This morning, as I was sitting at my local Starbucks, staring groggily at my computer screen, and attempting to sift through a torrent of emails, I came across a message from Christian Peacemaker Teams giving me an update on the ongoing violence between Israeli settlers and Palestinians. Over the past two years, I’ve grown more interested and concerned over the situation in the West Bank over Israeli settlements.

The focus of this particular update was on the struggle between the small town in the South Hebron hills of At-Tuwani, Israeli outpost of Havat Ma’on, and the settlement of Ma’on. (For a brief history of the conflict and CPT’s involvement, please visit this website here.)

http://www.cpt.org/hebron/documents/Tuwani_media_packet.htm

Throughout the conflict, Palestinian natives have generally responded through nonviolent means, despite the constant harassment, violence, and crop burning that has occurred over the years. Unfortunately, let’s be honest here, in spite of the international outrage at these events the violence continues.

It’s all nice and dandy for us to discuss non-violent resistance to oppressors, celebrate the lives of the leaders of such movements, maybe even to show videos to elementary school students of members of different races and socio-economic backgrounds marching together. It’s uncomfortable to discuss the plight of the colonized in today’s age of liberal democracy; especially when the occupiers are seen as a bastion of said democracy in a land of religious fundamentalism. I’ll let you figure out the irony in the fact we are talking about Israel.

What is one to do when non-violence really just doesn’t work? Did the revolutionary message of Jesus really overthrow the Roman Empire? What about the nonviolent revolution in India? What of the bloody separation of Pakistan resulting from the new found freedom?

It’s legitimate to ask the question whether or not the Palestinians should heroically go on the offensive against the Israeli settlers, especially after the devastating Gaza Strip invasion.

As a Christian, I want to so badly identify with Christ. I want to believe that the best way to overcome violence is through love and self-sacrifice. Unfortunately, I know that some people simply do not care whether or not they are called out in there violence. The system is for them. In the case of a dictator, there are times when the country they oppress has no strategic value in the long run; therefore, no real reason for the heroic powers to intervene. I refer here to the crisis in Sudan in which there is, at this point, an arrest warrant for the current president, Omar al-Bashir, as well as to the atrocities committed by Hitler and Stalin in the mid-20th century. It was not until we in the United States were threatened that action was taken.

The topic of non-violence is not an easy one. It is not a topic that can be based off of an abstract ethical code of sorts and applied to any situation.

I am a Pacifist. I do affirm that using violence to overcome conflict is not a good idea. However as Richard Beck pointed out “If I saw a man raping a child and I had a baseball bat in my hand I know I’d hit him with it. And if I had to hit him in the head to get him to stop I’d hit him in the head. And if I had to kill him to get him to stop then I would kill him. I know myself, despite my intellectual sentiments and pontifications I know how I’d act in that situation.”

Unfortunately, this is counter to the teachings of Christ to love one’s enemy. I want to see restoration, wholeness, and salvation in the life of even the most evil of men. However at what cost does it come? Should there be limits to violence? How can one empower and affirm the humanity in the oppressed people of At-Tuwani as well as bring reconciliation with the Israeli settlers?

While researching the conflict I came across an article written about the conflict which described an event where the possibility of Israeli forces seizing Palestinian land, declaring state property, and then handing it over to the settlers was imminent. What did the villagers do? They found a non-violent solution. A way around the seizure. They could plant trees and declare the land agricultural. So they went out and planted trees in the area under threat. The risk here is that the trees will probably go to waste seeing as the Israeli settlers have repeatedly burned crops. Yet, I believe that it is a start.

Walter Wink points out in his monumental work “The Powers that Be” that Christ’s command ‘turn the other cheek’ does not mean to simply submit to the violence that is being inflicted. The interpretation that Wink points to in this passage is that Christ is specifically referring to a strike on one deemed to be of a lower class’s face. Essentially this was a back handed slap across one’s face to remind them of their lesser standing within the social sphere. To turn the other cheek was to invite another blow, this time openhanded, as a challenge, countering the social domination and forcing the the one who struck the blow to admit the equality of the one struck. The choice one would face in this situation is pick a fight or back down, either way admitting the humanity of the one receiving the blow.

Today it might be planting trees.

These solutions start us on a journey to counter the subjective violence threatening individuals and communities; yet, what of the systemic violence of racism or global captialism? How are Christians, or human beings in general, to respond to such unsympathetic systems and dictators?

This brings us back to the question “what about Hitler?” What does one do when faced with no other choice but violence in order to save lives? Does one hope for a magical way out? I cannot offer a passive solution to the dilemma of a bully . Here I am left haunted by the words of Marxist philosopher Slavoj Zizek.

“The true ethical test is not only the readiness to save the victims, but also – even more, perhaps – the ruthless dedication to annihilating those who made them victims.”

Bio: Nate is an aspiring science fiction writer and Starbucks Barista typically found on his off time at his Starbucks reading, writing poetry, and talking with various passerbyers.

image by Vox Efx

Faced with recent events, we may easily understand the pangs of compassion, concern, and confusion that are felt within the wake of such tragedies that befall mankind. News reporters speak of the urgency and fear felt by those closest to the situations. Televisions and computer monitors, like the panes of glass in a window, are all that seem to separate us from the victims of tragedy. The 1960’s futurist, Marshall McLuhan, termed this “the global village,” the inevitable culmination of connection technology that would cause mankind to bear witness to all the going-ons of the planet.

It is at times like these, we unconsciously become aware of the unspoken truth: Once we have seen, we feel responsibility for the triumph of Truth in the matter. We do not celebrate the men and women who have ignored the horrors that passed in front of them, knowing them to be wrong and refusing to act through sheer lack of courage. This generation knows this truth far and above others through sheer connectedness. Human crisis and violation of rights meet underground masses when not addressed by public media. We do not truly hear the cries or see the pain of those in Haiti, Indonesia, Darfur, Uganda, Rwanda, or China. Yet, when we hear of the events in these areas, we are driven to act, or, rather, feel some guilt for not acting on the compassion we feel. Do we sacrifice as much as we can? Do we truly conceive of the gravity of the situation? With contorted and confused souls we sit, digitally watching from afar, trying to grapple with the suddenly juxtaposed emotions of helplessness and responsibility.

For thousands of years, mankind has cared only for those he could see, those he could provide for, or those he had direct contact with. Are our minds capable of understanding the sheer gravity of global depravity and ungoverned, natural tragedy? These victims are not part of my community. They are not one of my own. We might think, “if this were but a man who came to my door, a neighbor who needed taking in, I could do something.” But as fellow members of the human race, their pain resides in the collective subconscious of all who witness it. Whether McLuhan foresaw or understood the near unbearable weight of responsibility that comes with this act of global witnessing, I do not know. What I do know is that, a few times a year, we stare into the eyes of a refugee, a sick child, a displaced citizen, a victim, a person who has lost a son, a mother, their home, their livelihood, and we are called upon to respond.

If there is but one thing our primitive minds unceasingly ask and yet fail to grasp, it is the question of “Why?” Why did this happen? Why was this allowed? Why do people act this way? Why was I here instead of there? Why not me? We develop mythos. We try to explain. But stories and logic cannot free us from the cold, harsh grip of responsibility one feels when he asks these questions or the momentary guilt we feel when we turn down an opportunity to give. Christopher Hitchens, for all the things he might say that I would find disagreeable, recently said this of tragedy and response: “It isn’t my idea that these capricious catastrophes strike the just and the unjust with such regularity, or that they are soothingly explained away by the pseudo-compassionate. Of all the great cosmic questions, WTF still strikes me as one of the most pressing, relevant, and ultimately humane.”

It is coincidence that, a few weeks before this, I would write on laziness as a refusal to act with responsibility towards the well-being of those who bear responsibility for your own. In a recent conversation with a coworker, we discussed the nature of global responsibility. What requires me to act besides image-induced guilt and emotional response? I might submit, in harsh, reasonable fact, you bear no responsibility for those outside your immediate and tangible control. However, we do not look through the annals of human history to make note of those who did what was required of them, but we define as heroes those who did what was needed when Fate handed them a subpoena.

Bio: Josiah is a graduate of North Central University in Minneapolis, MN. His thirst for knowledge is only surpassed by his thirst for coffee. Thus, much free time is spent in the quest for the next fix.

Top 3Cast, created by contributor and friend, Tone Hoeft. It’s a new way for you to get your interesting input.

Top 3cast analyzes and discusses the most interesting and important news stories from the previous week. Join our rotating crew of panelists each week as they discuss their top 3 stories and why they think they are so important.

Click for more info and links to subscribe

My first contributing episode will enter syndication the Feb 1st, but check it out before then for more highlights and opinions from highly interesting people!

Bio: Tone Hoeft is pursuing his Master’s degree in Communications from Eastern Washington University. To learn more about him or his thoughts, visitwww.inproximity.org.

Bio: Josiah is a graduate of North Central University in Minneapolis, MN. His thirst for knowledge is only surpassed by his thirst for coffee. Thus, much free time is spent in the quest for the next fix.

- Harvard University’s “Justice: What’s The Right Thing To Do?” series of videos (via Joshua Curtis Dorman)

- The Moral Animal: Why We Are The Way We Are by Robert Wright | On Evolutionary Psychology as a scientific study and the development of psychological, natural ethics and morals in the human species

- Why Evolution is True by Jerry A. Coyne | A rough explanation using modern developments in evolutionary theory to show the evidence for the simple yet powerful force of evolution. Recommended if you feel The Origin of Species would be too great of a dive for yourself.

Soon to read:

- Evolution: From Creation to New Creation by Ted Peters and Martinez Hewlett | A theological engagement with evolutionary theory

- How the Mind Works by Steven Pinker | On human cognition, emotion, and neurological action

___________________________________________________

Please take these as recommendations. While the YouTube videos are obviously far more accessible, I offer the books as a library selection to look into.

Bio: Josiah is a graduate of North Central University in Minneapolis, MN. His thirst for knowledge is only surpassed by his thirst for coffee. Thus, much free time is spent in the quest for the next fix.

Lazy [ley-zee] adjective, -zi⋅er, -zi⋅est, verb, -zied, -zy⋅ing.

- averse or disinclined to work, activity, or exertion; indolent.

The first of the 7 Deadly Sins I will address is Laziness (i.e. sloth or apathy); a sin married women everywhere might label as the spiritual bane of their teenagers and husbands.

The caricature of laziness is seen as a person preferring the luxury of rest over the benefit of work. However, in order for this sin to be committed, there must be work to be done. Rest itself is not sin. Rest as priority over work is a sin as much as refusing to rest altogether (Exodus 20:8-11).

The natural/instinctual argument would be that laziness results from the desire for conservation of energy. Through general need as a natural, physical creature, we must rest. We must conserve our energy, or our bodies/minds will wear out from too much stress. However, the individual must work as well. He must work to seek out energy supplying sustenance (or in a more modern sense, he must work for the finances that provide the capability to purchase such sustenance and comforts making rest more beneficial; housing, bedding, etc). However, the lazy individual avoids exerting himself in the pursuit of these, and, instead, capitalizes off of the work of other individuals around him. He is not compelled to work by need, and, thus, does not seek to work. It is taking advantage of the labor of those around you. This poses a reflective question: Can an individual be lazy in isolation? Could Tom Hanks be lazy on the island with no one other than his stained volleyball companion? It is inevitable that he, as a living, biological creature, will not rest himself to death. He will not starve by sitting around if he is capable of moving. Once his need becomes strong enough, he will be motivated to work, he will seek out sustenance, he will seek out some element of comfort.

His capability to find this comfort may be greatly hindered if he waits too long, but he will nonetheless cease to be lazy. In the fable the Ant and the Grasshopper, a Grasshopper observes as the Ant stores for the winter months when food is less plentiful. The Ant warns the Grasshopper that he must work or he will not have food, but the Grasshopper claims that he has plenty of time. This is because of his disinterest in work. When winter comes, the Grasshopper has no food and receives a stern moral lesson from the Ant regarding laziness.

The question is, was the Grasshopper lazy?

Looking strictly at the present, he is not. Looking at it with a sense of the future, he is. He is unprepared for the future moment when his stores run out or trial comes in the shape of winter. His workload is essentially doubled because of the scarcity of food at the time he begins working. However, at this point, he ceases to be lazy. He will not sit until he dies, but work to overcome such obstacles in order to survive. Yet, if value is placed upon the rest that is needed when he is aware of the hardship he will face, he will be considered lazy for not doing what needs to be done when it was easier to accomplish. If he is unaware, I would posit he is not lazy.

Rest does not become morally wrong until it becomes more important than the instincts we understand and hold as ideals in our societies. There are two such instincts which, when violated, result in laziness; sharing the common workload of the group and being prepared for future hardship through awareness.

One form of this laziness is essentially “rest addiction” resultant from the desire for neuro-chemical reward of rest over the desire for survival. This will ultimately be defeated in true hardship once higher biological needs are starved.

However, the main form of laziness we see in the first world is the consequence of social relationships. Rest here becomes sin when it capitalizes off of the work of others due to the abundance of provision that comes from good relationship. However, this taxes the provisions of the group in such a way that can be understood by simple math. If there are 4 people making contribution and 5 people consuming, there is a deficit. While each person contributes more than they can consume, in this sense it does not seem a terrible deficit and is survivable.

Wikimedia Commons

When a society is bearing a larger burden of consuming non-workers, the deficit b egins to be larger. This causes laziness to be an even greater sin as you have non-capable consumers such as children, invalid, and elderly who cannot contribute. This is because you are not only taxing the work of others, but consuming the provision of those who cannot work.

“Those who do not work, will not eat.”

- Appropriated from II Thessalonians 3:10 by Capt. John Smith of the Jamestown settlement in 1608 as discipline for laziness in the colony.

In review, the “wrongness” of laziness might be defined as, not simply a lack of work or motivation to work, but the taxing the contribution of others for one’s own restful gain or as valuing rest over preparing for future hardship in light of one’s awareness that it is coming.

The human species is far more capable of looking ahead and planning than others. However, one often has just as hard of a time thinking situations will change greatly in the future as we do believing the world has ever been different than the one we have been raised and live in. We are not lazy if we do not prepare for constantly immanent crisis, but we are lazy if we do not prepare for those likely to occur.

Stay tuned for the next part of this series!

Bio: Josiah is a graduate of North Central University in Minneapolis, MN. His thirst for knowledge is only surpassed by his thirst for coffee. Thus, much free time is spent in the quest for the next fix.

For quicker updates, subscribe to the RSS feed.

While I continue working on my [S]instinct series, I figured I would post something to fill time.

I don’t know if it’s of any benefit to anyone, but, if you’re curious, here is a glimpse through the clouds into the mind of doubt. I wrote this during my senior year at NCU. Perhaps it will help you understand the questions of your friends, perhaps it will help you in the midst of your own questions.

Whatever it does, I wanted to publish it because I was happy with how it turned out. Interested in hearing any feedback.

This wide ocean of faith is difficult to swim in. The mind begins to clamber, to tread water, to seek a foothold in some ounce of land. The depths seem impenetrable and dangerous, the heights, unattainable. With no land in sight, I am left afloat. I do not know what manner of thing might punctuate the silence, punctuate the loneliness, or punctuate this time-stretching dread. What might live in the icy depths beneath? What might live in gray skies above? Am I seen, or am I truly alone? This water, black, both keeps me alive and signals my possible fate. This wide ocean of faith is difficult to swim in. The doubt and fear like icy temperature cloud my mind. Am I alone? Will no one come to my rescue? Will no one give me light? Where is the hope? Surely, my faith is strong, I’m swimming in it. But where is the hope? “Faith is being sure of what we hope for and evidence for things unseen.” “Blessed are they who believe and have not seen.”

This situation I am faced with is the same which faced Peter. This water can be walked on or drowned in. The same water that holds him up might also silence him.

Bio: Josiah is a graduate of North Central University in Minneapolis, MN. His thirst for knowledge is only surpassed by his thirst for coffee. Thus, much free time is spent in the quest for the next fix.

For quicker updates, subscribe to the RSS feed.

How do we define sin? It is a question not addressed often by theologians. Grace is more their territory. The question is more commonly addressed to the ethicist. The question(s) being: “How does an individual determine right and wrong?” and “Is it universal or subjective?”

We know right action from wrong action. We make these determinations every day. But how? How did these become wired into us? For average Christians, the response draws back to the Garden of Eden where the consumption of a special, forbidden fruit imbued the naive progenitors of the human species with this moral wiring. My personal belief is that this is an explanatory myth regarding the fact that there is something wrong in this universe. The fundamental Christian religious belief is that the destructive elements of all existent reality is an aberration from what is perfect.

My personal belief goes the route of evolutionary development of life. Within this route, one must question the development of morality. One often hears the argument that you cannot fully believe in evolution and have morality.

Where do you get your morality? If there is no God, if I am simply complicated ooze, then the truth is, your life doesn’t matter, my life doesn’t matter…If life is just random chance, then nothing really does matter and there is no morality—it’s survival of the fittest. If survival of the fittest means me killing you to survive, so be it. – Rick Warren

This argument is flawed.

First, how does one reconcile the fact that the sense of morality extends beyond the human species? Chimps, dolphins, elephants, etc. These creatures have a primitive and basic sense of morality. Where does it stem from? Surely they didn’t accidentally munch on the forbidden fruit while grazing in the Garden?! Essentially, the only “special” nature of the morality we understand is a result of our advanced culture and our ability to verbalize and meta-analyze what it is we are even discussing.

Second, it ignores social development as an evolutionary trait for survival. What is a key factor shared between the human species and other “moral” species? Community. We are communal creatures. One man can walk alone and survive alone; but in a group he is far more likely to conserve energy and survive longer. He is able to combine his ingenuity and strength with that of others and accomplish more. It is because of community and intelligence that Man has become the dominant species on this planet. Our collaborative inventiveness allows us to change our survival tactics quickly when our context changes.

What does this have to do with morality? In my (and many biologist’s) opinion, morality is a development out of socio-communal evolution. Morality (and sin) can be defined by looking at what it addresses, namely, our relationship to one another as human beings. If we do not relate well with one another, we will not be as capable of survival. Man lives best in community with others.

However, this social evolution stands apart from standard evolution. Survival instinct is more primitive than social instinct. Our drive to relate well with others comes in conflict at times with our drive to survive. This is where sin enters the picture. I want to discuss in the following series how sin is defined by this conflict. How sin EMBODIES this conflict.

Rather than look at a list of commands like the famous 10, I figured I would address the list known as the “7 deadly sins” which has been used by the Catholic church as a list of the “mortal vices” that endanger the soul of man, as compared to the “venial sins” or minor sins which, according to the church, result in a less critical separation from God and threat of damnation.

- Laziness

- Pride

- Lust

- Gluttony

- Greed

- Envy

- Rage

In the next series of blogs, I want to look at these sins and their relationship to survival instinct. Why are they considered sinful? Is there a time they can be defined as not sinful or when their occurrence might be deemed impossible?

Remember, sin can be centrally understood in affecting our relationship with one another. The command to love our neighbor is intimately related to the command to love God. Ideally, in the final post of this series, I will address this other side of the coin; the relation of religion and theological/spiritual belief to socio-communal evolution and morality.

One day an expert in religious law stood up to test Jesus by asking him this question: “Teacher, what should I do to inherit eternal life?”

Jesus replied, “What does the law of Moses say? How do you read it?”

The man answered, “‘You must love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your strength, and all your mind.’ And, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”

“Right!” Jesus told him. “Do this and you will live!”

Luke 10:25-28

Stay tuned for the next part of this series!

Bio: Josiah is a graduate of North Central University in Minneapolis, MN. His thirst for knowledge is only surpassed by his thirst for coffee. Thus, much free time is spent in the quest for the next fix.

For quicker updates, subscribe to the RSS feed.

With the amount of atheist blogs I follow, I can’t help but be aware of the multiple ad campaigns going around right now for the areligious-reason groups. First there were bus campaigns in England with the following slogan:

Then came the billboards in America:

etc.

Then came the Christian vandalism of said atheist billboards:

along with many protests and lawsuits about the message on these billboards. This has resulted in some of them being taken down by the ad firms who give in to the sway of the protesters.

And I ask, how is this even Christian? How is this message hurting you and your belief? How is it that we cannot grasp that we live in a pluralist society where people are content with letting others have whatever faith they have?

The gospel was birthed in a pluralistic society, but Paul didn’t go around smashing the statues in Athens because they displayed heathen gods and “unknown” gods. He didn’t protest their existence. He simply proclaimed what “they knew as unknown,” and “When they heard about the resurrection of the dead, some of them sneered, but others said, “We want to hear you again on this subject.” ³³At that, Paul left the Council. ³⁴A few men became followers of Paul and believed.” Thus, the message of the gospel must be, in some way, stronger than the simple message of faith and belief the other religions of the day had. How did they convince a group of non-Jewish people to turn from their culture’s most popular religions to follow the way of a Jewish rabbi with simply the story of a man who rose from the dead?

In what way have we lost the true center of Christianity when we make it about what you believe rather than how that action is birthed in what you believe? There is no greater display of your personal theology than how you act towards other people. Faith is not intellectual acknowledgment of historical or even semi-historical events as having occurred. It is not in the belief of the existence of a God-man or in his resurrection and eventual return as a historical event. It is found where hope and belief cause us to behave in such a way that these things might be true. We hope they are true. Where this hope goes wrong is when Christians focus on what God dislikes rather than what God loves, and if we are to call ourselves Christians, we must acknowledge the love of God for everyone.

In what way have we lost the true center of Christianity when we suppress in fear the messages of other religions and a-religions? Is the gospel about being the only voice heard? And what message does suppression send to any person who is an atheist other than what they already believed: That Christians are self-centered bigots bent on world domination or condemnation through being the one voice heard?

In a nation whose first right is “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Amazingly, free speech and free practice of religion are in the SAME sentence. Amazingly, this document was written by the very people conservative Christians hold high as banners of the True America and the “way it should be.”

If someone wishes to espouse their beliefs over a billboard, why protest? Christians would find it laughably ridiculous were Atheists to protest the advertisement of a church on a billboard. Besides, the South would become a barren wasteland of “YOUR MESSAGE HERE” billboards with the loss of religious advertising privileges. What would ever entertain me on road trips?

Bio: Josiah is a graduate of North Central University in Minneapolis, MN. His thirst for knowledge is only surpassed by his thirst for coffee. Thus, much free time is spent in the quest for the next fix.

Taking the time to learn about any social justice cause can be exhausting. Once we open our eyes to the injustice in the world, it can be overwhelming. There are terrible things out there, like human trafficking, the global food crisis, and the dangers of malaria. It’s a noble goal to highlight places that need help, but it’s easy to hear about these things and feel despair because of how far the world has fallen. It’s easy to get discouraged.

This is a problem people who champion social justice issues must face on a regular basis. In the face of so much despair, how do you begin to have hope for a better tomorrow? A friend once told me that when you look at the world, it’s hard to ignore what a terrible place it is. You hear about people dying from starvation, about girls who are sold to pimps to be prostitutes, about groups of people who go around killing innocent villages. The world is filled with all kinds of awful. Looking at the world, it’s easy to see why there’s so much despair.

There are few human experiences that transcend cultural barriers and pain is something every person must deal with. It is unfortunate pain is universal to mankind, but it also allows us to feel empathy for one another. If we didn’t know what pain felt like, then how could we ever truly understand the sorrow others go through? But to view these issues with discouragement and despair is an injustice in itself. To limit the view of the world to just despair is a world that is not worth living in.

It comes down to a worldview question. How will you choose to view the world around you? Yes, despair and sorrow exist in the world, but will you let that become the only thing you see? It is a dangerous tension people who champion social justice must navigate as they live their lives. They can either choose to recognize the sorrow around them and be weighed down by it, or they can realize there is more going on than despair. It easy to feel outraged at the injustices in the world, but it’s also easy to forget to see the beautiful things people are doing everyday.

On the macro level there are organizations like, Blood Water Mission, Venture, and Charity:Water, that make it their goal to truly make the world a more pleasant place. They exist to make life better for those who are less fortunate, they get others to take notice and care about these tragic situations. The work they are doing is beautiful indeed.

But it also happens on the micro level as well. In every community you may a hear story like this (which actually happened): A daughter has five extra dollars that she doesn’t know what to do with. She thinks about it for a while and realizes there is nothing else she needs. You would think she would put it in her piggy bank to save it for another day, but this wouldn’t be a beautiful story if she did that. What she does instead is give the five dollars to her older brother so he can enjoy it. The brother of course accepts his sister’s generosity, but it doesn’t end there.

A couple of weeks later, the sister’s hamster suddenly dies and she is crushed about the whole ordeal. It may be just a hamster, but to her, it’s like her very own daughter has died. She is crushed. Her brother takes notice of the grief her sister is going through and goes up to his father and says, “Dad, I’d like to help pay for my sister’s hamster.” He offers to give up his own money to help her deal with her pain. Now this is a beautiful story.

It’s impossible after hearing things like this to see the world as only a place of pain and despair. We must remember beautiful things happen everyday. If we get stuck in pessimism, then evil, despair, and oppression will continue to weigh us down. But if we realize beautiful acts always triumph over evil, then we can create true change. It is only when we hold an optimistic view of the world that we can be driven to make a difference.

-Tone Hoeft

Bio: Tone is pursuing his Master’s of Communications at Eastern Washington University. To find out more about him or his thoughts visit www.inproximity.org.

“They arrived in our greatest hour of need.

They gave us hope,

And in return,

We gave them our trust.”

The first thing I hope you notice when watching this promo is its HEAVY use of religious imagery and language. There are multiple references to the Visitors as “Saviors”. Tyler steps out aghast at the mothership and exclaims “My God!” There are healings. Talk of gratitude morphing into worship is heard. A crucifix falls off an altar. Messages of hope are being spread to all mankind and those in power do not like what they cannot control. The second thing I hope you sense is the fear these things generate in the religious leaders and conservative people.

Now, if one understands the plot of this series (due to it being a remake), the jaded perspective of man when it comes to things seeming “too good to be true”, and how pop culture ultimately spins things (main characters are not evil), one knows that nothing in this show is as good or perfect as it seems. However, what if it was? What if the messages of hope were what they claimed to be? What if these people truly could save us?

At the very least, the initial episodes of this show, revealing and developing the message of the Vs and the reaction of Earth’s population, could give us a wonderful lens into a first century Pharisaic perspective of Christ, in that, he did much the same thing. He upset the government and the religious system by giving people hope rooted in some sort of alternative form. The people who were myopically focused on who held power and control in the here and now, suddenly witnessed the gift of equality to those over whom power was held. It was not the revolution they were looking for. Because of this, it gained devotion from those who experienced the new equality and fear from those who watched their system be critiqued with an obvious authority they were helpless to stand against. All they were able to do was kill the man.

This plays on the common understanding that man has always believed the world could be a better place, he has simply been at a loss of what or how to change it. Suddenly, beings clothed in human bodies arrive on the scene and prominently declare messages of hope and peace; radically transforming the lives on this planet through “miraculous” healing and cultural advancement.

It reveals the development of fear in the systemic leaders, both political and religious, as a result of the development of hope in the masses. This fear is a result of the loss of control through the realignment of devotion.

The actions and message of the Vs reveal by stark contrast the failings of the religious system to spread the hope it claims. However, it seems they do so by giving hope for the present rather than a hope for the future. Also, it is spread to everyone. It is not a message solely for those deemed appropriate by the system.

This begs the following questions:

- In what way is our “blessed hope” one that is not simply a future, or what are the ramifications of the Gospel of new creation to the present world?

- In what way have we narrowed our message to those within our system versus a message to all? (Something most think is a result of lifestyle requirements, linked to the “Go and sin no more” statements of Christ.)

So, Jesus and the Space Aliens. Their stories start off much the same; with hope, devotion, worship, trust, redemption, and salvation. If we, as the church, are to be for the world what Christ was for Israel, where have we gone wrong? Where was our effectiveness lost?

Just something to think about.

“V” begins Nov. 3rd on ABC.

Bio: Josiah is a graduate of North Central University in Minneapolis, MN. His thirst for knowledge is only surpassed by his thirst for coffee. Thus, much free time is spent in the quest for the next fix.