I really need to have a pop-culture moment. Sorry, but I may burst if I don't get this off my chest.
My undying love for Eric aside, it's time I feel I should discuss what has happened this season on True Blood so far. With only 5 episodes left, so I need to make sense of it all to see if I can figure out where it is all going. There is entirely too much going on to be able to do a recap of the entire season up until now, but may I suggest going to Television Without Pity if you would like to read a recap of the entire show. Season 1 and 2 are also out on DVD, so you get get them through Netflix. But you may not want to read through this if you want to completely stay out of the loop, there are some spoilers.
First thing is first, though. May I just air out my single grievance against this show? Please please please STOP introducing characters and plot lines that aren't in the book series until later. I know a lot of people who watch this show have read all the books by now, so you need to chop and dice the plot from the source material so that it stays fresh and interesting. But what you did last year was excellent. While Sookie, Bill, Jason and Eric where away in Texas, it was great seeing the maenad plot from the book fleshed out. In the book, Sookie gets tore up by the maenad, heals, and goes away to Texas to help find a missing vampire. In the books, it is the king of Texas' "brother." When Sookie returns from Texas, she is invited to an orgy. The book ends with the house the party was in being burned to the ground and the maenad escaping. In the show, they are looking for Eric's maker, which worked out because it helped with Eric's character development. When the gang returns from Texas, they stumble on Maryann's (the maenad) "wedding" and it ends with Sam killing her. All in all, it wasn't that great a departure from the books and it kept the show interesting. But this season, we are focusing so much on identity that it's taking away characters and plot lines that you don't read about until later in the series. I know what they are building up to with the introduction of Claudine and Maryann and Lorena asking her "What are you?" But we shouldn't get the answer to that until the 7th book! And Russell and Sophie-Anne don't even get married. In the books, she marries the king of Arkansas, and that doesn't even happen until the 6th book. Hell, we don't even meet Sophie-Anne until the 6th book. And Crystal? I know what she is and I know what will happen with Jason, but that doesn't happen until the 4th book. Are the writers that desperate to keep the viewers guessing that they are pillaging the other books? If they keep doing that, they will have stripped the books down for future seasons and there won't be much left for them to work with. That's really what I'm concerned about. I love the books. A lot. I love the show because even though I know what will happen with certain characters, they mix it up enough that I'm not sure how they will reach that endpoint, or even if it will be the same endpoint as the books. If you're planning on having any sort of longevity for this show without alienating people who've read the books (which I think is a large portion of their loyal viewers by now), it's got to stop. I know I wouldn't be so riled up if I were like other people who haven't read the books. They are blissfully unaware of what's really going on.
And there are some BIG spoilers coming up, so don't say I didn't warn you. I can't emphasize that enough...
So, knowing that the writers and Alan Ball wanted to focus on identity this season, here are my predictions. First, Sookie has fairy blood in her. That's why she doesn't have a blood type. That's why Russell was questioning Bill about his research into Sookie's lineage at the queen's behest. Claudine? She's Sookie's fairy-godmother. That magical place Sookie went in her dream? Those were all fairies. The pond? The fairies' world. Remember, Claudine said it was a lot bigger than it looked. That's why Claudine wanted Sookie to go with her. That thing Sookie does with that white glow and repelling people she was angry with? That's her fairy blood at work. Did you notice that the water Sookie drank has the same white glow? So did the fairies as they left into the pond. My guess is that the water was an infusion of more fairy blood so that she could heal. That's why Claudine didn't want Sookie to let the vampires "take her light." All that whispering between Hadley and Eric? Hadley knew, so she told him. That's what was so interesting. Why could Bill stay outside in the sunlight? My guess is that the large amount of fairy blood he just ingested allowed him to do that, as well as maybe partial immunity to silver and other ills for vampires. Why else would the queen be so interested in her? In the books, fairies are like catnip to vampires. I'm sure they are going to give fairy blood all sorts of magical abilities in relation to vampires. Since Claudine was referring to light, which I'm sure she was talking about blood, it would make a nice yin-yang relationship with the darkness we associate with vampires. I'm hoping that they will stick with the book in this aspect, but Bill and Sookie will break up. We don't find out until much later that Bill was sent by Sophie-Anne to seduce her so that the queen could use Sookie's telepathy to her advantage. My guess why they will break up in the series? Sophie-Anne sent Bill still, but this time it was to take advantage of her blood and it's capabilities. Whether or not they will reveal this in the current season, we will see. But Bill and Sookie breaking up is pretty crucial for the plot lines next season to have any similarity at all to the fourth book and beyond. Sorry, Bill fans.
So what about Jason? Well, Crystal is a were-panther. That's why she was sniffing the air when she was outside with Jason and knew it was time for her to leave. With only 5 episodes left, it does look like they are going to leave the were-panther plot to next season for the most part. They won't be able to truly do it justice if they just cram it in here at the end. With that same focus on identity, we've seen Jason go from a womanizing man-boy to someone aspiring to be a cop and thinking he's in love. I think they will end it with him finding out what she really is and then pick it back up next season with plot line from the book.
I really can't make many predictions about what will happen with Sam and his family. There's nothing I can base it off from the books since it's not there. It's the same reason I can't say what will happen with Lafayette and Jesus or Jessica. But I can say I think a great way to end this season is to have Sookie driving home after her first night back at Merlotte's and coming up on a very naked Eric and him asking her "Do I know you?" and then roll the end credits. Or maybe on her way to the police station after getting the news about Jason being missing. That would be a nice way to bookend the season. Start it with a vampire kidnapping after a marriage proposal, end it with a missing person and a naked amnesiac vampire.
Monday, August 2, 2010
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Lost in Translation
Before I delve any deeper into what the Bible does and doesn't say, a dear friend of mine suggested that I should focus a little on the problem with translations. More specifically, I will focus on the bias that can be imbued on the final product and the fact that it is easy to wrongly translate things.
To begin with, unless you are fluent in ancient Greek and Hebrew and have the original manuscripts in front of you, it will be impossible to correctly translate what was originally recorded. Seeing as the original manuscripts would be thousands of years old by now, chances are slim that many survive to this day. And the copies that do exist are so different that it's difficult to say which the most accurate. Just take a look at the Dead Sea Scrolls, for example. These are a collection of manuscripts found in a series of caves near the Dead Sea, which have been dated to be from 150 BCE to 70 CE. As such, they are the oldest surviving copies of the Bible. But there are discrepancies between what scholars have been able to translate based off these scrolls and what we have in the Bible today. The scrolls contain passages from almost every book in the Old Testament, so you can easily pull up the accepted modern day text and compare it to what was written on these scrolls. These scrolls usually uphold what we find in the Masoretic Text, which is essentially the Hebrew Bible.
One of the more interesting deviations between the Dead Sea Scrolls and what we find in modern Bibles is a few verses from Psalms 22. This is a passage that Christians can look at as a prophecy of Jesus' crucifixtion. In the Contemporary English Version of the Bible, verse 16 reads "For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet." In the K'tuvim, you would find the corresponding verse in the book of Tehillim, verse 17, "For dogs have surrounded me; a band of evildoers has encompassed me, like a lion, my hands and feet." However, in the Dead Sea Scrolls, it reads "Like a lion, they pin my hands and feet.” For the sake of being thorough I went through older English translations to see if I could pinpoint when it went from "pinning" to "piercing." The earliest English translation was the Wycliffe Bible (completed in the 1380s), but I could not find a complete version that includes this passage. And please enlighten me if you do know where this passage is located in the Wycliffe Bible. So, strike one. I think it should be important to note that in the 1490s, Oxford professor Thomas Linacre decided to learn Greek. After comparing what he read in Greek to the Latin Vulgate (the 5th century Latin version of the text), he came to the conclusion that "Either this (the original Greek) is not the Gospel… or we are not Christians." I was able to find a copy of the John Rogers version, which is much more complete than the Wycliffe version. And it does say "pierced" and not "pinned." So as of 1537, this was the official translation: "They pierced my hands and my feet, I might have told all my bones: as for them, they stood staring and looking upon me."
But you may be thinking to yourself "What's the big difference? Aren't pierced and pinned synonyms?" As a noun, a pin is something you would use to fasten something with, usually something long and narrow. However, as a verb, it has a completely different connotation. I could pin you down on a cross with something other than a spike, like a piece of rope or wire. Piercing, on the other hand, is defined much more violently than pinning. It specifically says that a hole is made when something is pierced, whereas there is no mention of a hole when something is pinned. When I think of pinning something, I think of a corsage being pinned to a shirt. When I think of piercing something, I think of body piercings, which would be much closer to what happened to Jesus than pinning. Piercing sounded more violent and painful than pinning, so it's now favored as the correct translation of the text. The Christian translators decided that in order to have this as a prophecy about Jesus, all they had to do was change that one word and it fit. They sound so similar, what's the harm, right? You should note that if you were to look up pierce and pin in the dictionary, you would not see them listed as synonyms of each other.
And that, dear readers, is how easy it is to change things in order to fit your religious views. Next time, more of what Jesus taught us as interpreted by yours truly. But why should you listen to a word I say? Afterall, the whole point of this post was that it's easy to read something and interpret it as you wish. Well, let's just say that I'm trying to put a different view of Christian ideology and stories out there. Stay tuned for more developments.
To begin with, unless you are fluent in ancient Greek and Hebrew and have the original manuscripts in front of you, it will be impossible to correctly translate what was originally recorded. Seeing as the original manuscripts would be thousands of years old by now, chances are slim that many survive to this day. And the copies that do exist are so different that it's difficult to say which the most accurate. Just take a look at the Dead Sea Scrolls, for example. These are a collection of manuscripts found in a series of caves near the Dead Sea, which have been dated to be from 150 BCE to 70 CE. As such, they are the oldest surviving copies of the Bible. But there are discrepancies between what scholars have been able to translate based off these scrolls and what we have in the Bible today. The scrolls contain passages from almost every book in the Old Testament, so you can easily pull up the accepted modern day text and compare it to what was written on these scrolls. These scrolls usually uphold what we find in the Masoretic Text, which is essentially the Hebrew Bible.
One of the more interesting deviations between the Dead Sea Scrolls and what we find in modern Bibles is a few verses from Psalms 22. This is a passage that Christians can look at as a prophecy of Jesus' crucifixtion. In the Contemporary English Version of the Bible, verse 16 reads "For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet." In the K'tuvim, you would find the corresponding verse in the book of Tehillim, verse 17, "For dogs have surrounded me; a band of evildoers has encompassed me, like a lion, my hands and feet." However, in the Dead Sea Scrolls, it reads "Like a lion, they pin my hands and feet.” For the sake of being thorough I went through older English translations to see if I could pinpoint when it went from "pinning" to "piercing." The earliest English translation was the Wycliffe Bible (completed in the 1380s), but I could not find a complete version that includes this passage. And please enlighten me if you do know where this passage is located in the Wycliffe Bible. So, strike one. I think it should be important to note that in the 1490s, Oxford professor Thomas Linacre decided to learn Greek. After comparing what he read in Greek to the Latin Vulgate (the 5th century Latin version of the text), he came to the conclusion that "Either this (the original Greek) is not the Gospel… or we are not Christians." I was able to find a copy of the John Rogers version, which is much more complete than the Wycliffe version. And it does say "pierced" and not "pinned." So as of 1537, this was the official translation: "They pierced my hands and my feet, I might have told all my bones: as for them, they stood staring and looking upon me."
But you may be thinking to yourself "What's the big difference? Aren't pierced and pinned synonyms?" As a noun, a pin is something you would use to fasten something with, usually something long and narrow. However, as a verb, it has a completely different connotation. I could pin you down on a cross with something other than a spike, like a piece of rope or wire. Piercing, on the other hand, is defined much more violently than pinning. It specifically says that a hole is made when something is pierced, whereas there is no mention of a hole when something is pinned. When I think of pinning something, I think of a corsage being pinned to a shirt. When I think of piercing something, I think of body piercings, which would be much closer to what happened to Jesus than pinning. Piercing sounded more violent and painful than pinning, so it's now favored as the correct translation of the text. The Christian translators decided that in order to have this as a prophecy about Jesus, all they had to do was change that one word and it fit. They sound so similar, what's the harm, right? You should note that if you were to look up pierce and pin in the dictionary, you would not see them listed as synonyms of each other.
And that, dear readers, is how easy it is to change things in order to fit your religious views. Next time, more of what Jesus taught us as interpreted by yours truly. But why should you listen to a word I say? Afterall, the whole point of this post was that it's easy to read something and interpret it as you wish. Well, let's just say that I'm trying to put a different view of Christian ideology and stories out there. Stay tuned for more developments.
Sunday, July 18, 2010
Oh, how I love a good psychological thriller
Well, this week I finally got around to seeing a couple of movies. I saw Despicable Me, which I know I said I wouldn't see. But the more previews I saw, the more I wanted to go see it. Not to mention, it has good word-of-mouth right now. I am a sucker for kid's movies, I'll admit to that. A good chunk of my DVD collection are Disney/Pixar and Dreamworks Animation movies, not to mention all the Harry Potter movies. It was a really cute movie. The minions were adorable, and it showed that even the most dastardly person can have a heart of gold. I can appreciate that because apparently I am a dastardly person (she typed jokingly).
Anyways, I adored Inception. I think Christopher Nolan is increasingly becoming one of my favorite directors. Memento I think is being overlooked now that he has a couple of splashy, big-budget movies (the Batman reboot and Inception). For those of you who have only ever seen those 3 movies by him, you are doing yourself a disservice. It is a giant mind-fuck, which I love. You'd need to watch it at least twice to be able to fully wrap your head around it. Same with Insomnia, another great Nolan flick. Inception definitely follows this tradition of multiple viewings. Honestly, if you didn't get the ending you weren't even paying attention. I love that Leo's wife's name was Mal (Latin for evil). There was also character named Eames. The Eames' were a husband-wife team of architects and furniture designers. Ellen Page's character's name was Ariadne, who was the woman who helped Theseus kill the Minotaur in Greek myth. Once you see the movie, you can see why I got a little bit of joy out the character names. It definitely fits the characters. For those that don't know the basic plot, Leo and his team are hired to plant an idea in someone's mind, whereas they are typically hired to extract information from in their dreams. The premise is sound enough. Theoretically speaking, it is easier to obtain information from the subconscious mind than the conscious one. That's why a trained, professional hypnotist can be potent. And I'm not talking about the gimmicky ones at conferences. And Leo's character described what the result of inception quite eloquently that an idea implanted in the subconscious can spread like a virus once it's there, which is a pretty accurate statement. I also loved the idea of totems, which are objects they used to tell if they were in the dream world or the real world.
All in all, I'd recommend both flicks. I think a user review on Yahoo was pretty spot on when it that while it isn't a truly excellent film, it's great in that it isn't a regular summer popcorn movie and it requires you to think and use your brain.
I think that's why I've enjoyed his Batman reboot so much. They are exploring the human aspect of the superhero and supervillain and their psyches and their motivations. It's not "I'm good, you're bad. Let's fight." I've read recently that Nolan has been approached to do with the Superman universe what he's done with the Batman universe. I'm not 100% on board with this yet considering Superman actually has the superpowers that Batman lacks. But I have a feeling he will explore lonliness and abandonment. We will see. I'm sure he'll do something great with it.
Next time, I'll be back on topic. I've been working on Bible translations. And let me tell you, it's been hard finding old English bibles.
Anyways, I adored Inception. I think Christopher Nolan is increasingly becoming one of my favorite directors. Memento I think is being overlooked now that he has a couple of splashy, big-budget movies (the Batman reboot and Inception). For those of you who have only ever seen those 3 movies by him, you are doing yourself a disservice. It is a giant mind-fuck, which I love. You'd need to watch it at least twice to be able to fully wrap your head around it. Same with Insomnia, another great Nolan flick. Inception definitely follows this tradition of multiple viewings. Honestly, if you didn't get the ending you weren't even paying attention. I love that Leo's wife's name was Mal (Latin for evil). There was also character named Eames. The Eames' were a husband-wife team of architects and furniture designers. Ellen Page's character's name was Ariadne, who was the woman who helped Theseus kill the Minotaur in Greek myth. Once you see the movie, you can see why I got a little bit of joy out the character names. It definitely fits the characters. For those that don't know the basic plot, Leo and his team are hired to plant an idea in someone's mind, whereas they are typically hired to extract information from in their dreams. The premise is sound enough. Theoretically speaking, it is easier to obtain information from the subconscious mind than the conscious one. That's why a trained, professional hypnotist can be potent. And I'm not talking about the gimmicky ones at conferences. And Leo's character described what the result of inception quite eloquently that an idea implanted in the subconscious can spread like a virus once it's there, which is a pretty accurate statement. I also loved the idea of totems, which are objects they used to tell if they were in the dream world or the real world.
All in all, I'd recommend both flicks. I think a user review on Yahoo was pretty spot on when it that while it isn't a truly excellent film, it's great in that it isn't a regular summer popcorn movie and it requires you to think and use your brain.
I think that's why I've enjoyed his Batman reboot so much. They are exploring the human aspect of the superhero and supervillain and their psyches and their motivations. It's not "I'm good, you're bad. Let's fight." I've read recently that Nolan has been approached to do with the Superman universe what he's done with the Batman universe. I'm not 100% on board with this yet considering Superman actually has the superpowers that Batman lacks. But I have a feeling he will explore lonliness and abandonment. We will see. I'm sure he'll do something great with it.
Next time, I'll be back on topic. I've been working on Bible translations. And let me tell you, it's been hard finding old English bibles.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Part 1 on Christianity (The Beatitudes)
I will preface this post by informing you of why I'm writing this. Most people who know me know that I'm pretty much an atheist. Deism is a better word to describe my relationship with God. I was raised Lutheran, however I lost my faith back in my late teens. While I still believe the Big Man is up there, I don't see any benefit to organized religion. I tell you this because I have volunteered to help at my church's VBS (vacation Bible school) this week. I still call it my church because if I have a sudden epiphany, I know they will welcome me back with open arms. It's nice to feel productive during the day seeing as I work nights 99% of the time. I really can't remember why I said I'd help, but I'm pretty sure I couldn't come up with a logical reason to not to. In some twisted way, it's interesting to see the indoctrination of young minds. Yes, I'm a sick individual, but that's my psychology training kicking in. I really feel like I've been behind enemy lines all week. Now, onto the bulk of this post.
What set me off was a lady that I'm working with this week. We've been getting along great, don't get me wrong. But something she said just kind of crawled under my skin and is festering there. This year the focus has been on Paul and his ministry. The stories have been focusing on his travels and how he was arrested for teaching others about Jesus. The kids were on the other side of the room listening to the teacher, so they didn't hear her. The teacher said something about it being nice that we don't have to worry about being put in jail for talking about Jesus. But she just made some snide comment about how it may not be that way for much longer. That just got me to thinking about how Christians these days keep saying that the US is a Christian nation founded on Christian values, which in turn got me thinking about what Jesus really taught us and how his teachings are being hijacked to serve these people's desires. It mostly pissed me off simply because religious intolerance has led us to the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, the Holocaust and other innumerable events.
So, what did Jesus really teach us in the Gospel lessons? The first couple of stories are about him after his birth are him being baptized and his temptation by the devil. There isn't much to learn from these stories, as they just show that he is the son of God and that he can resist temptation from even the devil himself. Soon afterwards he started healing the masses and spreading the word about God's kingdom. His first glowing speech was the Sermon on the Mount, home of the oft-quoted Beatitudes.
"Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven. Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God. Blessed are they that are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven. Blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely for My sake." (Matthew 5:3-11).
I think that the meaning of this part of the sermon is that if you are downtrodden, your faith in God will ultimately make your pain and suffering worth it, as you will receive God's blessing and St. Peter will let you through the pearly gates into heaven. Not a bad moral to this story.
I do think one of the more interesting Beatitudes is the one regarding peacemakers, who will be called his children. What do you think Jesus would think of all the wars that have been carried out in his name? If peacemakers are going to be called children of God, shouldn't Christians strive for peace and avoid wars?
But my all-time favorite Beatitude that illustrates the hypocrisy of the modern church is the one about being humble. If the meek inherit the earth, what would Jesus have to say about the evangelical mega-churches? They get millions and millions of dollars, and yet most of it goes to the upkeep of their monstrosities of churches and other frivolous things. You know the Touchdown Jesus I wrote about last week? That church paid a quarter of a million to build a 62 foot tall statue. There's a group on Facebook petitioning the church to use the money that has been donated and money they were going to spend on rebuilding and putting it to better use. It has over 10,000 fans after a week. The church says that it was fully insured, so it's going to be getting money from it's insurance company anyways to pay for a new one, yet they are asking for donations. Do you really think that money will go towards the new statue? Most likely not. The people who operate Solid Rock Church and other mega-churches run them like businesses. It's a house of worship. Operate them as such, not some scheme to get you rich. Jesus lived in poverty. I'm not suggesting everyone live in poverty. I just think that it would be more Christ-like for the pastors and the people who operate these churches to not be making 6-figure incomes, live in mansions and drive expensive luxury cars. That is in no way humble. And don't give me this bullshit about how Jesus wants us to be successful. There is a definite line between success and excess, and these folks have crossed it. Jesus wanted us to use our success to help the unfortunate, not make extravagent purchases. You're supposed to tithe 10% of your income to your church, but that usually only ends up paying to upkeep costs. Like the Touchdown Jesus money, a lot of your discretionary spending is put to better use by making charitable donations. Remember those ubiquitous "WWJD" bracelets? I think that's what Jesus would do if he had any amount of money. Use what he needs to live comfortably and give the rest to charity.
Anyways, this is only part one of a series of posts on Christianity and why I think it's gone awry. Come back for more later.
What set me off was a lady that I'm working with this week. We've been getting along great, don't get me wrong. But something she said just kind of crawled under my skin and is festering there. This year the focus has been on Paul and his ministry. The stories have been focusing on his travels and how he was arrested for teaching others about Jesus. The kids were on the other side of the room listening to the teacher, so they didn't hear her. The teacher said something about it being nice that we don't have to worry about being put in jail for talking about Jesus. But she just made some snide comment about how it may not be that way for much longer. That just got me to thinking about how Christians these days keep saying that the US is a Christian nation founded on Christian values, which in turn got me thinking about what Jesus really taught us and how his teachings are being hijacked to serve these people's desires. It mostly pissed me off simply because religious intolerance has led us to the Crusades, the Spanish Inquisition, the Holocaust and other innumerable events.
So, what did Jesus really teach us in the Gospel lessons? The first couple of stories are about him after his birth are him being baptized and his temptation by the devil. There isn't much to learn from these stories, as they just show that he is the son of God and that he can resist temptation from even the devil himself. Soon afterwards he started healing the masses and spreading the word about God's kingdom. His first glowing speech was the Sermon on the Mount, home of the oft-quoted Beatitudes.
"Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven. Blessed are they that mourn, for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth. Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled. Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called the children of God. Blessed are they that are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the Kingdom of Heaven. Blessed are ye when men shall revile you and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely for My sake." (Matthew 5:3-11).
I think that the meaning of this part of the sermon is that if you are downtrodden, your faith in God will ultimately make your pain and suffering worth it, as you will receive God's blessing and St. Peter will let you through the pearly gates into heaven. Not a bad moral to this story.
I do think one of the more interesting Beatitudes is the one regarding peacemakers, who will be called his children. What do you think Jesus would think of all the wars that have been carried out in his name? If peacemakers are going to be called children of God, shouldn't Christians strive for peace and avoid wars?
But my all-time favorite Beatitude that illustrates the hypocrisy of the modern church is the one about being humble. If the meek inherit the earth, what would Jesus have to say about the evangelical mega-churches? They get millions and millions of dollars, and yet most of it goes to the upkeep of their monstrosities of churches and other frivolous things. You know the Touchdown Jesus I wrote about last week? That church paid a quarter of a million to build a 62 foot tall statue. There's a group on Facebook petitioning the church to use the money that has been donated and money they were going to spend on rebuilding and putting it to better use. It has over 10,000 fans after a week. The church says that it was fully insured, so it's going to be getting money from it's insurance company anyways to pay for a new one, yet they are asking for donations. Do you really think that money will go towards the new statue? Most likely not. The people who operate Solid Rock Church and other mega-churches run them like businesses. It's a house of worship. Operate them as such, not some scheme to get you rich. Jesus lived in poverty. I'm not suggesting everyone live in poverty. I just think that it would be more Christ-like for the pastors and the people who operate these churches to not be making 6-figure incomes, live in mansions and drive expensive luxury cars. That is in no way humble. And don't give me this bullshit about how Jesus wants us to be successful. There is a definite line between success and excess, and these folks have crossed it. Jesus wanted us to use our success to help the unfortunate, not make extravagent purchases. You're supposed to tithe 10% of your income to your church, but that usually only ends up paying to upkeep costs. Like the Touchdown Jesus money, a lot of your discretionary spending is put to better use by making charitable donations. Remember those ubiquitous "WWJD" bracelets? I think that's what Jesus would do if he had any amount of money. Use what he needs to live comfortably and give the rest to charity.
Anyways, this is only part one of a series of posts on Christianity and why I think it's gone awry. Come back for more later.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
A quick thought about the oil spill and government oversight
I hope that there's going to be a massive overhaul of MMS and the government's oversight of the oil industry. I'm glad that Obama announced that he is naming another czar that the Republicans hate so much to oversee the oil industry. The people who don't want the government to overreach and have an oversight committee for every aspect of American life I think are the idealists, not me. We live in a very twisted, greedy era. If the government doesn't step in and tell people running industries and businesses what they can and cannot do, they will get away with bloody murder without so much a slap on the wrist. Deregulation and lax oversight is what got us into the hot economic mess we are in now. Deregulation lets people like Bernie Madoff get away with gigantic cases of fraud. Sure, there are corrupt people in government as well. Case in point, the cozy relationship between MMS and the oil companies. But I think as a whole, the people at the top of industry and business pose a greater threat to the American people than the government does. I'm probably going to be called a socialist for verbalizing this, but I can live with that. I'd rather have the government looking out for me like they're supposed to rather than watching them sit back and let all hell break loose.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
BP spill microblog
I've stayed away from this as long as I could. Last week was an outrageous week for BP. First they bought the term "oil spill" on Google so that way their website and their response efforts are at the top of the page. Go ahead and try it if you haven't yet. Right there at the top, in a pale yellow box: www.bp.com/gulfofmexicoresponse. And then while I was watching Rachel Maddow last week she had a story about the fine print on the permit that BP filed in order to drill at the Deepwater Horizon. Apparently their paperwork said that they weren't worried about the impact on the coastline because they thought that it was too far off shore for it to be a threat if there was a catastrophic event leading to an oil spill, and therefore didn't prepare any contingency plans. They listed a walrus as an animal that could be potentially threatened in the case of a spill, for Christ's sake. Then she revealed that BP's "in case of emergency" person had died several years prior to them applying for this permit. Not to mention that several other people listed had bad contact information. Seriously?!? And now I read today that BP had some emails circulating about the executives disregarding advice about safety 6 days prior to the explosion. Again: seriously?!?
And now I'm starting to hear that the British are unhappy with the way our government is dealing with BP and the beating their public image is taking. I'm sorry, UK. If it would make you feel better, we can set up an oil rig in the English Channel that is managed by, oh I don't know, let's say Shell. They're an American-based oil company. Now let's blow it up and let over 50,000 barrels of oil spill out into the English Channel, ruining your fisheries, beaches, tourism, not to mention the toll on your wildlife. Then you can tell us that we are being too harsh on BP.
But a silver lining to this whole debacle is that I hope we will finally invest in clean energy and better and more efficient ways to handle a crisis of this magnitude.
On a lighter note, the statue known to many in this area of the world as either Touchdown Jesus or Big Butter Jesus is no longer with us. The image to the left is of what he looked like before he burned to the ground. To those of you not from Southeastern Ohio, this is a 6-story tall statue of Jesus. He looks like a referee signaling a touchdown, hence the name Touchdown Jesus. He got the nickname Big Butter Jesus because he looks like he's carved out of butter. Well, it looks as if lightning struck him last night, causing him to burn. But honestly, how could they not see this coming? He's a statue made of fiberglass and styrofoam with a metal framework. He was just begging to be hit by lightning. But don't worry, kiddies. He'll rise again in 3 days. OK, maybe not that soon. But word on the street is that the people at the church are already planning his resurrection. And now let's see the progression:
And now I'm starting to hear that the British are unhappy with the way our government is dealing with BP and the beating their public image is taking. I'm sorry, UK. If it would make you feel better, we can set up an oil rig in the English Channel that is managed by, oh I don't know, let's say Shell. They're an American-based oil company. Now let's blow it up and let over 50,000 barrels of oil spill out into the English Channel, ruining your fisheries, beaches, tourism, not to mention the toll on your wildlife. Then you can tell us that we are being too harsh on BP.
But a silver lining to this whole debacle is that I hope we will finally invest in clean energy and better and more efficient ways to handle a crisis of this magnitude.
On a lighter note, the statue known to many in this area of the world as either Touchdown Jesus or Big Butter Jesus is no longer with us. The image to the left is of what he looked like before he burned to the ground. To those of you not from Southeastern Ohio, this is a 6-story tall statue of Jesus. He looks like a referee signaling a touchdown, hence the name Touchdown Jesus. He got the nickname Big Butter Jesus because he looks like he's carved out of butter. Well, it looks as if lightning struck him last night, causing him to burn. But honestly, how could they not see this coming? He's a statue made of fiberglass and styrofoam with a metal framework. He was just begging to be hit by lightning. But don't worry, kiddies. He'll rise again in 3 days. OK, maybe not that soon. But word on the street is that the people at the church are already planning his resurrection. And now let's see the progression:First, a flaming Jesus. Then, his metal skeleton:
Monday, June 14, 2010
True Blood is back!!
I started the last post with a beauty note, and I'll do the same for this one. I finally have figured out the trick to having a manicure last longer than a couple days. Normally if I give myself a manicure, it only lasts a couple days, three at the most. I'm not about to pay to get my nails done
at the salon every week just so I can get something that lasts. Anyways, it's nothing fancy, but I got to thinking about why when I used to get acrylic nails the polish lasted a couple weeks. Well, they buff the hell out of your nails before they even put on the nails, then buff the acrylics. Well, lo and behold, it's kept the polish from having any major chips for a week now. And let me just sing the praises of China Glaze. It's a couple bucks cheaper than OPI and I think it has a better selection of colors. How many shades of cherry red cremes can you come up with, OPI? Seriously? The color here is called Sexy Silhouette and it reminds me of the OPI color Kinky in Helsinki, which they sadly discontinued.
Anyways, my favorite show in the entire universe started it's last 3rd season last night. Yes, True Blood is finally back on the air. And before it even started airing, I read somewhere that it's been renewed for a 4th season already. (SPOILERS: a season of Eric not having a memory and being decidedly un-Eric will be great. That's at least if they keep that aspect of the 4th book.) I will admit that I'm not a huge fan of first couple episodes of the past seasons. But they are necessary to move forward the plot of the season. Last night, being the first, set up the basic plots. Sam is on the hunt to get to know his birth family. Eric and Queen Sophie-Anne need to sell a shitload of V via Lafayette to get the magister off their back. Tara is extremely depressed because Eggs is dead. Sookie enlists Jessica to try and find Bill (who's been kidnapped and taken to Mississippi). And we get a very brief introduction to the new group of supernatural creatures we get this season: werewolves. In the countless articles I've read about this season, I have some theories. I've read that the person who kidnaps Bill in the books isn't the one who did it in the show. So that means Lorena isn't the kidnapper. Whoever did, uses werewolves as lackeys and is based in Mississippi because I know we get introduced to King Russell. I hear we do find out who did it next week, so I'm going to go out on a limb and say that King Russell or his husband did it to get to Sookie, much like Queen Sophie-Anne did in the books. I also know that they are finally giving Pam a more recurring role. I love Pam. Aside from Eric, she's my favorite vampire. And the brief glimpse of the werewolves has made me happy. They are happily using real wolves. Let's do a side-by-side comparison.
This is a True Blood werewolf:
This is a Twilight werewolf:
One is on a movie budget and looks horrible. The other is on a TV budget. Yes, it's HBO, but it's still a smaller budget than a movie budget. I will say that the werewolves in Twilight are required to do a lot more than they need to do on True Blood. That's were CGI comes in handy, but couldn't they have made them a little more realistic?
Yes, I'm very anti-Twilight. It's horrible. The books were good. The movies are just simply awful.
In other news, another week also means another Doctor Who. It was a rather good episode. Nothing horribly memorable, but good. A friend and I thought at first the auto-pilot program was the Master. I am looking forward to what I'm sure is the first part of another 2-episode arc. The same friend has a theory that the crack in the universe is the bubble that the Doctor put Gallifrey and the other Timelords in, which is about to burst open and bring the Time Wars upon us again. Seeing as this is towards the end of this series, it makes a lot of sense, as these will be the final 2 episodes. It sets up a great new series. It also makes sense if you look back at the episodes with the Silurians ("I'm the last of my species." "No you're not. I'm the last of my species and I know how that sits in your heart.") and the Venice episode (Signora Calvierri guilting the Doctor with the extinction of her species from Saturnyne). They are amping up the guilt on the Doctor for the extinction of the Time Lords. She also made the brilliant realization that the TARDIS is getting slowly more pale. It had a nice amber glow towards the beginning and is now bleaching out. What this means, I'm sure we will find out.
And in World Cup news, the US surprisingly held it's own against England. Yes, my friends, I'm a Yank and I will always choose the US over England. I'm sure Green will never hear the end of it during the tournament and after when he returns home. I will say that those damn vuvuzela are extremely annoying. It sounds like a hive of angry bees in that stadium! I'm just glad I'm not there!
at the salon every week just so I can get something that lasts. Anyways, it's nothing fancy, but I got to thinking about why when I used to get acrylic nails the polish lasted a couple weeks. Well, they buff the hell out of your nails before they even put on the nails, then buff the acrylics. Well, lo and behold, it's kept the polish from having any major chips for a week now. And let me just sing the praises of China Glaze. It's a couple bucks cheaper than OPI and I think it has a better selection of colors. How many shades of cherry red cremes can you come up with, OPI? Seriously? The color here is called Sexy Silhouette and it reminds me of the OPI color Kinky in Helsinki, which they sadly discontinued.Anyways, my favorite show in the entire universe started it's last 3rd season last night. Yes, True Blood is finally back on the air. And before it even started airing, I read somewhere that it's been renewed for a 4th season already. (SPOILERS: a season of Eric not having a memory and being decidedly un-Eric will be great. That's at least if they keep that aspect of the 4th book.) I will admit that I'm not a huge fan of first couple episodes of the past seasons. But they are necessary to move forward the plot of the season. Last night, being the first, set up the basic plots. Sam is on the hunt to get to know his birth family. Eric and Queen Sophie-Anne need to sell a shitload of V via Lafayette to get the magister off their back. Tara is extremely depressed because Eggs is dead. Sookie enlists Jessica to try and find Bill (who's been kidnapped and taken to Mississippi). And we get a very brief introduction to the new group of supernatural creatures we get this season: werewolves. In the countless articles I've read about this season, I have some theories. I've read that the person who kidnaps Bill in the books isn't the one who did it in the show. So that means Lorena isn't the kidnapper. Whoever did, uses werewolves as lackeys and is based in Mississippi because I know we get introduced to King Russell. I hear we do find out who did it next week, so I'm going to go out on a limb and say that King Russell or his husband did it to get to Sookie, much like Queen Sophie-Anne did in the books. I also know that they are finally giving Pam a more recurring role. I love Pam. Aside from Eric, she's my favorite vampire. And the brief glimpse of the werewolves has made me happy. They are happily using real wolves. Let's do a side-by-side comparison.
This is a True Blood werewolf:
This is a Twilight werewolf:
One is on a movie budget and looks horrible. The other is on a TV budget. Yes, it's HBO, but it's still a smaller budget than a movie budget. I will say that the werewolves in Twilight are required to do a lot more than they need to do on True Blood. That's were CGI comes in handy, but couldn't they have made them a little more realistic?
Yes, I'm very anti-Twilight. It's horrible. The books were good. The movies are just simply awful.
In other news, another week also means another Doctor Who. It was a rather good episode. Nothing horribly memorable, but good. A friend and I thought at first the auto-pilot program was the Master. I am looking forward to what I'm sure is the first part of another 2-episode arc. The same friend has a theory that the crack in the universe is the bubble that the Doctor put Gallifrey and the other Timelords in, which is about to burst open and bring the Time Wars upon us again. Seeing as this is towards the end of this series, it makes a lot of sense, as these will be the final 2 episodes. It sets up a great new series. It also makes sense if you look back at the episodes with the Silurians ("I'm the last of my species." "No you're not. I'm the last of my species and I know how that sits in your heart.") and the Venice episode (Signora Calvierri guilting the Doctor with the extinction of her species from Saturnyne). They are amping up the guilt on the Doctor for the extinction of the Time Lords. She also made the brilliant realization that the TARDIS is getting slowly more pale. It had a nice amber glow towards the beginning and is now bleaching out. What this means, I'm sure we will find out.
And in World Cup news, the US surprisingly held it's own against England. Yes, my friends, I'm a Yank and I will always choose the US over England. I'm sure Green will never hear the end of it during the tournament and after when he returns home. I will say that those damn vuvuzela are extremely annoying. It sounds like a hive of angry bees in that stadium! I'm just glad I'm not there!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)