I just found these, enjoy

Equality

I find it kind of strange when I come to look at the bible and especially the NT to find so much explicitly or implicitly within the teachings of Jesus, and his followers is about the radical nature of his message. I see his message being about the equality of all people and about tearing down the constructs we place around ourselves to include some and not others. To separate ourselves and make ourselves into the elite. In the honour-shame society into which Jesus was born there were things that were expected of you depending upon your social standing and things that you did not do for the same reasons. To do otherwise was to decrease your and your families honour. Into this society came Jesus who did the 'shameful' thing of associating with the poor, the sick, the prostitutes, the tax collectors and what is worse he taught others to do the same. His ministry and message were that no one was better than any other person, we are all equal. Paul continued this message in the early church (not saying that the other apostles did not) being captured most simply in his words 'There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female'.

In the parable of the landowner in Matthew 20:1-16 we read that the 'first will be last, and the last will be first'. Now in the context of the parable this doesn't actually make any sense. Because in the parable the people who arrived first don't get paid any less than those that arrived last which that conclusion implies that they did (excepting of course if we calculate out that they got a lower rate of pay, but that isn't the clear meaning of the parable). If however we understand 'the first will be last and the last will be first' to mean 'the first will be as the last and the last will be as the first' then appears to be closer to the situation described in the parable. In this world there is no elitism, no one is more special, better or worse, more likely to be favoured by G@d than any one else.

Christ came to the Jewish world were they had implicitly believed that they were better than the nations. The chruch has failed in this mission. By removing the elitism created by being the chosen people we have set up a new elitism of salvation. A way to exclude and keep the love of G@d to ourselves. This is not the message of Jesus, a message of hope and reconciliation to the whole world.

Finally,I was talking to one of my friends a while back discussing encountering other religions and what Christianity has to offer the world that other religions do not. The standard Christian answer is that, we have Christ to offer, and that he is our assurance from G@d of our salvation and redemption. However, in encountering other religions often they do not need this assurance or already have their own form of assurance. In my opinion, erroneous and ill informed as it is, I think this is a point that Christ offers to the world there is an equality that we do not give to one another that is at the heart of the gospel message. No longer are the poor, sick, and naked viewed as those cursed by G@d but as those who are loved by G@d.

Human Rights Film Festival ii

Here goes what and when people are going to see things. Give me a text or leave a comment if you're interested and hopefully stuff will be organised.

Lost Children:
Wednesday 7.45pm

1000 women and a dream:
Saturday 2pm

Drowned Out:
Sunday 8pm

and it sounds like some might be interested in going to see Mardi Gras on Friday at 5.30pm but the above are ones people are already going to see or got the most displays of interest.

Princesses and Angels

I was listening to ZM a few mornings back and they were discussing some issue regarding the ways that males and females perceive things differently. Anyway someone made the comment was that women are princesses and angels. What does that make men, warriors and ogres?

But then again for all the words said for gender equality there still are fundamental perceptions of the behaviour of both genders. This is especially to be noted when kids are younger, a phrase often heard is 'boys will be boys' in other words boys are allowed to and should play violent games when younger, because that is what boys do. But not girls? Is it that there is a fundamental difference in the genetic makeup of boys which makes them aggresive into warriors and ogres? Or could it be that because such behaviour while not smiled upon is not frowned upon, while not desireable is forbidden? And since it is not forbidden then the boy finds that he can do such things without reprimand (excepting of course hitting a girl).

Conversely, are little girls naturally less troublesome than little boys? Or because they are little princesses and angels are they taught that they do not indulge in those things that grubby ill-mannered little boys do? Are these differences inherent or are they structures that people inherent force upon their kids making or allowing them to conform to the expected behaviours of their respective genders?

This is another post of interest dealing with a similar topic.

Human Rights Film Festival

I don't know how many of you know but the Human Rights Film Festival is coming to Christchurch next week. Some of the films showing look quite interesting:
Lost Children
Frozen Angels
Breaking Bows and Arrows
A Letter to the Prime Minister
1000 Women and a Dream
Bhopal
The Real Thing
Is anyone interested in going to any of these or another one?

Today

I have made a semi-resolution to myself not to blog overly about stuff that is happening to me. For the most part that stuff is to private and the illusion of privacy provided by the interweb is just that an illusion. I also find reading blogs of people I don't know when they are only about their problems and lives pointless and inane.

Anyway something struck me today at church, not through the sermon (not that it wasn't good it just wasn't anything fantastically new, though I did get referenced for something :). Firstly, during communion (which Westchurch celebrates weekly) the person who performed it did so through the form of a liturgical consecration. Now I know some people find this type of thing boring and tedious but I find it quite uplifting (especially because it is a rare occurence that we are lead to communion this way at Westchurch). I love the sound of the voice of one people raised in unison to respond to G@d. There is a sense of unity and familiarity created by this, a sense of one body in many parts entering the presence of G@d. This is one thing at that I believe is at the heart of Christianity a sense of belonging and togetherness, and communion is one of the actions that we use to affirm this.

Also, for any of you that are interested, the sermon next week is entitled the Suffering Church and Islam. The sermon is about the church in Islamic countries. The guy speaking is from a group that supports these churches. Feel free to cruise along, its at Westchurch (meets at Avonhead Primary on Avonhead rd) and the service starts around 10. Everyone is welcome.

ps. the intro to this post is not a dig at anyone in particular and to those that I know outside of the internet I enjoy reading what's going down in your life

how am i not myself?

Amusing

Check this out

...save me

...these were the words which concluded the movie 8MM except for the epilogue. It wasn't what I would call an enjoyable movie, in fact in places it was quite sickening, but it was a good movie. The story follows a young PI (Nicholas Cage) who has been hired to find out whether what appears to be a snuff film is real (for those of you who don't know a snuff film is a film in which someone is actually being murdered, generally with S&M overtones). It takes Cage into the underworld of pornography led by a sleazy adult bookstore attendant (Jaoquin Phoenix).

These closing words were so ept for in the course of the movie Cage was taken into the depths of earthly hell. People are reduced to objects and degraded and humilated and engage in this willingly. He sees the underside of the pornography industry and is disgusted by what he sees. He cannot understand why people do this why they do these things to one another. He cannot believe that people do this because they can and because they enjoy it.

By not respecting themselves people degrade themselves. By not viewing ourselves as immortal and by not seeing the intimate, inseparable unity of the human being mind, body, and soul we do horrible things to ourselves believing that it has no effect upon us. Also, when we allow or worse encourage people to abuse themselves in this way for our titilation we are taking their humanity and reducing to mere objects for our pleasure. Both are sinning as I defined it in the last post where sin rather than being a breaking of some law is a lack of wholeness, a failure to be all that we were meant to be. Also there is the sin of failing to grant others their wholeness. We can steal the wholeness of others and we are guilty whether or not they offer it up freely.

-random postscript: this is the problem with the Prostitution Law reform in NZ. I agree that it is just and right that it was unfair that the client was not prosecuted while the provider was, because both are equally culpable. For without one there could not be the other. And the argument that a woman seeking to support her children by the means she can is valid. However, that is just the point: what is wrong with society where the only way that some women can support themselves is by selling themselves to anyone? Should not the government not be looking at ways to provide for all of its citizens in ways that builds them all up and increases the wholeness and shalom of everyone.