1.  


  2.  


  3. Help us spread the word! 

     


  4. new post on my new site.

     


  5. Jesus *becomes* a human sacrifice through his death as a means of overcoming mimetic violence. But when scapegoating works, it does so because we are able to convince ourselves that the victim is guilty (or otherwise carries our guilt for us), but Jesus exposes the bankruptcy of the sacrificial system precisely because he is acknowledged by all is *being innocent*. In his innocence, he represents the innocent victims of every regime and exposes the evil at the heart of sacrificial systems. Furthermore, through his teaching, he exemplifies another way of being-in-the-world, namely that of positive mimesis, mimetic love if you will. That mimetic love is the heart of Jesus’ teaching and suggests a means by which to overcome the structures of mimetic violence. Finally, through his resurrection by God, Jesus defeats the structures of mimetic violence, by refusing to remain the innocent victim. In triumphing over death, he triumphs over the whole sacrificial system. He is the innocent victim who exposes the system, but he is also the conquering lamb, who defeats the mechanism of mimetic violence through overcoming death.
     


  6. The folks most likely to be alienated by her book are, unsurprisingly, the seekers—those who call themselves SBNR, of course, but also those who want religious community, or at least want to want it (full disclosure: like me). For these folks, who may be, as she says, “shopping” for a place to belong, Daniel has absolutely no patience… This book is a very honest confession of how much Lillian Daniel needs church, as well as how tired she is of having to defend her religiosity to liberals who don’t feel the same need, and who are narcissistic enough to think all religion is therefore for suckers… If, having vented, she then hopes to win over some of those who might be testing the waters, she might consider ridding her rhetoric of stereotypes and caricatures designed to shame them for not yet belonging.
     


  7. Process theists argue that the deity of traditional theism is at once too active and too static. It is too active in the sense that its control of the universe is absolute, leaving nothing for the creatures to do except to unwittingly speak the lines and play the parts decided for them in eternity. It is too static in the sense that it lacks potentiality to change, to participate in the evolving universe it created, and to be affected by the triumphs and tragedies of its creatures. In short, it is a God who acts but is never acted upon and can therefore never interact. This is summed up in the non-biblical Aristotelian formula of God as the unmoved mover. Fritz Rothschild describes the God of Rabbi Abraham Heschel—a God who feels and is felt by the creatures—as “the Most Moved Mover.” Hartshorne, who greatly admired Heschel, amends this formula in an attempt to distill the essence of process theism, “God is the most and best moved mover.
     


  8. a myth that “fits” and “works” for us

    Had a great conversation with Doug Hammack this morning about trying to figure out which story/myth our Emergent Raleigh cohort will “live into.” This got me thinking about a few things:

    1. Does a group like ours require a defining story?

    2. Are we as individuals, families, communities and so on living out of one primary myth, or are we stuck between a mixture of ideal myths and implicit myths (via what we actually do)?

    3. Is our group just going to be a monthly hangout at a bar, with random events thrown into the mix, or something more?

    4. If our group is, in the least, culturally Christian, should we find ways to clarify what Christian might mean to us, or replace that language with something else that “fits” our group better? Will Christian language last beyond the next few decades to describe the ethos, sensibilities, and trajectories that ring true to so many of us?

    5. Is “humanism” a sustainable (enough) myth? Would humanism better describe our understand of the universe and our role in it than a (redefined) Christian myth?

    What do you think?

     


  9. The historical evidence for systematic persecution of Christians by Jews and Romans is actually very slim. There were only a few years before the rise of the emperor Constantine that Christians were sought out by the authorities just for being Christians. The stories about early Christian martyrs have been edited, expanded, and sometimes even invented, giving the impression that Christians were under constant attack. This mistaken impression is important because it fosters a sense of Christian victimhood and that victim mentality continues to rear its head in modern politics and society. It’s difficult to imagine that people could make the same claims about persecution today were it not for the idea that Christians have always been persecuted.
     


  10. I wish that a postcard version of Bakker’s message could be beamed to every person who thinks of him- or herself as “spiritual but not religious.” Many of the growing number of Americans who don’t identify with a specific religious tradition have been put off by congregations that forced them to believe or leave. It is so much harder, though, to work through issues of belief and doubt alone, and most exiles simply don’t.
    — 

    Amy Sullivan