DaveCo's Xanga

Monday, February 13, 2006

Mon, 13 Feb 2006 23:37:53 GMT

Moving My Blog...

Thu, 05 Jan 2006 07:04:53 GMT

I've decided to move my blog to a place where I'll have more options and power over my blog and it's lay out.

It is now here: http://dmbennett.wordpress.com/

Book mark it.

Research and results....

Wed, 04 Jan 2006 22:39:54 GMT

I just read this article, it's fascinating and relevant to all Christians out there. Let me say one thing before you read it, pay careful attention to the lack of ill-will this Rabbi has against Christianity, and how he nearly beleives Christianity and Judaism to be of the "same spiritual energy". What does that mean? Anywho, some thoughts to ponder and questions to be raised. More importantly is the issue at hand in this article, where has the faith, love, and prayer gone?

My answer, and perhaps an illuded point, post-industrial consumer captialism. That is not an solution, just a complaint, so forgive me for being useless thus far on this one.

P.s. I have nothing against Rabbinic persons or Judaism, and I somewhat dig the lack of ill-will.

Reading List Update

Wed, 04 Jan 2006 00:37:38 GMT

Following the path of my sister I too this year will be posting a completed works list, basically for myself, but hey I suppose it couldn't hurt to see if other people are interested:

Dave’s 2006 completed books:

Border Crossings by Rodney Clapp

Subject matter: Christian trespasses on popular culture, politics, and art.

Another Response to Blue Like Jazz by Don Miller

Tue, 03 Jan 2006 23:27:13 GMT

I was reading an assignment for one of my classes, which happens to be two treatises one by Emil Brunner, and one by Karl Barth who has heralded in this era in the protestant age of "knowing God". Written and published in 1934 these treatises are very systematic and scientific in layout and proposal. Here is a brief excerpt to show my point:

I have formulated them as Barth's opinions as best as I can. I am not perfectly certain however, whether I have hit upon ever shade of Barth's opinion.

In what follows I set out:

My counter-theses witha very brief scriptural proof.
A discussion of its relation in the history of dogma to the Reformation, to Thomism and to Neo-Protestantism.
A concluding discussion of the theological and practical signifigance of the controversy, i.e. of the interest of theology and the Church in the rejection of the conclsions which Barth draws from his correct fundamental position.

Many times I remember reading in Blue Like Jazz that Miller is tired of himself and others thinking of Religion in such a mathematical way. The truth is, perhaps Miller is looking at the wrong thing, in essence Miller while using post-modernist thought and arguing against modernist thought, is indeed employing a modernist argument to post-modernist people who are using modernist ideas of knowledge, and he is doing this under the guise of post-modernism.

Now that was rather wordy and perhaps hard to follow, but let me explain. Where Miller sees mathematical and regulated ways of talking at the Bible, I see that as just another way at looking at the Bible as looking at it relationally. Miller is constructing a fundamental theology based on narrative and relationship, while at the same time expecting those who look at it rationally as inherently wrong or biased against this.

If he were a true adherent to post-modernism he would be apt to say that both are paths to finding God, regardless of whether or not he can see it from the point of view presented through Rationality and the scientific method.

Don't take me wrong here, but I am niether a supporter or opponent to either of these views, I think that both have their own nuance and tact, and in their own rights are different means to the same end. I will say this though, experientially I can understand a systemetic way of thinking, I am prone to do so, often times.

I use the example of Emil Brunner above to say one thing: Because he is systematically understanding the Bible and our interaction with it (I.e. Scriptural proofs, a 3-point outline) does not mean that his understanding/faith in God is any more or less important than Don Millers.

Let us free ourselves of negating each other's clearly God given talents and join hands and work to the glory of his kingdom. In other words: let's get along. Let us also not forget the beauty of both systems of thought: without rational systematic "modern" thought our world of ease and technology would never have ascended to become what it is now, and without relational and narrative theology our understanding of Christ and the move towards civil rights would not be as far progressed as it has become. In the end, without the narrative of Jesus, Martin Luther King Jr. might not have been such a determined or peaceful protester.

Introspectively yours....

Tue, 03 Jan 2006 06:24:08 GMT

I realize that kicking yourself in the face because of the past is something that can go on forever, and is not exactly healthy. However it's a funny thing to be constantly relearning old experiences as if they were new, and melding them into new understandings, this however is not a new concept for me.

In fact the hard thing came tonight, when I had a conversation with an old friend and realized once again, with a sickening feeling and the utmost intensity that there was nothing I could have done. I suppose I feel like it is unfair to have been judged unworthy under the circumstances, but then that is nothing that I haven't done to others. Still, feeling like you could have done something to correct the past and excusing that with circumstances, or thinking you have learned your lesson and finding out you never can, leaves one with a feeling of hopelessness.

And so it is that I am stuck for God knows how long, feeling hopeless, and in some strange sense vowing to never be hopeless again. But then I suppose that, that was never up to me in the first place.

God rest the weary soul that was me.

"Must Love Dogs"

Mon, 02 Jan 2006 03:41:38 GMT

So I just finished watching the film "Must Love Dogs." An actually cute Romantic Comedy. Of course we always have a tendency to relate to the main characters of the movie, but henceforth I have decided that I am the John Cusack of "Must Love Dogs" and "Serendipity" of course excusing that I am not as attractive as John Cusack.

I say that because we're both impulsive, we have our "theories" and many time I think we both come off as scary, when all we are really wanting to do is be honest, and get the other person to be honest. Of course I also relate because John Cusack and I apparently are doomed to do badly at finding the right woman.

It's not fair you know, this dating game or any game really, I just want to find an intelligent, funny, impulsive, different woman who catches my humor and crazy theories that I seem to be flinging off in my mad twirl of impulsivity. One who in fact flings off her own crazy theories, hidden intelligence, and strange impulsive dance.

I don't want sex, money, success, or power. I'd settle for occasional mood swings, angry arguments, disagreements, compromising, having to cook, and even an overbearing group of in-laws. All I really want is some one who will try, and someone who "gets" me. And I know we'll fail at making each other happy, wonder why we're dating, and maybe even get bored with each other. But all I want to do is "get" her and give her all that I've got, God knows it will never be enough, but it was never supposed to be anyway.

I suppose in the end it's not in my hands anyway, but then a relationship never could fit in to one person's hands.

An observation...

Sun, 01 Jan 2006 21:42:08 GMT

I've always had a hard time studying/reading with too much or too little noise going on. There is something uneasy and eery about complete silence, and too much enteraction if I keep the radio or television on. Even people in the background distract me if they are talking. I seem to have some innate, uncontrollable want to think about the music, or speak with the persons talking.

Why is it that I can't concentrate in complete silence then? I don't have an answer to that question so much as I have a solution to that problem. Sitting outside really helps, the sounds of nature are there taking away the eery silence, but are not too involved, and even if they were I would not be able to find them or silence them.

Nature is peaceful, never speaking too much or too little, the sound of the breeze carrying many of the noises of small animals and life working it's way through your head, helps rather than hinders the ability to read.

Perhaps it has to do with control, and the lack that I have of it in nature, and so I accept what's going on, even though I can remove myself from the situation. Or perhaps it's the lack of involvement, knowing that I am a bystander to a conversation that occurs regardless of my presence.

I'm not quite sure what it is, but I like to think it's because I just as much as any other creature have a place in nature, and that nature is without agenda. It seems that nature is a place where I can come into contact with the slowness of life, the world will not fall tomorrow if I don't rush around always trying to get there, than understanding that I am here.

To borrow an example from Pirsig, A hike through the woods is not to accomplish a distance, or getting to the top of the mountain or end of the trail. If I keep concentrating on getting up ahead, then when I get there I am concentrating on getting up ahead again, I am never satisfied with what it is that I have, and where I am. Potentially I am missing out on the many beauties that I am surrounded by. Besides, being at the top is not a place I will stay either, in fact, hardly any foliage or life will survive at the apex of a mountain, it only flourishes on the sides. But let us not forget that without the apex there would be no mountain.

In affect, part of reading is accepting my surroundings, and my place in it. To finish the book is not a good goal, rather it is to understand and apply the book. But what good is accomplishing either of those goals if you have to forsake everything around you to do it, including silence.

Getting there is being there, but let us not forget that there serves a purpose also.

Saturday, December 31, 2005

Sat, 31 Dec 2005 21:52:21 GMT

What a perfect sunset for the last day of the year. I wish I had a camera to take a picture of it, but I am afraid that even a camera can't capture the magnificence of a sunset.

A beautiful mixture of deep grey purples, and brilliant pinks, a little orange and a serene blue back-drop with a hint of ominence.

The clouds christening the on-set of a new year, careless of the time, for they have seen many, and will see many more, they are nearly oblivious to it. The trees, standing in gratitude, a luminescent thunder of silent applause.

And the noticeable greed of the stars, shining to be seen, and noticed, on this last eve of the year.

All nature is still in the wake of such a scene, homage is not enough.

It is a demand for worship.

From the Creator.

To be the best... Causa Sui

Sat, 31 Dec 2005 17:51:39 GMT

Sometimes I daydream about being a writer, coming up with something clever, new, fun, and educating. I realize however that my writings quite possibly would get lost in the cascade of every day publications.

This reminded me of use, and purpose. In America we are encouraged to do our best, but what good is doing our best, when some one doing better than you can perform the same task and elaborate on it farther than you can?

And then I had a liberating thought, it's not about doing your best, or even having a contribution. Why live one's life in such a competitive way? Rather wouldn't it be even better, to help others do their best?