Woo, theology! It's what all the cool kids do on a Friday night!

[axver]

Wow, it's November already. Where does the time go? I'm struggling to keep up with this year. I do recall asking for a fast year back at its start, and I quite delightfully seem to have gotten my wish. This coming month is going to be chaotic. I'm excited and nervous, and I probably won't be on LJ much, so I apologise if I take forever to

Comments

[writergeek313]

Good luck with keeping up with everything. I definitely understand chaos--right now I'm applying for about 65 different college teaching jobs, working on my dissertation, teaching, and working as the editor of a journal. Things won't probably slow down for me until after the start of 2007, but part of me is definitely counting the days until then.

You're still getting to check out a few U2 shows in the coming weeks, yes? (I've barely been on Interference at all lately--I had enough of all the negativity). I've got a ticket for Hawaii but am still wrestling with myself about whether I can justify the time and travel expenses to actually go.

[axver]

Yikes, you are busy. I suddenly feel as if I have very few commitments! The U2 shows are part of what's keeping me really busy; I've seven U2 concerts, a few exams, a major essay, and a submission for a journal to do in the next month. Certainly makes things hectic!

Heh, it's funny, the "omg teh selloutz" posts on Interference annoy me, but the blindingly positive ones irritate me even more. People, Bono didn't invent singing.

[writergeek313]

Seven--wow! I really think these will be some of the finest shows of the tour, since they've had the break and know how long fans have been waiting for them to make it to that part of the world. I just hope they don't blow it by playing too many ATYCLB songs. I'm glad to hear they've been rehearsing Kite, as that's one of the few songs on the album I truly like, but I'd rather see them dig into the back catalogue. Out of Control in a stadium would be mind boggling, and they really need to play One Tree Hill again. I saw them once on the first leg and they were good, but I couldn't believe how much better they were on the third leg--so much more energy, and they seemed to be having more fun

[axver]

I was originally only intending to do three shows, five at most, but then it swelled into seven. Now I'm glad I'm seeing that many, after all the fun I had at the rehearsal last night. We waited for hours and we got really wet, but damn, SO WORTH IT. I agree on the ATYCLB songs matter, though with qualifiers, heh. The new version of Kite is absolutely beautiful and Walk On is a favourite guilty pleasure of mine, and I really get into Beautiful Day and, yes, Elevation live (though I wouldn't miss either if they were cut), but we really don't need Stuck In A Moment. I really hope we aren't going to miss out on the Boy stuff. I would even be happy with I Will Follow just because I haven't heard it live yet. And I'm going to be so nervous before the Auckland shows, desperately hoping for One Tree Hill

Glad to hear

[headachegrey]

...you can reconcile with Christianity. And kudos on emphasizing the historical context of the OT - I seriously wish a course on biblical history was required before even opening the thing, heh.

That said, no Old Testament means no need for a Saviour, really, so it's still necessary for comprehending faith, if not living it.

T

Re: Glad to hear

[axver]

Heh, it certainly would be useful if more people took courses on Biblical history. Then we wouldn't encounter so many outlandish claims! I find myself often equally disappointed by atheist caricatures of the Old Testament as I am with Christian ignorance of it.

Interestingly enough, I find myself conceiving of alternate scenarios in which Jesus would still be quite necessary. But those are just mental games without much basis in fact. It's just hard to know where to draw the line with the Old Testament, because some parts of it truly seem abhorrent, especially to a pacifist like myself.

[miriamus]

Deism?

[axver]

I've considered it, quite seriously. It certainly provides convenient answers to a few tricky questions, but I feel it leaves some other equally important questions wholly unanswered.

[laughing_shadow]

I'll comment on the substance of this post laster, but for now

define themselves as a privileged "us" against an unprivileged "other"

You are getting more and more academic by the day : P

Before you know it you'll be dismissing OT history via a Foucauldian power-knowledge critique, & THEN I will be able to mistake you for a phD ( ;

[axver]

'You are getting more and more academic by the day'

Haha, when I wrote that, I thought "... André, you've been paying too much attention in uni, haven't you?"

'Before you know it you'll be dismissing OT history via a Foucauldian power-knowledge critique, & THEN I will be able to mistake you for a phD'

Haha! Oh no, not Foucault! I'm already tiring of hearing about him and it's only been a year. Of course, maybe I really have been paying too much attention, because it seems most other people haven't got far past name recognition yet.

[laughing_shadow]

PEA ESS - the funamental thing to remember about science is that it as A way of thinking about the world, not THE way of thinking about the world. And no less socio-historically constructed then other forms of thinking to boot. For myself I reject scientific realism (i.e. I do not believe science allows us to understand some underlying reality as it is) and therefore do not generally waste my time on "science tells us" arguments re: God.

[tinandcopper]

Great point. Numerous other societies have developed very extensive, very coherent physical taxonomies, relevant to their needs and environments. A cow falls down because it has been struck with the evil eye, not primarily because it's front ligaments are strained. The viewpoint is reinforced when the cow gets up after being treated for the evil eye. Many other very interesting cases can be discussed (although for a good discussion I have to do more research).

I'm curious to know what system you have in place of 'scientific realism.' Is all knowledge merely culturally constructed, and "reality" simply a social construct? Is there nothing that we can study, and be wrong in our observations about?

[axver]

I too would like to hear more of your perspective. I guess I've been raised in a society that's made me accustomed to strongly and extensively privilege science. I find myself very reluctant to even argue against its importance just because I do not wish for such arguments to be construed as anti-intellectual.