Serious Business Blog

Allegiance

2011-10-12T18:49:00.000-07:00

Declaring allegiance to anything less than some form of "goodness" seems foolish to me.

For example, I may some day marry and have a wife who I love dearly. But, if she commits some heinous murder, I'm going to help any law enforcement agents as they seek to bring her to justice. This is because my ultimate allegiance is to what is good and right, not to a fallible human being.

This don't-declare-allegiance-to-fallible-humans extends to fallible systems. Any loyalty I may have to friends is subservient to an ultimate loyalty to what I feel is "right." In the same way, any loyalty I may have to my government, school, or occupation is secondary to this ultimate loyalty to "goodness."

As a consequence, I dislike the pledge of allegiance. "I pledge allegiance...to the republic...." But that republic is fallible. The human beings that make up that republic may require that I do something despicable. In such a case, I believe the right thing to do is to break that allegiance.

So, what good does it do to pledge allegiance to something fallible? Such an allegiance cannot always be maintained. In some situations, loyalty to the fallible must be broken in order to do what is right.

Why is Hitler never given English subtitles?

2011-07-14T17:43:00.000-07:00

Interesting question with a fantastic answer:

"It makes him seem more "foreign." He seems more evil if you can't understand him.

Obviously, the Nazis were truly monsters. What I mean by "evil" is more like "cartoonishly evil." Most Americans see Hitler as this absolutely demonic figure, Satan incarnated in the flesh. The real lesson of course it that he wasn't. He was a man. Allowing you to hear his words makes him seem less evil. Ultimately, I think that should be the lesson. Hitler didn't roll into power on a drumroll of flames and brimstone. He came to power speaking the most wholesome themes of patriotism, family, traditional German greatness, etc. He was popular because of this. He didn't get into power solely on a "let's kill the Jews" platform.

There's a very similar contemporary version of this. We always want to make our enemies seem radically different from us, whether past or present enemies. The contemporary version is the translation of Muslim radicals. Go watch the translations of one of Bin Laden's or Ahmadinejad's speeches.

They'll translate every word into English. BUT they won't translate "Allah." Allah is just the Arabic word for God. But notice the difference between these two translations:

"Allah commands death to the infidels!"
"God demands we kill the non-believers!"

These are exactly the same. They both describe the same order from the same God, but the second one sounds much less foreign. For many, it's a disturbing reminder that the exact same God they worship in church every Sunday is worshipped by Muslims they demonize.

Language is a powerful thing. It shapes and molds our actions and thoughts. Slight differences in translation can completely change the feeling of a message, it's really a truly frightening thing."

Disappointments in Obama

2011-07-05T11:05:00.000-07:00

Short list

Long list

How would you disprove your viewpoint?

2011-01-24T15:45:00.000-08:00

From this.

The article's worth reading. In my opinion, being unable or unwilling to describe conditions in which personal beliefs would no longer be held is all it takes to be considered "unreasonable."

PUDDI PUDDI

2010-12-25T23:08:00.001-08:00

Blind Servitude

2010-12-04T13:21:00.000-08:00

It is my growing conviction that doing whatever your local Holy Man says on the basis of faith alone is a great evil.

Securing the Washington monument-A worthy read from security expert Bruce Schneier

2010-12-02T13:32:00.001-08:00

http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/12/close_the_washi.html

[Overly Explicit] Eclipse CVS Tutorial

2010-10-19T20:08:00.000-07:00

Concurrent Versioning System (CVS) is used to submit projects for a class I'm taking. I've had my share of grief with it as a new user, and know that many of my friends and classmates have as well.

Search as I might, I couldn't find a decent tutorial for using CVS from within Eclipse. So I threw this one together, because working with CVS through Eclipse is the easiest way to make sure your code stays backed up, and the best way to avoid losing points for bungling a last-minute submission.

Click "New," the leftmost button in the toolbar, just as you would to create a new project. Select CVS Repository location.
Enter information so that it matches what I have here. Obviously change your username and password, as well as your connection type to extssh.
Go ahead and click "No" when prompted to open the CVS perspective; we'll use this later.
Now that we've added the repository location, we can create a project. Click "New" again, and select "Projects from CVS."
Select the repository you just added.
Enter your module name. For UMBC CMSC 341, this is your UMBC username.
The default should be set to "Check out as a project configured using the New Project Wizard." Make sure this is selected and click "Next."
Select Tag. This is how versions of your files are displayed. I prefer versions (1.1, 1.2, 1.3), although Dates also seems like a nice choice.
After clicking "Finish" in step 8, click "Next" to create a new project using the New Project Wizard.
Apply whatever project settings are appropriate.
Apply whatever project settings are appropriate.
Now you can create packages and classes. Here's a sample.
Once you're ready to add and commit your new file to the repository, open the CVS perspective by clicking Window -> Open Perspective -> Other... and selecting CVS Repository Exploring.
Enter a comment and click "Finish." Note that you don't need to "add" new files; Eclipse will automatically add a file CVS doesn't know about for you.
At this point your file should be in the repository. Go ahead and check it out into a new directory to make sure it's there. Just for the record: as long as you don't "cvs add" a new file from the new directory you just checked out a project into, you can delete that whole directory without consequence. All "checking out" does in CVS is create a working copy.

Worth Reading -- Infrequently Asked Questions by Donald Knuth

2010-10-19T16:54:00.001-07:00

http://www-cs-faculty.stanford.edu/~uno/iaq.html

A Post on Reddit I Generally Agree With

2010-10-13T12:47:00.001-07:00

Source

For years, I was a libertarian. These were the two pivotal points that, when they changed for me, changed my political orientation completely. As I see it, these two issues are the ones that should receive more discussion between honest and open people on either side of the debate.

I understand these aren't novel or particularly insightful thoughts, but I thought some people might be interested in seeing the exact two points that caused me to change from voting Republican to voting Democrat.

Previously I thought:

1) Big government can't do anything efficiently or with quality, and there are no checks on it to prevent that. In contrast, free-market economics, despite being occasionally brutish, at least tends toward efficiency since it features competition as a check for quality. Therefore, a small government that leaves all possible matters up to the free-market will lead to the best system for the benefit of the general population.

2) Poor people need the discomfort of being poor to help be motivated toward working hard. Only a small number of people are truly incapable of bettering themselves, the rest of them just need to be educated in capitalism and then given that motivation.

Then I realized:

1) Most giant companies are just as bad as big government in terms of their inefficiencies and how hard it is to change anything, and there are almost no meaningful checks for quality when they get to a certain size because competition is limited or non-existent. They can be even worse than big government because they are compelled to grab every penny with no direct incentive toward any other values or mission.

2) The ability to dramatically alter one's lot in life for the better (as compared to your parents, for example) is a very, very rare ability no matter what one's socio-economic background. It is even harder, though, for those who are poor, who have been marginalized, or who are culturally or socially conditioned toward certain dysfunctional behaviors and thoughts.

While the question of "wanting it bad enough" is certainly a contributing factor for those that do succeed, it still requires extraordinary levels of self-knowledge, persistence, good-fortune, and support from others that cannot be expected of the vast majority of people even in the middle class.

Furthermore, for many if not most people, an overly uncomfortable situation drains their capacity for self-discipline, self-control, goal-orientation, long-term thinking, and personal growth. These people will either turn to crime or will simply stagnate for generations.

Stephen Colbert on Migrant Workers

2010-09-25T08:52:00.000-07:00

Stephen Colbert testifying before the House Judiciary Committee about migrant work(ers) is all over the news. I'm glad he and his humor are bringing so much attention to this issue.

What really stuck out to me, however, were these words. Upon being asked, "Mr. Colbert, you could work on so many issues. Why are you interested in this issue?" He responded,

"I like talking about people who don't have any power, and it seems like one of the least powerful people in the United States are migrant workers who come and do our work but don't have any rights as a result. But we still invite them to come here, and at the same time ask them to leave. That's an interesting contradiction to me, and, um, 'Whatsoever you do for the least of my brothers...,' and this seems like the least of our brothers right now. A lot of people are 'least brothers' right now because the economy's so hard, and I don't want to take anyone's hardship away from them or diminish anything like that, but migrant workers suffer and have no rights."

I felt such tremendous admiration and respect for Colbert when I heard these words. I can't wait for the rally on 10/30/10.

Also worth noting:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Colbert#Personal_life

A Man Without a Country

2010-09-02T16:20:00.000-07:00

by Kurt Vonnegut.

He's my favorite author and this book is a short read (JACKPOT). A few gems:

   "Here is a lesson in creative writing.
   "First rule: Do not use semicolons. They are transvestite hermaphrodites representing absolutely nothing. All they do is show you've been to college."

   "Evolution can go to hell as far as I am concerned. What a mistake we are. We have mortally wounded this sweet life-supporting planet--the only one in the whole Milky Way--with a century of transportation whoopee. Our government is conducting a war against drugs, is it? Let them go after petroleum. Talk about a destructive high! You put some of this stuff in your car and you can go a hundred miles an hour, run over the neighbor's dog, and tear the atmosphere to smithereens. Hey, as long as we are stuck with being homo sapiens, why mess around? Let's wreck the whole joint. Anybody got an atomic bomb? Who doesn't have an atomic bomb nowadays?"

   "No matter how corrupt, greedy, and heartless our government, our corporations, our media, and our religious and charitable institutions may become, the music will still be wonderful.
   "If I should ever die, God forbid, let this be my epitaph:
   THE ONLY PROOF HE NEEDED FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD WAS MUSIC

   "For some reason, the most vocal Christians among us never mention the Beatitudes. But, often with tears in their eyes, they demand that the Ten Commandments be posted in public buildings. And of course that's Moses, not Jesus. I haven't heard one of them demand that the Sermon on the Mount, the Beatitudes, be posted anywhere.
   "'Blessed are the merciful' in a courtroom? 'Blessed are the peacemakers' in the Pentagon? Give me a break!"

Rick Astley's new single: Light's Out

2010-09-01T12:28:00.000-07:00

I never minded being rick rolled because I really liked the song. So I was pleased to discover that Rick Astley's new single is actually pretty good:

Music aside, Rick Astley seems like a really cool dude. According to his Wikipedia article, he thought the whole "rick roll" phenomenon was amusing and didn't try to squeeze money out of it. His main concern was that his daughter not be embarrassed.

Filming Police in Maryland

2010-08-27T12:53:00.000-07:00

Getting into trouble with police officers for filming them in public is old news in Maryland:

http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2010/08/201082214554232983.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1hxOr3q7nrk
^Note: Salvatore Rivieri was fired because of this incident right before he was eligible for full pension.

And, more recently:
http://www.salisburypost.com/Opinion/082610-edit-resisting-arrest-qcd

Fed up with this ridiculous double standard (police are allowed to film you from their cars and frequently do during speeding stops) I finally wrote a letter to Governor O'Malley. The template can be found at the bottom of this post. I strongly encourage any Marylanders who read this to do the same--police shouldn't do anything in public they wouldn't want caught on camera. This law is disgusting and subjects untold numbers to easily avoidable police abuse.

Your Street
City, State, Zip
August 27, 2010

The honorable Martin O’Malley
Governor, State of Maryland
100 State Circle
Annapolis, Maryland. 21401-1925

Dear Governor O’Malley,

My name is Mark Pallone. I am a senior at University of Maryland, Bal-
timore County studying computer science. My telephone number is ###-
###-#### and my address is insert address here. My email addresses are
insert@email.here and insert@email.here.

As I understand it, under Maryland state wiretapping laws, it is illegal to film
police in public in spite of the fact that police cars commonly record traffic
incidents with their cameras without the consent of all involved.

This is a gross violation of justice because it restricts an essential and commonly
accessible safeguard against police abuse.

As a citizen of the United States, resident of the state of Maryland, and regis-
tered voter, I encourage you not only to vehemently oppose any law or measure
that further restricts Maryland citizens from protecting themselves, but to pro-
actively seek to change or even destroy laws that subject Maryland citizens to
police abuse that could be so easily avoided.

Thank you for your service, time, and consideration.

Sincerely,
Mark Pallone

Terrorists Don't Represent all of Islam

2010-08-18T04:23:00.000-07:00

Props to CNN. I stopped reading their news site when every other thing I saw was Tiger Woods or iPhone or Facebook related.

I wonder if there are parts of Islam that are actually illegal. By "parts of Islam" I don't mean any culture; I mean something from the essential religion that can be verified by a contextually accurate reading of the Koran.

Update: Also worth noting is George W. Bush's statement in September 20, 2001 to the Joint Session of Congress:
"Americans are asking: Who attacked our country? The evidence we have gathered all points to a collection of loosely affiliated terrorist organizations know as al Qaeda. They are the same murderers indicted for bombing American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, and responsible for bombing the USS Cole. . . .
"The terrorists practice a fringe form of Islamic extremism that has been rejected by Muslim scholars and the vast majority of Muslim clerics--a frings movement that perverts the peaceful teachings of Islam." (emphasis mine)

He also said,
"I ask you to uphold the values of America, and remember why so many have come here. We are in a fight for our principles, and our first responsibility is to live by them. No one should be singled out for unfair treatment or unkind words because of their ethnic background or religious faith."

This Place Sucks

2010-08-12T20:51:00.000-07:00

I can't sleep again. A few things have been bothering me lately--the defeat of the healthcare for 9/11 first responders bill, Sheila Dixon's corruption in Baltimore (and the fact that she gets to keep her $83,000 a year pension in spite of everything), people thinking it's okay for the US government to forbid citizens from peacefully worshiping on private property....

The ignorance, corruption, and greed in this world is staggering. As frustrating is how unaware of their own ignorance and bias people tend to be. One of Socrates' greatest claims to fame was merely pointing out that most people who seem authoritative are little more than capable actors. I suspect that not realizing this simple fact can cripple an otherwise good person's ability to change this world for the better. Unless you know an issue thoroughly--meaning you have done more than entertain opinions that flatter your own--there's no reason for you to have a strong opinion. Your opinion isn't worthwhile because you don't know enough to make a compelling, reasonable, and concise argument. You can't cite that you've respectfully considered conflicting opinions. You don't have a thorough knowledge of the issue and its implications. So why make a fool of yourself by parroting what you heard some talking head say? If you're at this level of ignorance for a particular issue, then you have no place imposing your opinion on others.

What I find most encouraging are people who both genuinely live their lives for others as well as for themselves and have the mental capacity to realize when they should or should not impose an opinion. Sadly, these kinds of people are few and far between.

I hope to live up to this description someday. In all honesty, many of my "selfless" acts are done not because I enjoy doing them, but because I want to be a "good person" and the injustice in this world and the frustration it brings are never far from my thoughts. I can't stand the thought of being another American consumer wholly possessed by the pursuit of comfort, wealth, and position, ignorant of the worlds problems, trading in a lifetime of service for an isolated world of selfishness and pleasure.

So what can I do? What can anyone do to stop the endless parade of selfishness and suffering that is human history? How I can maximize my impact on this world has been in my thoughts lately. It's a daunting question with tiring implications.

Speaking of which, I'm feeling tired now. Let's see what suffering and depravity tomorrow brings.

Michael Bloomberg on Building a Mosque in NY

2010-08-07T14:21:00.000-07:00

“This morning, the City’s Landmark Preservation Commission unanimously voted not to extend landmark status to the building on Park Place where the mosque and community center are planned. The decision was based solely on the fact that there was little architectural significance to the building. But with or without landmark designation, there is nothing in the law that would prevent the owners from opening a mosque within the existing building. The simple fact is this building is private property, and the owners have a right to use the building as a house of worship.

“The government has no right whatsoever to deny that right – and if it were tried, the courts would almost certainly strike it down as a violation of the U.S. Constitution. Whatever you may think of the proposed mosque and community center, lost in the heat of the debate has been a basic question – should government attempt to deny private citizens the right to build a house of worship on private property based on their particular religion? That may happen in other countries, but we should never allow it to happen here. This nation was founded on the principle that the government must never choose between religions, or favor one over another."

Common sense is all too rare these days.

I Expose War Crimes

2010-07-26T19:24:00.000-07:00

"Can't agree with this enough.

Why have a high paying job today? You'll just be exploited by the rich to make themselves richer, or supporting the system that goes to war needlessly. You'll just spend your extra money on a house bigger than you need, or a car that pollutes the atmosphere and gives your children asthma, or a swimming pool full of fresh water that others would shed blood to drink.

Count me out. I'll save my best efforts for fighting the good fight."

source

Interesting Slashdot Quote

2010-05-23T09:52:00.000-07:00

"I'll tell you what I told my ultra-religious grandmother. Don't set a precedent that you wouldn't want to follow when you aren't in power. Think having Christian laws is a good idea? What happens when you lose the majority and Muslims get a chance to write their own. [sic]"

"Don't set a precedent you wouldn't want to follow when you aren't in power." That's a quote I'm going to remember. The original post is about the new curriculum in Texas.

Original post:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1661548&cid=32308104

Speed Reading

2010-05-15T11:47:00.000-07:00

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speed_reading

How have I never heard of this? I think I have a new hobby.

Intellectual Candy

2010-04-28T21:24:00.000-07:00

It's past midnight after a long day. I'm excited that the semester's almost over and what I might be doing over the summer, and it's keeping me up. I tend to pride myself on thinking a lot, but I've been wondering about this lately.

Currently, I'm waiting for an email response before I continue with a simple coding project. Here's where "I tend to pride myself on thinking a lot" becomes relevant. I have a list of books I want to finish reading and things I want to learn how to do. Rather than use this time to be read and learn, I'm surfing the internet for minor intellectual amusements (that's a nice way of saying I'm spamming "random" on XKCD and reddit.com).

I like to think, but most of the time I feel like I don't like to think too hard--just hard enough to make myself feel smart and be amused. I'm deliberately trying to keep this brief because I strongly suspect other people are like this too.

`\_(O.o)_/`

I deleted my Facebook account about a week ago. I got fed up with their general attitude towards their user's personal information (Google it if you don't know what I'm talking about). The question now is whether my insignificant disgust and minor protest is worth giving up such an easy and effective means of communication with people I care about.

Generally, the only thing that's really worthwhile on Facebook (for me) is organizing events. The little snippets of communication are nice, but there's usually not much worthwhile substance. The most valuable experiences I share with others aren't those we have online. Also, I care about my privacy.

So, why not just severely restrict what I post on Facebook? Well, I don't always control that. Sometimes people message me with things I don't want stored on Facebook's servers forever. Other people tag me in pictures or notes.

Also, it's more than just my concern for privacy. I don't like having anything to do with an organization that treats its users so poorly--that cares more about money and control than it does keeping people in touch. I believe Ghandi was right when he said that we should "be the change we wish to see" in the world.

For me, this means limiting (probably (hopefully (omg nested parens)) insignificantly) my communication with others so that I can break off of a corporation that consistently acts unethically. Also, my study sessions are a lot more productive without it. ^_~

A Conversation About Being Rational

2010-02-07T17:40:00.000-08:00

I had this conversation with my friend Jeremy last night. He thought it was interesting enough to post in his blog, so here's a link:

http://www.divinatactical.net/blog/a-conversation-about-being-rational.html

Back

2010-02-05T21:19:00.000-08:00

I'd like to start writing here again. I doubt there will be much in the way of apologetics, since my experience in the past 6 months or so has been somewhat distasteful. For the record, I decided to stick with Protestantism for a few reasons. Ask about these if you're ever inclined or want to convince me otherwise :-)

So, I attended Severna Park Evangelical Presbyterian Church's membership program and want to check out New Song Presbyterian before committing to either. This puts my baptism at about summer, I think.

A random note about apologetics: it's the most biased field I've ever encountered. People put all of their hopes and dreams not only for this life but for all of eternity into one perspective, raising confirmation bias to incredible levels. I think true humility and gentleness is very difficult to maintain under that circumstance. I have a particular admiration for Catholic apologist Scott Hahn because of how respectfully he treats the views of others and the gentleness with which he discusses his potentially opposing viewpoints.

I noticed that politics (of course) is the same way. But honestly, this can be said anytime people presume knowledge about something they don't really understand, whether it's government, economics, psychology, whatever. There's a real need for people to realize how little we actually know, how easily misled we are, how biased we tend to be, and how much we NEED to be gentle and humble with each other. Arrogance or presumption of correctness without loads of experience are probably the biggest things that get under my skin.

I love Socrates for this reason. He wasn't significant for his expertise in some area, he merely pointed out that most people don't know what they're talking about. It's bizarre that simply realizing one's own ignorance can set one so far apart.

* * * * *

I stumbled across an amazing quote today:

"Do not train a child to learn by force or harshness, but direct them to it by what amuses their minds, so that you may be better able to discover with accuracy the peculiar bent of the genius of each." -Plato

I love this! If I ever have kids, I want to teach them that there are two stages to life: in the first, we experience many things trying to figure out what particular gifts God has given us. In the next, we use these gifts to serve those around us. This is an oversimplification, but the underlying message is there: we have gifts, and with such gifts come an obligation to figure out what they are and how we can use them to love those that cross our paths.

* * * * *

My obsession with XKCD led me to a book called The Visual Display of Quantitative Information by Edward Tufte. It's a book about graphs. It sounds boring, but graphing information is a really interesting concept in my mind. You can hand someone 500 pieces of data, or you can show them a picture. The difference is obviously outstanding, as a case from the book illustrates:

Dr. John Snow had a list of people who died from cholera and their locations. The information revealed by the image would have been extremely difficult to discover with just a list of names on a piece of paper. However, when visually displayed, he noticed that most of the deaths were from people who used the Broad Street pump. Access to the pump was cut off, and many lives were saved.

Christianese

2009-09-20T11:15:00.000-07:00

Some terms just irk me and I'm not entirely sure why. "Born again" and "spiritual journey" are two of them. Perhaps I just associate them with stagnant emotionalism or adolescence.

`\_(O.o)_/`

A Fun Thought; Current Activities

2009-08-28T13:33:00.000-07:00

I was wondering if a solid parallel can be drawn between how our actions, stemming from our thoughts, define our lives and how words, stemming from historical roots, are defined based on usage. I might elaborate on this later, but probably not. ^_^

* * * * *

Summer draws to a close as classes start in September. It's a bit sad as people I care about resume their lives in different parts of the country (world?), but it's exciting nonetheless.

Lately my apologetic studies have halted as work at American Eagle tripled and in my spare time I've been relearning the programming language Python for my new job as a lab assistant this semester. It's a great language that's very easy to learn and offers the user tons of power with minimal experience, and I really enjoy working with it as a result.

However, a dear guide has pointed me to Seth Evangelho, a research assistant to Dr. Scott Hahn. He actually responds to my questions in a timely fashion! Once my schedule allows I'll be asking him questions raised by my re-reading of The Shape of Sola Scriptura by Keith Mathison as I take the time to make my thoughts coherent. With his permission, I will probably post parts of his conversation here. He's already responded to two of my questions and I can't wait to continue this dialogue. I'll post my initial emails here:

MP: Among Protestants there's a claim that Catholic Apologists reject sola scriptura by setting up and tearing down a version of it that's not actually practiced by the magisterial reformers, but by fanatics such as the Anabaptists, Melchoirites, Spiritualists, etc. How does Scott Hahn define sola scriptura as the magisterial reformers practiced it?

and:

MP: My name is Mark Pallone, and I'm an unbaptized Christian considering Catholicism. As I explore apologetics, I come to the odd realization that very intelligent well educated people come to radically different conclusions within theology. In light of this, I feel obligated to choose a church based on more than intellectual reasons, especially considering how it's inappropriate for a Christian to live without sacraments and waiting until my intellectual search becomes convicting simply will not do.

Like many others, my biggest draw towards Catholicism is the obligable submission to Rome every Catholic shares. I have a few questions about Catholic unity I haven't been able to have answered. Before I ask those, however, there's some ambiguity that needs to be dispelled:

I assume you would agree with the statement, "The Catholic Church has unified teaching." Who is the Catholic Church? Select clergymen? Only clergymen who submit to Rome? All clergymen? Only clergymen and laymen who submit to Rome? All people who have been accepted as a member of the Catholic church and have not been excommunicated?

Again, with permission, I'll post the whole dialogues. This will probably done through individual blog posts.

Mark's Church Questions

2009-05-20T21:04:00.001-07:00

I've assimilated theological excerpts from various sources and will be meeting with my former teacher Jeff Cagle to get the Protestant rebuttal of Catholic teachings which this assimilation seems to favor.

If anyone wonders why I struggle with Protestantism, here's a link to the file:

http://files.filefront.com/13787518

:-)

Revelation

2009-05-16T22:01:00.000-07:00

I was struck today by how often we settle for so much less than we're capable of. Is there any reason not to do your absolute best in everything you do?

o_O

2009-04-27T21:04:00.000-07:00

In The Shape of Sola Scriptura, Keith Mathison states:

"A perfect example of this ('this' referring to the idea that Rome has freed itslef from past authoritative doctrinal decisions) may be seen in the dogmatic change that has taken place on the issue of salvation outside the Roman Catholic church. The papal bulls Unam Sanctam (1302) and Cantate Domine (1441) expressly state that there is is absolutely no possibility of salvation for any man outside of visible union with the Roman Catholic church and subjection to the bishop of Rome. The decrees of Vatican II (1962 - 65), however, expressly allow for the possibility of salvation, not only for non-Roman Catholic Christians, but also for Jews, Muslims, pagans, and even those without an "explicit knowledge of God." The issue is not which if either of these two positions is true. The issue is the fact that they cannot both be true, and thefact that the second cannot be seriously considered a "development" of the first. The bulls decree that "it is altogether necessary to salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff" (Unam Sanctam). Vatican II decrees that it is not altogether necessary to salvation for every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff; in fact it is not even necessary for salvation that a person be Christian. The two doctrines are in direct and complete contradiction with each other, and no amount of explanation can hide that plain fact."

I think it's time I put this book down and figure out concretely what Rome teaches. On to the Catechism!

FTM

2009-04-26T19:20:00.000-07:00

2 Tim. 2:20

2009-04-25T14:42:00.000-07:00

"In a large household there are vessels not only of gold and silver, but also of wood and clay, some for lofty and others of humble uses. If anyone cleanses himself with these things he will be a vessel for lofty uses dedicated, beneficial to the master of the house, ready for every good work. So turn from youthful desires and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace along with those who call on the Lord with purity of heart. Avoid foolish and ignorant debates, for you know that they breed quarrels. A slave of the Lord should not quarrel but should be gentle with everyone, able to teach tolerance, correcting opponents with kindness."

New Topic: The Council of Trent

2009-04-24T01:13:00.000-07:00

Magisterial Protestants claim the Council of Trent dogmatized the idea of tradition as a source of revelation. Some Catholics denied this, and I was under the impression they also believed that divine revelation ended with the apostle's deaths.

A Wee Bit Frustrated

2009-04-18T00:06:00.001-07:00

No church appeals to me at the moment. Reading about corrupt Popes and historical simony makes the Catholic Church very unappealing. Not knowing why Protestants reject authority not specified in Scripture yet embrace unauthoritative (in the sense that the men who assimilated these collections didn't have Scriptural authority) Scriptural collections is terribly frustrating. I don't even take radical "Tradition 0" Protestants seriously.

This is the first time in my search that I haven't looked forward to finding an answer. I haven't searched thoroughly enough to make any dramatic conclusions, but not having a goal to look forward to is weighing me down.

I've feared that I may never be satisfied with a Church's dogma, and this fear is starting to creep up again.

I think of a song wonderfully sung by the lovely baritone OJ Spikes at his senior recital tonight by Ralph Vaughan Williams:

"Home, no more home to me, whither must I wander?"

Yes, I'm an emo princess.

Calvin and Hahn

2009-04-13T14:52:00.000-07:00

What I'm currently struggling with:

Scott Hahn:
"The Bible presupposes the Church and depends upon the Church for its own authentication....The Church preceded the Scriptures. Indeed, all of the New Testament books, except the Gospels, are primarily occupied with describing a community already well established, with distinctive policies, practices, and patterns of devotion--with its own structures of authority and methods of decision making."

"But there is still another another sense in which the Bible depends upon the Church. Not only do the individual books presume the existence of the Church, but so does the collection as a whole. Some authority had to determine which books would be included in the New Testament and which would not; for the book of the Scriptures came with no inspired table of contents"

"It was not until the fourth and fifth centuries that the institutional Church fixed the New Testament in the form we know it today; and it was brought to that form, after a thorough investigation, through the work of bishops and synods of bishops--a process familiar to Catholics of every historical age since the first generation. The complete Christian "canon," or list of New Testament Scriptures, was attested by St. Athanasius in 367 A.D., but accepted universally only with the Synod of Rome in 380 and the Councils of Hippo and Carthage (in 393, 397, and 417 A.D.)."

John Calvin:
"What reverence is due Scripture and what books ought to be reckoned within its canon depend, they say, upon the determination of the church....Such wranglers are neatly refuted by just one word of the apostle. He testifies that the church is "built upon the foundation of the prophets and apostles" [Eph. 2:20]. If the teaching of the prophets and apostles is the foundation, this must have had authority before the church began to exist. Groundless, too, is their subtle objection that, although the church took its beginning here, the writings to be attributed to the prophets and apostles nevertheless remain in doubt until decided by the church. For if the Christian church was from the beginning founded upon the writings of the prophets and the preaching of the apostles, wherever this doctrine is found, the acceptance of it--without which the church itself would never have existed--must certainly have preceded the church. It is utterly vain, then, to pretend that the power of judging Scripture so lies with the church that its certainty depends upon churchly assent."

I was initially puzzled because, although they contradict each other, each line of thinking made sense to me. The key difference that leads to each conclusion seems to be the distinction between what the apostles wrote and spoke.

Scott Hahn clearly differentiates between the two. He notes that Christ "wrote nothing and, as far as we know, He never asked His disciples to write anything." To him, the authority of the apostles, led by the Spirit, is the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim 3:15).

Calvin rejects such a distinction, considering all the apostles wrote and spoke to be authoritative truth on which the church is built and sustained.

I've been feeling overwhelmed by this since I first read Calvin's point of view. There's still some research to be done, as I'm not familiar with the context of the prooftexts mentioned (Eph 2:20, 1 Tim 3:15) and would like a more detailed explanation of how Protestants view the initial collection of Scripture. How is the common layman supposed to know that what's in the "bible" is authoritative and true if the powers that assimilated it have no divine authority?

At the moment I desire nothing more than clarity.

Mildly Annoyed With CNN

2009-03-15T19:45:00.000-07:00

Since they keep labeling anything to do with the internet "Tech." See:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/03/13/shoe.thrower.fans/index.html

People use the internet to communicate? Who knew!?

-_-

I used to use Ubuntu

2009-02-26T12:36:00.001-08:00

But it actually made me feel cool. >__<

Scientology

2009-02-24T21:52:00.000-08:00

I don't like hearing rejections of Scientology based solely on the fact that it's "weird."

Scientology:
Xenu, the dictator of the "Galactic Confederacy", brought billions of aliens to earth 75 million years ago, stacked them around volcanoes and killed them using hydrogen bombs. The essence of these people remain, and today cause people spiritual harm.
Paraphrased from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenu

Christianity:
"The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...."

The second description is floating around the internet somewhere underneath an image from Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ. It's certainly blunt and offensive, but it serves to prove my point that, at least on the surface, Scientology isn't much stranger than what a lot of people believe, whether it's Hinduism, Islam, atheism, Christianity....

Rejecting something solely because it appears to be far-fetched or unfamiliar is dangerous.

Now I feel stupid for comparing Christianity to Scientology. Oh well. Back to finite state recognizers (I'm so smart!).

(-_-)

I'll probably start dropping more than ethical/theological things here

2009-02-23T19:28:00.001-08:00

Now all I need is a profound thought.

We're obsessed with it, and never seem to have enough.

2009-02-19T20:32:00.001-08:00

WTB [Time]

My Greatest Fear

2009-01-28T13:58:00.000-08:00

What's to Come

2009-01-18T15:42:00.000-08:00

Ethics, morality, and theology have always fascinated me. However, only recently have I been steadily reading, learning, and discussing such things on my own time. I decided to add this blog to my account so that I can drop thoughts (and remember them for future exploration) for others to consider.

At the moment, I'm exploring basic Catholic and Protestant differences. I was raised strictly Presbyterian, but fear that my upbringing leads not to reasoned, but biased approaches to both churches. For this reason I keep an open mind and try to remain humble as I learn and discuss.

At the moment, I'm focusing on:

-Sola Scriptura
-Catholic and Protestant interpretations
-Medieval understanding vs. modern

-Scriptural and historical basis for Catholic offices

This writing is largely for my own organization and benefit. However, I'm constantly reminding myself, and feel obligated to remind potential readers of the following:

-- This is largely taken from INTRODUCTION No 5 from
http://executableoutlines.com/fa/fa_01.htm --

-Withhold judgement until you fully understand the matter:
Proverbs 18:13 (NKJV) -- "He who answers a matter before he hears it,
It is folly and shame to him."

-"...explore and follow what is there instead of rearranging what is there to fit our designs."

-"Don't be hasty in drawing conclusions or applying what you hear"
Proverbs 14:29 (NKJV) -- "He who is slow to wrath has great understanding,
But he who is impulsive exalts folly.

-"If you have any additional information, questions or viewpoints, please feel free to share"
Proverbs 11:14 (NKJV) -- "Where there is no counsel, the people fall;
But in the multitude of counselors there is safety."

And remember, the best way to learn (and teach!) is with humility, as it promotes the use of reason instead of stupid, presumptuous passion.

Keep one last thing in mind: my language is rarely concrete. I often use words/phrases such as: "I suspect," "It's possible," or "Perhaps," as I'm very aware of how little I know. I feel that authoritative language should be used only by those of great knowledge and discernment.