Anyone have their copy of "Brave New World," by Aldous Huxley, handy? That whole "What Would Jesus Drive?" campaign reminded me of something said about Jesus being used to promote products. I'm pretty sure it was from "Brave New World."

Dandelion: Check out this:
http://www.av1611.org/wwjd.html

That is a very interesting site, but seems to see the pollution question in terms of a false alternative.

The thrust of it is that because God "damages" the earth (the flood, plagues, and destruction during the end times, etc.), that christians have no obligation to work toward the preservation of the environment. With that conclusion I disagree.

I have not seen any Biblical rescinding of the command given to Adam and Eve (by implication to all mankind), where the following is given:

"And the LORD God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden, to dress it and to keep it." (Genesis 2:15).

Also, when God finished the creation, he pronounced it to be "good". I realize this was before the fall, but don't see the renunctiation of the command to dress and keep the "garden".

The site listed has a total focus on the next life and salvation; but MANY of God's commandments deal with how we are to live TODAY in terms of our relations with our fellowman and God. This is one of the major criticisms of much modern evangelical/fundamentalist christian thought. . . that the focus on loving your fellow man in the here-and-now is secondary to the personal concern for salvation in the next life.

I don't see how this site is unable to reconcile the two into a common theology. How about if we seek out salvation in Christ, but still feel the obligation to serve our fellowmen? Why this site, and many others, see these as mutually exclusive is beyond me.

There is also the legitimate debate on seeing Christ as Lord AND Savior. Why NOT both? The idea that we can be Christian without following Jesus's walk and example seems a bit weak to me. This goes to the fruits-of-the-spirit debate. IF we do not manifest the fruits of the spirit in our lives, THEN, some would argue, by definition we are not saved.

This is a bit off-stream from a Bradbury site (but apropo with a Sunday morning discussion), but the above referenced site seems a bit absolutist for my tastes. There is room in christianity for some discussion. I also, in contradiction to the site, see room for discussion on what it means to say that we accept Jesus as BOTH Lord and Savior.

"What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? Can faith save him? . . Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone." (James 2: 14, 17)

"And hereby we do know that we know him. If we keep his commandments. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him. he that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked." (I John 2:3-6)



[This message has been edited by Mr. Dark (edited 01-05-2003).]

Mr. Dark::::: Actually, I was looking for the guy who came up with the term Dandelion was asking....... and this site had his name... Didn't go thru all the copy.
Hope all is best as possible with you, for 2003.......... will E-mail by tomorrow....

I just re-read Brave New World tonight and didn't notice passages talking about using Jesus as a commercial endorsement. But I may have missed something. I read it in one sitting and was going a little faster than my usual snail-pace.

Also, in my entry above, no offense was meant to those who adhere to a different theology than mine (which is probably under construction most of the time, anyway!). I read the web page and reacted to it. If I offended anyone, please accept my honest, earnest apologies. It is not my intent to tell others what to believe nor is it my intent to belittle others' beliefs.

I believe the formulation of a personal theology is a very personal process based on many factors. When people "do" religion in good faith, they have my respect and support.

Mr. Dark::::::
Pertaining to paragraph 2, where you say..."It is not my intent to tell others what to believe..."

....Well, Gosh, I don't know to believe you or not on that.....

(....just say I'm having another attack of After the Holiday Grumps)

By the way...did you take Evelyn Wood Reading Dynamics or Something? How do you manage to go thru a book like...Brave New World ...at one sitting....?

Mr. Dark::::::
See! I "submit" message. It says, "Failed to Connect". Try again... and BINGO.... got duplicates. That's like the 4th time that's happened.....
Say, by the way... I read somewhere that Ray met Aldous Huxley at one time, somewhere. I am sure of that...(.I think!!)

[This message has been edited by Nard Kordell (edited 01-06-2003).]

I've had the same experience with the site. I've learned to wait it out to avoid double-postings. It tells you it's failed to connect, but it is still trying after it sends you that message. So it you wait, it will work itself out and post.

As to the other comment, that you don't know whether to believe me or not when I say I don't mean to tell people what to believe . . . What can I say? I take religious beliefs seriously (as I know you do!!!). But the truth is I take many religious beliefs and claims seriously. I reacted to this person's site because he took a bunch of verses out of context and then acted like his was the only perspective possible. This bothers me in religion as it does in philosophy.

Personally, I do admit to struggling with the idea of "alter-call" theology in Christianity. I don't mean to cast stones at someone else's belief. It just doesn't resonate with me. I think we spend too much time arguing about what it takes to be saved and not enough time trying to understand what it means to be a disciple. I believe if we truly live as disciples of Christ (as defined by Him in the NT) then the question of salvation will follow. When we focus on salvation and ignore the call to discipleship we may be denying ourselves the full scope of what Christ's call to discipleship is. Clearly the scriptures tell us to seek out salvation in Christ. But not to the exclusion of taking seriously Christ's call to discipleship.

As to your comment on reading "Brave New World" in one sitting, I used to read pretty fast, but slowed down when I started to study philosophy, theology, scripture and literature. Speeding through a book may be great, but a lot of learning is done through reflection and synthesizing what we read. I don't believe you can "speed reflect" or "speed synthesize". My very fun trip through "Brave New World" was enjoyable, but I would need to slow down and go through it again to get full value out of it.

"I believe if we truly live as disciples of Christ (as defined by Him in the NT)"

Not to open a can of worms, but...as Christ defined Himself or as Christ defined disciples?

Your post was great. You used all the quotes I would have except the good old Golden Rule, "Do Unto Others...." That is, how would YOU like to inherit a polluted/stripped/despoiled planet? Not a healthy or happy place for people or other life forms, so in respecting God's works, one respects the rights of fellow beings on the planet, leaving a better legacy.

Jesus peddling products: maybe it was Harlan Ellison or some other author than Huxley? Know I read it someplace edgy. Good question, what would Jesus drive? If He really wanted to save the environment, would He walk, or ride a donkey, or would He keep up with the times to reach more people? That question is HYPOTHETICAL, folks!

Can of worms?

Gee, can I shake out a couple of them onto the ground....?

There is good in everything.... because God is in everything. The face, the character, the personality of God, has been defined, in Christianity, as the character of Christ. It is understood, not thru the rational mind and thinking....but thru the "breath" of God, his Spirit...

The subject Mr. Dark is attempting to explain, is too vast for speculative eyes.... for this 'site'....

But in attempt to state a position per his idea of getting to heaven....in the New Testament, the letter to the Ephesians, in the first 2 chapters, does it not make it clear: it isn't about your behavior that gets you to heaven, it is what you believe about something that is already true and done... that is, the door to heaven is open, and the struggle is in "getting rid of, thru a lot of pain and time usually...your own ideas of getting there, Versus...God breathed, thru His word... understanding of how you get there.....

Remember Jesus said, "You must be as perfect as my heavenly Father is perfect to get into heaven." That means, I can try to I am 105 years old, and will never be 'That' perfect. So, if I am to take Christ's statement at face value...I need God Himself, who is perfect... to overtake my entire soul and mind with Himself. One drop of God in my ocean of self, does not 'neutralize' the Ocean.....But the more I "dry up", the more I find that God's drop is all I need....

I never was able to get a hold of Bradbury's..."Burnt out Rabbis,and Priests, etc...." I expect, tho, as a Unitarian, Ray is not...going to have an "Ephesians" flavor to salvation....I am sure...

[This message has been edited by Nard Kordell (edited 01-06-2003).]

I've come across an article where B mentions about his relation to Huxley and Orwell.
http regon.com/Bradbury1001.htm

I hope it helps

I've come across an article where B mentions about his relation to Huxley and Orwell.
http://oregonmag.com/Bradbury1001.htm


sorry the first time was wrong

Ana - This was a very fun article. I'm printing it out as we speak/write.

On salvation (agreeably too large a subject here): I guess my "thing" is that I want a theory of salvation that includes Ephesians; but I also want it to include the Gospels, and James and I John. When Christ says we must be as perfect as His Father, I see several aspects to that. One, that perfection is In Christ. Two, we are commanded by Christ to follow his teachings and to be true disciples. Three, Paul writes that "I can do all things through Jesus, who strengtheneth me".

Paul is one of my personal heroes, but a complete NT theology factors in all NT writers and is not just a Pauline theory of Grace. Again, I seek a middle ground (or synthesized theology) between Paul, James, John and the gospels.

As to the role of rational thought in religion, I agree that there is a necessary mystical element to religion (see William James' "Varieties of Religious Experience), but I think rational thought is a gift of God and is one of the means by which we understand God.

"And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures." (Acts 17:2)

"And he [Paul] reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and pursuaded the Jews and the Greeks." (acts 18:4)

Why would Paul "reason" from the scriptures in attempting to teach and convert, if reason were irrelevant to the quest to know God?

Since discipleship is a matter of following a teacher, I would say the discipleship I'm talking about is in the question of what does Christ expect of those who claim to be His disciples?

I think one location where Christ Himself identifies his demands to discipleship is in the Sermon on the Mount -- which includes the golden rule (Matthew chapters 5 - 7).

One of the concluding ideas in the Sermon on the Mount is in Matt 7:21, where Christ says, "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven."

While some writers have argued that the kingdom of heaven has nothing to do with salvation, I'm not so clear (scripturally) on why that argument is made.

I also understand that "the will of my heavenly father" is sometimes argued to be simply faith or an alter call; but the scope of the New Testament spends so much time discussing the expectations Christ has for His disciples, that it bears serious thought.

Final note: I know this is a Ray Bradbury site. I just went off on the site referenced above and apologize to all for the diversion from a focus on Ray's wonderful works. I have recently acquired "A Chapbook for Burnt-Out Priests, Rabbis and Ministers" and will probably be "inspired" to open some new topics as I work through that book. This may be a more relevant way to look at Ray's theology. We'll see what he has in that book. Again, sorry for the diversion!



[This message has been edited by Mr. Dark (edited 01-06-2003).]

Ana,
Wonderful article...thanks! I'll print it out when I get back home.

Mr. Dark::::::

Ah, you have somewhat twisted my arm to ask .."The Question"...

This Questions puts to rest all the philosphy, all the reasonings, all the pros and cons of everything, all the arguments.

I love asking this question to somebody standing even next to me at a crosswalk downtown. I have discovered, to my surprise...that everybody seems to have this Question on their mind...no matter who they are, with or without an answer...

I love this Question, because... this is the end all Question, all the decorations gone, and all that counts is the reply. The Question is simple: "Are You Going to Heaven When You Die?"

If you stop...to consider your life, to pause, thinking things over....the answer is 'no'. If I pointed to your hands, and asked...are these your hands?... would you choose to sit down a moment and ponder the possibility for or against? ....You either know, or don't know.