, I would not stand before an atheist, or even a lilly-livered universalist like yourself and offer such insult.
posted by:
lynnkramer (
reply)
post date:
09.27.07 (12:38 pm)
I know from previous posts that you are not a Catholic, which is fine since modern Catholics have nearly everything in common with protestants these days as opposed to Ultra Montaine [Othodox Traditional]Catholics such as myself, but honestly I actually that the, Catholic example is the best way.
That is the way of the Saints.
Often evangelists stir up more hostility than conversion.
In these times, I think that the example of St. Paul with the Athenian pagan philosophers, as described by St. Luke in the Acts of the Apostles of the New Testament, is instructive. St. Paul gave the Athenian pagan philosophers on the Areopagus the Christian message in an imaginative talk, after which the pagans wanted St. Paul to return on the next day. St. Paul, however, inferred that they did not have an open mind to converting, but simply wanted to waste his time in idle argument. Therefore, he did not return the next day, never returned to Athens in his missionary journeys, and never wrote an Epistle to the Athenians.
All too many traditional Catholic Christians turn individual evangelization into little more than a spitting contest. The evangelizer is bound and determined that he is going to force the other party to the truth and "win the argument."
It doesn't work that way. All we can do is plant the seed, and God will take care of the rest. Some (many?) souls will chose Hell. That is sad, but that is a matter of their free-will. No one can force them to become true Chistian Catholics.
Many of the people whom you will meet, particularly Newchurchers, are like the Athenian philosophers. They close their minds to the obvious proof of their eyes and ears, and will waste your time in pointless debate -- merely to win an argument. All you can do, like St. Paul, is to deliver the message. What the hearer does with that message is his responsibility, and will lead to his eternal salvation or damnation.
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
09.27.07 (6:57 pm)
Reply to: lynnkramer
Wow, a non-spam comment from you?
I'm impressed. At least it's not the cut and paste stuff you used to do so much of. Congrats!
posted by:
kurtmaddox (
reply)
post date:
09.27.07 (9:27 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
"Lilly-livered Universalist", huh... so, now we've stooped to ad hominem argument? lol!
First, just as a correction, I'm not a "Universalist". I would have to believe that each individual human being is condemned by God and needs to be "saved". I don't have any idea about that kind of stuff so I guess I'm a "Idontknow-a-list"! Ha! Ha!
I'm glad to see you and Lynn Kramer are aligned on this one ;-) Isn't it interesting that Lynn Kramer's dismissive smugness about Ultimated Truth is so similar to the position that other fundamentalist of other faiths take toward those in the world that disagree with their faith?
Still, Lynn Kramer and I absolutely agree that you won't win arguments for your faith by using logical argument or reason -- all you can do is state your claims and leave the results to the "hearer".
An even more intersting point to make is that both your and Lynn Kramer's beliefs actually condemn each other Hell despite the fact you both fly the "Christian" flag over your souls. On this point there can be no honest debate -- Lynn Kramer's fundamentalist Catholicism leaves no room for "salvation" outside the "Church", which, of course, is the One True & Universal (Catholic) Church through which Atonement for one's sins is available ONLY through the Holy Sacraments.
No "Holy Sacraments" -- no "salvation". PERIOD!
Many protestants hold out that individual Catholics might be "saved", but, that the Catholic Church itself is a heretical organization. Some conservative fundamentalist evangelicals are very fond of calling the Catholic Church an agent of Satan. I'm not giving out 3rd party info here, I've heard it from evangelical Protestant pulpits all my life and heard just recently from an up and coming evangelical evangelist.
Like I've pointed out here over and over again, the fact is that very few Christians agree about Jesus or about the absolute nature of Ultimate Truth. Using a strict rendering of the various beliegs on salvation within the divergent "Christian" sects, it appears very, very few living human beings have any real shot at Eternal Salvation.
We "Idontknow-ists" will likely rot in Hell along with the Mormons, the Catholics, the Jehovah Witnesses and any number of lesser known "heretics" -- according the Southern Baptist theology, at least.
Of course, the Methodists get in, but, they are relegated to being the maintenance crew at the Eternal Paradise Health Spa!
As a final thought tonight, I wonder which is more offensive to the average person -- being told to "suck it..." or being condemened to eternal damnation?
posted by:
kurtmaddox (
reply)
post date:
09.28.07 (12:51 am)
Reply to: lynnkramer
Mr. Kramer, do you find the tiniest bit of irony in the fact that if you are truly "Ultra Montaine" that your theology condemns Pastor Dave to eternal damnation along with the "newchurchers", the Athenians & Kathy Griffin and yet you make a defense here of someone who is much more dangerous than any foul-mouthed non-believer? An "Ultra Montaine" would have no choice to see Pastor Dave as a heretic or false prophet while the rest of us are simply apostates. In the ranking of evil, a heretic is much worse than an apostate and worthy of much more scorn than someone who wouldn't accept your Truth.
We miss your response generator around here! lol!
Be Good!
posted by:
Baby Jesus (
reply)
post date:
09.28.07 (9:20 am)
Pastor Dave,
I saw your comment over at Pastor Boston's blog and should caution you about criticising the gay movement. His son is gay. Remember what James tells us about watching our tongues.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.28.07 (9:47 am)
Reply to: Baby Jesus
Did you truly read my comments? Let me say a couple of things:
Pastor Boston's blog is much more aggressive and confrontational than mine. That's not bad. It's just a difference of style.
The post of which I offered comment is, itself, very critical of the gay movement.
What I had to say was mostly words of encouragement to this fellow blogger.
Sometimes my tongue does say things improper, and deserving of correction from the writing of James. I don't think this is a time when such is true. I wrote, as I'm sure you are aware, that in my opinion gays should be free to be gay without reprisal of the law. If you should check other things I have written concerning this subject, you will find that I most likely go further than Pastor Boston and most evangelical pastors in that I am accepting of gay marriage. I think it is a sin, and I would never perform such a ritual nor would my church recognize it as legitimate as a religious union. But, the secular state is not a church. If gays want a civil union, I think the state should allow it. By the way, I think the proper venue for Christian marriage is the church, not the state. I wouldn't mind seeing the state get out of the marrying business.
So, I'll ask you to re-examine what I said on this man's blog. Also, perhaps you should study more carefully what he says. As to the sexual orientation of his son- I have no idea. That's a personal matter. I'm sure the good pastor will discuss the matter if he wishes, and I will interact with him about that issue- not yourself.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.28.07 (9:59 am)
Here's the blogsite for Pastor Ed. Boston. I'll try to write it in a way that the t-Blog censors will allow.It's pretty good, and like I told him, I admire someone that has gained an ongoing readership on blogger, Check it out:
dotherightthing (dash) cyberpastor (dot) blogspot (dot) com
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.28.07 (3:11 pm)
Reply to: lynnkramer
Thanks for the thoughtful comment. I'll admit I do not know what you mean by "Ultra Montaine Catholic". Thanks to the internet and wikipedia, I have gained at least an inkling. It's a strict papist, someon who strictly believes God's message and ultimately salvation is through the Roman Pope. Feel free to enlighten me if I am truly off base. Of course, my faith identity moves in a very different direction. Simply, Christ alone.
And I do appreciate your understanding of Christian evangelism, with which we have a more common ground. Indeed, all we can do is to plant the seed, and leave the results up to God & the individual.
My friend, you are obviously very sincere about your faith. My wish would be for God to continue to lead you toward the light. I would ask that your prayer for me to be the same.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.28.07 (3:14 pm)
Reply to: kurtmaddox
So I am an apostate? Thus, prepared for me are the hottest flames of hell? Guess I'll lose some sleep over this one. Not!
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.28.07 (3:22 pm)
Reply to: kurtmaddox
Just read your response to Lynn. So, seems you think you have me all figured out concerning my attitude toward Catholic believers, and my theology concerning Hell and eternal judgment. Perhaps, is it possible, you would be selling me short?
For the record, I condemn no one to Hell. I simply believe salvation is only through Christ. He will work out the details. As far as the physical nature of Hell, it is a mystery to me. The colorful analogies used by Jesus in His teachings need not be taken literally.
Alright, maybe I've been selling you a bit short, also. I'll agree you do not seem a Universalist. How about Agnostic?
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.28.07 (3:25 pm)
Reply to: surrogate
Now, be nice to Lynn. Rumor has it he is secretly attending a Baptist church these days. He sneaks in late, and slips out when the sermon is winding down.
posted by:
Pastor Ed (
reply)
post date:
09.28.07 (5:12 pm)
Well, I'm not sure how you found my blog, but I'm glad you did, and I'm glad I could follow your link back to here. This is one of the best mediums to get our Christian values out to what I call the "formerly Silent Majority". Now don't get me wrong, there is still tons of work to be done, but I believe that Christians and others that believe in a high standard of morals are sick and tired of putting up with the "vocal minority" and allowing them to push us around. You are correct our styles may be different, but we are working on the same side!!!!! Oh and by the way brother, I've read the end of the Book, our side wins!!!!!!!!
posted by:
kurtmaddox (
reply)
post date:
09.30.07 (8:57 am)
Reply to: PastorDave
Well, PD, I hate to harp on this, but, since I hear this refrain from those with your theological POV so often, I'll go ahead and respond to what I believe is clearly an intellectually dishonest position regarding the nature of exclusive salvation doctrines. Let's just say that I'm doing it for goofs and giggles and not that I have any hope that those who take your position -- the position of "hey, I don't condemn anyone to Hell -- that's God's job -- will at least drop the disingenious claim that they are personally compassionate in their hearts despite their belief that the rest of us will get our just deserts of an eternity of torment.
If it weren't so pervasive in our society, that position couldn't possibly taken seriously by any thoughtful person, in my opinion. (The same goes for Muslims and any other doctrine that teaches that the entirety of our lives boils down mostly to which family and into which country we are born so that we might "choose" the right the "Savior" and be spared the wages of our sin, which, of course, is always eternal damnation.
Or, to quote your new friend "Pastor Ed", "I've red the end of the Book, OUR side wins!"
Congrats to Ed, by the way, on completing his course in Christian humility! lol!
Now, back to the matter at hand. Namely, the question of whether one can claim true compassion for those who disagree with their theological dogma of exclusive salvation via a narrow channel of belief -- that Jesus Christ is Lord and Savior and that all other claims to divinity are not only false, but, are quite assuredly the work of Satan the Deceiver. Hence, all human beings who worship anything or any other name other than Jesus were certainly NOT "chosen" from the beginning of time and certainly will NOT be party to "eternal life". In fact, such reprobates and apostates, according to the dictates of Holy Scripture as written by God Himself through the prophets, will be condenmed to spend eternity in Hell to recite their koans, work out their useless karma, rid themselves of their damaging Thetans and gaze upon the beauty of Shiva all the while wondering what the heck happened to their 72 virgins they were promised for flying to airplanes into those tall buildings in America.
In heaven, George Bush, of course, will finally get the approval rating he deserves once he's among his peeps who understand the story the same way Pastor Ed understands it -- in the end, "WE WIN"!
I am suggesting to you and to anyone who believes as you believe, that you'd do better and you'd at least be intellectually consistent if you dropped the pretense of philosophical "tolerance". You simply can't believe two opposing exclusive absolutes at the same time. In this case, you can't just play the "it's not me, it's just my silly God that set this thing up this way" card. It' just so absurd on the face of it.
It's analagous to a German soldier at the door to the gas chamber looking compassionately upon his Jewish prisoners as the walk throught that door to their deaths while thinking to himself, "I so wish these Jews weren't going to die here today in this gas chamber! Oh well, it's not me sending them here, it's the Fuhror."
To believe that your fellow human being is sentenced to eternal damnation due to some cosmic order of things predestined since before the creation of the Universe is NOT and CANNOT ever be construed to contain one ounce of compassion for any human being. This theology reduces us all to pawns in a cosmic game with rules established to sadistically test us for worthiness of being in the presence of the very Creator who also, by the way, created the rules in the first place.
To address your comment about me making assumptions about your personal theology, I invite you to point out which one of my assumptions I got wrong. I didn't say you don't make a valiant attempt to believe in the literal truth of your doctrines while at the same time being a nice guy that cares about other people - including non-Christians. What I am saying is that your literal doctrines, when examined for their logical inferences, are explicity clear about things -- if you don't see things a certain way then you get a eternal free-stay in Hotel Hades!
If you don't believe that Lynn Kramer is going to hell unless he accepts Jesus Christ as his only source of salvation in the manner prescribed by your doctrines, then you are undermining the very doctrines that define your faith. If Lynn Kramer doesn't admit freely that he must tell you that you are, in fact, deceived by Satan and that you will, as prescribed by God and by His representative here on Earth, the Pope, then you absolutely be condemened to Hell for following false doctrine and for being the much worse than a simple non-believer for your are a "heretic" (quotes mine, not LK's).
Heretics are the most evil of the evil for they've been predestined to become active agents of deception leading millions astray and into the depths of Hell for eternity while professing to work for the King of Kings. As the doctrines of heretics goes, they actually know in their hearts that they are mistaken but they are so far into their hardened deceptions that they can no longer see clearly. No human being works more clearly for Satan than the person who presents Lies as the Truth!
Now, I don't which one of you, you or Lynn Kramer, is working for Satan. I simply know that one of you MUST BE or neither of you can claim to be what you both self-define yourselves as being.
If anyone doesn't take my word for it, you might want to enroll in some Utra Montaigne classes or maybe attend Southern Baptist Theological Seminary for a semester!
For the sake of clarity, the same sillyness exists between Muslims and within all manner of sectarian belief systems. We seem to forget that it wasn't long ago that the Catholics and the Protestants battled in similar ways that we see with the Sunnis and Shi-ite's in Islamic countries.
Anyone rememember Bloody Sunday or perhaps the Inquisition?
That's all for this Sunday mornings reflections. May God have mercy on us all!
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.30.07 (10:52 am)
Reply to: Pastor Ed
I've heard blogging compared to a coffee shop gathering. In some of the small towns where I have pastored, generally there will be a local restaurant where folk will gather to start the day. Chitchat about all kinds of stuff, some relevant and some not, would be an integral part of the menu. Blogging is a form of the same. We "shoot the bull", we are silly sometimes, and serious at others. What we say cam be either poignant or suspect, and sometimes both. All in all, it's a good medium.
Keep up the good work. I'll be around for a visit from time to time.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.30.07 (11:24 am)
Reply to: kurtmaddox
There is a smugness about you, my friend, that is a bit irritating. You seem to think you are above the fray, that you have it all figured out, and the rest of us deists and Christians are simply silly with our beliefs. How can you clam such superior knowledge about matters so important, when you then claim there is no way to know ultimate truth? If I can't have it both ways, then you can't either.
I'm sure you are quite familiar with the foundation of my faith. I claim a conversion experience through a personal encounter with Jesus Christ. At that point, I entered into personal relationship with Jesus, which means that God now lives within. My encompassing purpose of life is now to serve and know Him. And through that I gain the greatest of joy and fulfillment. Now the mode through which I gain greater understanding of Him is foremost through the Bible, which is God's inspired word, without error when properly interpreted. So much of this involves the supernatural, and faith- two matters which are by definition in conflict with reason. You insist upon reason- Christianity insists upon faith.
Mine is an exclusive pathway to God. All religions are not equal. Perhaps there are other ways to gain a bit of understanding of God, but Jesus Christ is the ultimate, superior, and final revelation. To use religious language we are both familiar with, Jesus is the only way of Salvation. Not everyone has equal access to Jesus. Therefore, as most evangelical Christians, I believe every man will be judged by God according to how he deals with the light that he receives. We here in America have, for the most part, no excuse before God for rejecting the revelation of Jesus Christ. We have the gospel presented in many ways, places, and times.
Now I personally do not ascribe anyone to a burning, fiery Hell. Perhaps Pastor Ed sees differently. Most conservative, evangelical and Catholic Christians believe in a literal place called Hell. I believe the Bible use figurative language. I'm not a Universalist. I believe any man or woman who chooses to reject the revelation of Jesus Christ as God will, as such, choose to face eternity without Him. What happens to said person, the split second after leaving this life, is ultimately mystery to me. What is Hell? Annihilation? Simply yet profoundly, eternal separation? The condition of separation from God is a personal choice, made by those who think they are too smart, or too selfish, or too stubborn, etc. Why reject the ultimate love of God? Now, that is even a greater mystery to me.
I don't expect you to agree. Perhaps you are just too insistant upon reason. Perhaps you are trying your best to analyze yourself right out of the kingdom of God? A person who is too smart for God is, well, too smart.
posted by:
kurtmaddox (
reply)
post date:
09.30.07 (12:22 pm)
Sure, I can be "smug". When I am, it is most often intentionally. I'm gifted enough as a writer to at least fain humility if I want to create that perception in the same way the one can fain smugness if that's what one wishes to convey. My intention is to only use "smugness" when met with smug dialog from someone else.
Demonstrating absurdity by being absurd is a similar way of making a point. I enjoy that one, too :-)
I'll simply point out to you a MAJOR and CRITICAL difference between what you have charged is my taking a position of superiority and the theological position which try to mitigate a bit with the useless bromide of "its a mystery to me" and the inference that God makes these decisions and your just His faithful servant -- NOBODY GOES TO HELL TO SUFFER ETERNALLY BY THE DESIGN OF A SADISTIC DEITY when they embrace Kurtism!
I've stated the only Ultimate Truth that I'm willing to declare here many times. The "truth" is that I DON'T HAVE A CLUE! How in the heck would I know what we were doing before we were born and how the heck could I know where we go when we've taken our last breath in this body? Shoot, I can barely manage the daily requirements of daily life with enough grace and efficacy to accomplish even the simplest of life goals and try to have good relations with those I care most about. If anyone chose me as an authority on matters of Ultimate Truth, then they've made a very bizzare "leap of faith" ;-)
So, with my clear admission that I don't know the answers that you've stated at least some claim to having learned via a personal experience with Jesus Christ, let's examine what you do claim to know now that you've had said experience:
1. You claim that God inspired your scriptures and they contain literal truth when "interpreted correctly". (Whatever "interpreted correctly" possibly means, for goodness sakes.)
Talk about being smug! The only possible inference to this assertion is that all the other scriptures are essentially philosophies of deception. In other words, they must come from Satan and not from the true God. (All "not-true Gods", according to your theology, are neccessarily Satanic, by the way. There simply isn't anyway to be a Biblical inerrantist and/or literalist and not agree with the nature of all heresy.)
I say that all scriptures contain lower-case "t" "truth", particularly when they are read as the story of mankinds seeking of the divine and of our genetic desire for the transcendent to deal in some way with our awareness of our own pending demise and of our relative ignorance about how much of our observable universe works and about why it even exists. Of course, this leads us down the path of why we exist. Our deities provide the answers to these questions and we lock onto these mythologies with all our being. When these beliefs are questioned, we are quickly offended beyond meansure and/or incredulous at either the naive ignorance or the intential evil of the doubter.
After all, if we would just open our hearts and minds to the "True God", then He would life the veil from our reason blinded eyes and, of course, we get the "gift" of "eternal salvation" as an added bonus.
You said:
"Mine is an exclusive pathway to God. All religions are not equal. Perhaps there are other ways to gain a bit of understanding of God, but Jesus Christ is the ultimate, superior, and final revelation. To use religious language we are both familiar with, Jesus is the only way of Salvation. Not everyone has equal access to Jesus. Therefore, as most evangelical Christians, I believe every man will be judged by God according to how he deals with the light that he receives."
Come on, PD, you say it straight out the way it is written and then you wonder on over into Kurtism with your attempt to sound rational and hold out that some people don't have "equal access" to the truth. What baloney! That's not what Evangelicals believe. If you do believe that, then your own literal beliefs make you out to be a heretic yourself. Your Bible never says that we are judged relative to our access to the Truth. Your Bible says that those who would be saved were neccassarily known by name by an Ominipotent Creator even before He created the first Human Being. (I guess Ultimate Truth is a good place to find the Ultimate Circular Argument!)
On your right to your faith, you and I have no qualm. On your right to the claim that either your or Lynn Kramer's theology allows you both to go to Heaven, then you need to consult your inspired Word of God and do a little better work as an interpreter.
As for me, you both believe I'm going straight to Hell in a handbasket. You might be right. If I do stand before the Creator of the All Things one day just after I expire, I will answer that Force exact same complete honest that I answer the question here on Earth. My answer will be that I wasn't willing to believe any doctrine that claimed to know Ultimate Truths. I will answer than I determined the best I could do was strive to be honest, courageous, loving, compassionate and kind. I will certainly beg for whatever mercy is available from such an entity. If none is available, then I won't really have much choice in the final outcome at the point, will I?
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
09.30.07 (5:01 pm)
Reply to: Pastor Ed
Oh great. More "It's us against the world," crap.
Dave, you spawning these guys? Bet we're going to get a fresh perspective here.
"Our side wins!" Tee-hee... Tee-hee... Lucky you!
Is it wrong to induce vomiting?
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
09.30.07 (9:13 pm)
Reply to: surrogate
Now, here you go insulting my new pastor friend. I invite him over here, and look what you say. Over at his place, he consistently gets amens and high-fives. Why don't you treat us preachers with the same niceties?
Pastor Ed simply makes reference to the message of the Bible. It is pretty clear. Jesus Christ has gone to prepare a place for those who love Him. It is a spectacular place of beauty, indescribable with human language. Probably, also, Pastor Ed is thinking of the last book of the Bible, Revelation. It describes the climactic battle to end all history, in which the forces of evil will be defeated by the armies of God. It is apocalyptic and figurative language. But the point is clear. God wins.
Now, be nice to Pastor Ed. Since you have had a good bit of connection with the church culture and the Bible, I doubt that any of this is surprising. You don't have to agree.
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
09.30.07 (10:25 pm)
Reply to: PastorDave
Thanks for the lesson. I find this emphasis insulting to anyone who DOESN'T agree - which, as Kurt pointed out is at LEAST four sixths of the world, plus a great number of Christians who find Paul's dream to be just what it was, and not the great foretelling of a positively disgusting future that only a petty God would have anything to do with.
You don't have to agree, but you probably will one of these days.
posted by:
The Angel Gabriel (
reply)
post date:
10.01.07 (3:48 pm)
Oh, give me a freaking break! She was mocking the assholes who thank Jesus for everything including good bowl movements. Lighten up will you? You'll be much happier.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
10.01.07 (5:34 pm)
Reply to: The Angel Gabriel
That sounds so cool. I've heard it and read it a good bit. Big deal. So she insulted your God!
And, of course, if she had spoken with derision and insult toward your important cause of the day... For instance, "Suck it, you ignorant environmentalists, may you drown in sewage..." Or, "Suck it, you stupid Democrats, may Hillary Clinton drop dead." - of course, her career would be in ruins, killed by a thousand editorials and probably a death threat or two. And, notice she did not say anything like, "Suck it, you assholes who thank Jesus for everything including good bow(e)l movements. Lighten up will you? You'll be much happier." No. She had such disregard for the deity that the Christian chooses to bow down and worship, for whom thousands have died, that she blatantly insulted their God and by inference insulted them. It's an insensitive ploy by a limited talent who desperately wants to extend her 15 minutes of fame. And, I guess she succeeded.
posted by:
surrogate (
reply)
post date:
10.02.07 (4:43 am)
"Jesus Christ has gone to prepare a place for those who love Him."
I was wondering... Do you think Jesus would be more an Andes or a York Peppermint Patty guy?
Ya know, for mints on the pillows...
posted by:
scubadiva (
reply)
post date:
10.07.07 (11:28 am)
I haven't read the other comments - but it's always amusing to me what is politically-correct and what isn't. Blacks can use the 'n' word and it's ok. Griffin who will do anything to get a mention in the press makes jokes about Christians. Yet Mel Gibson gets railed for (drunkenly) making anti-semitic remarks. That dude Isiah something or other gets railed for making a comment against gays.
I've never understood 'the rules' about the public's perception of what is 'comedy' or 'acceptable' or whatever.
posted by:
joey (
reply)
post date:
11.06.07 (2:29 am)
Get a sense of humour is all I can say!
She was parodying all the pop trash that thank Jesus Christ for everything they do because it's the "trendy" thing to do...
Seriously, lighten up! You only live once, stop wasting your time complaining and just ignore it. She's the most succesful comedian in the United States at the moment and she just broke into the Australian market so it seems alot of people find her funny! I certainly do.
[but im sure this post will be slaughtered as having read your posts you guys clearly don't allow for any other point of view other than your own!]
posted by:
joey (
reply)
post date:
11.06.07 (6:15 am)
"A Muslim might kill you in response to an insult. A Christian will pray."
bahahaha and that's got to be the biggest racial stereotype ever! Shame on you Dave!
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
11.06.07 (4:14 pm)
Reply to: joey
Being Muslim is not a matter of race. What I have expressed may be a religious stereotype, but not racial. Surely you keep up with the news. Remember the Danish cartoons that were an insult to Mohammed, and the resultant riots, burnings, and killings? At the heart of many of the Muslim religion is the concept of jihad, or Holy War. It is a calling from God to subjugate the infidels, either by conversion or death. It is part of the religion. I do not think this to be a stereotype, but a fair and verifiable understanding.
posted by:
PastorDave (
reply)
post date:
11.06.07 (4:19 pm)
Reply to: joey
I don't think you have read this post, and the accompanying comments. There is lots of disagreement, and I think at least semi-serious interaction. Around here, you do not have to agree with the writer. Just be courteous with your reply- which you have done. I don't think this Grade B comic is anywhere near as popular as you allude. Most people will accept and even snicker at gentle humor, but to be so obvious with your disdain of another person's faith and to do so in such a public arena leaves a stinch. There will be some who like it, but not most.
