In the hit movie Twister, a really large tornado rips through a rural farmhouse. That’s pretty much the plot of the movie. If you’re like me and you enjoy watching rural farmhouses get ripped up by tornadoes – as long as all the nice people live – you think this is a seriously good plot for a movie.
Now, Twister has very little in the way of violence or sex, so I was a little surprised to learn that it was rated PG-13. And when I looked to see why it was rated PG-13, this was the “official” explanation from the people who rate movies, word for word (I swear I am not making this up – go see for yourself):
Rated PG-13: for intense depiction of very bad weather.
Which got me to wondering about some really important, life-changing questions, such as: “Can a movie really be rated PG-13 because it has very bad weather in it?” I mean, what if you showed a movie in London that had three weeks of intense fog…would that get you slapped on the wrist with the damning intense depiction of very bad weather label? Will family-friendly websites everywhere condemn your shameless display of bad weather? “Don’t go see that movie,” they’d say, “it’s got some bad weather depicted intensely. You don’t want your kids seeing something as horrible as an airport delay!”
Sometimes I think we confuse those things that really matter with the things that don’t. I think it’s really, really bad for you to watch a lot of movies with sex and violence in them; it’ll drag your soul down, bit by painful bit, towards the bad place. But I really think you’ll be none the worse for wear for watching a lot of movies with really bad weather in them, and I’m not sure that the three grandmothers in Minnetonka, Minnesota who apparently comprise the movie-rating system have quite figured that out yet.
On that theme, this week we discuss the value of the Creeds in helping us as Christians separate the things that really matter from the things that don’t. And that naturally leads us to: The Book of Leviticus.
Finpecia Tablets – Storage Requirements: Finpecia Tablets are Decreased Libido, Erectile viagra cost india Dysfunction, Ejaculation Illness(Reduced Volume of Ejaculate), Impotence, hypersensitivity reactions, Breast Enlargement, Breast Tenderness, Rash, Pruritus, Urticaria, Puffiness of the lips and face and Testicular pain. That is true to an extent considering that the bulk of this market is controlled by Generic variants of buy viagra find out this now. viagra is greatly useful for men suffering from erectile dysfunction and the solution of that disease is to take buy viagra. navigate to this pharmacy cialis prices Same concept, same scam. 2. “Overnight success” – I do not drink protein shakes or energy drinks. Sildenafil citrate has great potential to cialis generic pills treat men’s erection issue. (1) My reason for emphasizing the Creeds has somewhat to do with what I call the “Leviticus problem.” I’m not sure I’ve ever met a thoughtful Christian who, upon reading Leviticus, hasn’t asked the following honest question: “Why on earth don’t we still do everything this book says? Because it says that God tells us to do all sorts of things, some crazy and strange things, that not a single Christian I know ever does.” Well, the Bible says all sorts of things and some of them were context-bound to a particular point in history (e.g., parts of Leviticus) and some were universal and intended to be applied to everyone at all times (e.g., the Sermon on the Mount). But of course, what is universal and what is context-bound is itself often the source of some debate. And I think the Creeds – summaries of Christian belief – help us understand at least those things that are, in a sense, clearly non-negotiable, universal Christian beliefs.
I said they help with the problem; but of course they don’t completely solve it. Solving it is another matter entirely, and I’m not going to deal with that issue in totality here. But at the very least it is a useful starting point for understanding the Bible. If I wanted to understand, say, the theory of evolution, a useful starting point would be to get a sense of what the majority of experts on the topic said about it. In doing so, it would not be much help to go into detail on the many thousands of tiny disagreements that those experts have with each other. Now they may think those disagreements are hugely important (and you just don’t know scientists if you don’t realize how important they think they are), but all the same, those tiny disagreements aren’t what you, as a Sensible Consumer of Information, ought to be looking for to understand the theory writ large. Rather, you should be looking for what they all agree on. What they agree on would not end the discussion, but surely it would have some value as a starting point for understanding the theory of evolution.
Well, I think it a perfectly sensible approach to use, as an important starting point, what experts in Christianity have typically agreed on lo these 2000 years. And the Christian Creed does that as well as anything I know. So while it does not of course solve all the problems raised by Leviticus, any more than understanding the basic principles of natural selection might help resolve the Dawkins-Gould debate over the evolution of the eye, it does help provide a useful starting point for understanding the Christian approach to the book.
(2) Another important reason for emphasizing the Creeds is that you simply cannot exist without a Creed. It’s not possible. I am a Protestant Christian, and am not ashamed of that fact, but Protestants are almost universally hypocritical on this dimension. Many Protestants think a Creed is kind of a Catholic thing, and would say something like “well, we don’t need the Creed; I believe in the Bible.” But that’s just hypocritical. The Bible is too big and too complex and too easily misused to say that. The Bible is more of a history than it is a philosophical document with clearly-laid out propositions. The Bible itself says its own words can and will be twisted; and they are.
That’s why, even if they don’t formalize it, every church has a Creed. Every church has to decide what points of emphasis they will take in the Bible. And those that don’t admit that they have taken a step beyond the Bible in deciding their own belief system annoy me to no end. Because they do – they just do it implicitly and (as a result) badly.
As a historical example, consider what happened when, during the Protestant reformation, the Bible for the first time became available to the masses. Now I personally think this was one of the most important and awesome events in human history; but watch what happened next. Almost the very next thing that happened is that the Protestant leaders of the church realized that everyone was totally misinterpreting the Bible and that they needed guidance in order to read it properly – and they immediately produced versions of the Bible with footnotes to “guide” readers. Do you see what’s happening here? It’s no different today. Everyone has a set of principles and beliefs and such that they bring to the Bible, and everyone extracts truths from the Bible. The intelligent folk are aware of this process and do it openly, e.g., they have a Creed. And the Christian Creed is, in a sense, the consensually-shared, everyone-agrees-on-it extraction.
Since (as Michael Vick would say) I don’t have a dog in this fight, I’ll stop fussing about the origins and historical uses of the Nicene Creed, or about my aversion to imposed/received “creeds” in general. In particular, I take your last point–that we all have some set of beliefs or principles that guide us in our approach to life, and that there are advantages to making those beliefs explicit. In that spirit, I did a quick web search for some sort of “atheist’s creed” that I could share with you and your readers. The following is from someone named P.Z. Myers, and I found it at “atheistatlarge.com”:
“I believe in time, matter, and energy, which make up the whole of the world. I believe in reason, evidence, and the human mind, the only tools we have. They are the product of natural forces in a majestic but impersonal universe grander and richer than we can imagine, a source of endless opportunities for discovery. I believe in the power of doubt. I do not seek out reassurances but embrace the questions and strive to challenge my own beliefs. I accept human mortality. We have but one life, brief and full of struggle, leavened with love and community, learning and exploration, beauty and the creation of new life, new art, and new ideas. I rejoice in this life that I have and in the grandeur of a world that precedes me and an earth that will abide without me.”
I would word some of that differently (and may do so later on my own blog), but by and large I’m in agreement with it. The one thing I’d want to add, however, is an ending along the lines of “I acknowledge that I could be wrong about any or all of this, but for now, these are the grounds on which I stand. In good conscience, I can do no other.” I’m obviously playing off the words of Martin Luther, as well as keeping my options open–I once wrote, “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God,’ but only a complete idiot would put it in writing.”
Thanks for inspiring me to give some thought to the matter.
Thanks for the thoughtful comment as always, Jack! And for the good laugh. (And for showing admirable restraint on the Leviticus problem.)
I appreciated your posting the atheists’ creed, and I hope other readers do, too. I think it’s beautifully written. I naturally agreed with many parts of it. Actually, I re-wrote it so that I could agree with all of it and was going to post it here, but decided it would appear “cheeky” (which wasn’t my intent), so opted against it.
Love the co-opting of the Luther quote!