[Vision2020] Longhaired Preachers (pace Joe Hill)
Fri, 28 May 2004 07:37:34 -0700
While I certainly continue to disagree with Eric's defense of Doug's desire
to "take over" the Palouse, I admire him for continuing the dialogue on the
listserve. It's keeping him busy. I wonder, Joan, if, in a countermove,
the Church of Joan and Carl should attempt to coerce, by gunpoint if
necessary, the less enlightened in the area to our way of thinking, which
you and I know to be the real truth? I confess to a certain lack of skill
in the handling of firearms, however. It could turn out badly.
Carl Westberg Jr.
>From: "Joan Opyr" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>To: "Vision2020 Moscow" <email@example.com>
>Subject: [Vision2020] Longhaired Preachers (pace Joe Hill)
>Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 22:27:20 -0700
>Eric writes in response to Melynda:
> >. . . it presupposes that there's one truest religion.
> >There must be, because something is true. Either a god created us, or
> >he didn't. If he did, than that makes less true the religions who
> >believe he didn't. Either Jesus rose or he didn't. If he did, then
> >that makes less true the religions of those who believe he didn't.
> >There is a truth, therefore some guesses at it are going to be closer
> >than others. If you deny this, you're more of a sentimentalist than a
>Or, one might be a Universalist, denying none of the above but recognizing
>the possibility of other apparently competing but in fact simultaneous
>truths. Is God so simple that s/he can be utterly encompassed by the
>limited religious thought of a single people, a single denomination, or a
>single individual? What's sentimental about believing that there is more
>in heaven and earth, Eric, than is dreamt of in your philosophy? Or, for
>that matter, in mine? I haven't cornered the market on right thinking,
>though I consider the occasional hostile takeover bid.
> >I doubt there is a person on earth that has the exact understanding of
>who God is and the
> >precise truth on every question of philosophy. I doubt any person has a
> >complete understanding of the Bible. But you can bet some people are
> >closer than others.
>Why? Why would God give the truth to some but not to others? Why Yahweh
>in Israel and Shiva and Kali and Krishna in India? Why Jesus for you but
>not for me? Attempts at argument on this point invariably fail because
>they all boil down to the question of faith: I know what I know because God
>told me so. Even the great C. S. Lewis was unable to leap this final
>hurdle and win the triple crown. 'Mere Christianity,' like so many other
>attempts to prove that its author has the one, true answer, ultimately ends
>up biting its own tail.
> >All day long you live with absolute truth, and yet when it comes to the
> >of utmost importance, you want to deny that it exists!! Talk about
> >faith! Melynda, I could have you preaching "absolute truth" in five
> >minutes. All I would have to do is accuse you of murder and throw you
> >in jail. You'd be screaming "absolute truth" at the top of your lungs,
> >and paying a lawyer to argue about it.
>Ah, but now you're confusing absolute truth with objective fact. Melynda
>did not murder Colonel Mustard in the library with a candlestick because
>five witnesses and a video camera place her in the cereal aisle at
>Tidyman's at the time of death. The judicial system (in theory, anyway)
>relies on facts, not absolute truths. You can't skip from religion to
>legalism without tripping on your jump rope.
> >So it is clear that many who think they are Christians simply are not.
>They are deceiving
> >themselves. Two people can have different interpretations of a religion,
>but one is certainly closer to >the real truth. And when they meet God,
>they will find out who was closer.
>And I'm content to wait for that day. My objection to Doug -- and now to
>you, since you wish that you could "coerce" the entire Palouse into
>believing your interpretation of the Bible -- is that you aren't prepared
>to await God's judgment. You want to jump the gun; you want to embalm us
>while we're still breathing. Why rush the Rapture? Why try to enshrine
>theological ideas about heaven into secular, earthly law? You've got three
>score and ten years to tough it out down here and then bang, you're home
>free. I have no doubt that you believe we'd all be happier in your version
>of paradise, but I don't want to go. Look at it this way -- if you're
>right and I'm wrong, you'll never have to see me again.
>Joan Opyr/Auntie Establishment
>PS: Maybe I'll get to Heaven and God will say, "Hard cheese, honey; this
>here's Wilson country," but I'm willing to risk it. In fact, I'm
>cautiously optimistic that I'll get pie in the sky when I die.
> Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download :
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now!