8 comments:

• Sarah Elizabeth Tygert posted at 4:26 pm on Tue, Jun 19, 2012.

  Posts: 41

  There are things you would certainly consider drivel, Mr. Baumbach. If there is something for you to be gained from Mr Hebacker's article than that is wonderful for you and I will not take that from you. But it is hardly close minded to say that bigotry and intolerance is drivel, in the same fashion that racism is nothing more than nonsenisical nonsense without rationale.

  If one can find enlightenment in a white supremacy letter, splendid. Likewise, if you can find meaning in a letter stating God's judgement is against the human race, wonderful.. It does not detract from the fact that the former believes that individuals with darker skin are lesser people, or that the later believe that the non-believer is lesser than the Christian. I find no sociological import to either message, and you may to one or to both. If you can ignore the bigotry and see the bright side, great, but that does not make the bigotry nonexistent until it is removed . In the same manner that you may see a diamond in the rough, but the diamond remains nothing more than a pretty thing in a rock until all the non-valuable material is removed.

  • Link

   

• Darrell Baumbach posted at 4:32 pm on Fri, Jun 15, 2012.

  Posts: 9403

  With all due respect Ms Tygert, I am not attempting to interpret at all. You are misunderstanding what it is I suggested to do. I really do not care what the intent of the author was. There is much more ...such as unintended outcomes. I appreciate your perspective but if I gain something from what I do, that is better that simply stating the letter is drivel.You stating there is no sociological sense to it is close minded best.

  • Link

   

• Sarah Elizabeth Tygert posted at 11:58 am on Thu, Jun 14, 2012.

  Posts: 41

  With all due respect Mr Baumbach, your practice of "transfer[ing] the information to non religious terms" is a poor method of interpretation. In Biblical studies we call this eisegesis. The correct way to read something is to discover the intention of the author through the author's perspective, not re-interpret it through one's own.

  In this instance, my opinion of his letter stands. There is no greater message of the use of fear, it is simply religious elitism: worship my God and only my God or you are less than I am. He presupposes and assumes that those without the word of God are the source of evil in our world. He gets this from the Bible (nice circular argument, eh?) because, of course, the Bible is the word of God and thus to be revered.

  There is nothing to glean from such a message, and I'm sure Mr. Hebacker would agree that your perspective is not at all what he wishes to convey. It's simple and literally what is said: "Remember that same door which shuts in the wise virgin's forever will shut out the foolish and unbelieving forever."

  The unbeliever can not interpret such a clear message in a way that works sociologically. There is no sociological sense to it.

  • Link

   

• Darrell Baumbach posted at 4:13 pm on Wed, Jun 13, 2012.

  Posts: 9403

  Mr Hebacker stated... Away with the authority of the word of God, the result will be a people with no fear of God. ….. that God has departed from us because we have departed from Him, and because we don't respect the authority of His word …
  then stated... Remember that same door which shuts in the wise virgin's forever will shut out the foolish and unbelieving forever.

  Then Ms Tygert stated... What issue of fear?

  For me, it is obvious. When I read something that a religious person writes, I try to transfer the information to non religious terms. So I take god out of the picture and focus on what message I can glean that is transferable. In this case, god is the source of fear... but if you study behavioral sciences, fear of anything changes behavior both positive and negative. Mr Hebacker fears that without god( his source of fear) people with not behave themselves appropriately. He attempts to reinforce that fear by giving a warning to people in order to manipulate behavior.

  I think it is instructive that some people of faith respond to fear more than love. I think it wise to attempt to understand from where a person comes from in order to relate and treat them respectfully instead of just writing it off as delusional or simply drivel.

  • Link

   

• Robert Jacobs posted at 10:57 am on Wed, Jun 13, 2012.

  Posts: 297

  This is a excerpt from this article: Remember that same door which shuts in the wise virgin's forever will shut out the foolish and unbelieving forever.

  Yes the above it true those who do not believe will forever be in darkness and not saved. But some we chosen for salvation and nothing can separate them from the love of God!

  You cannot earn salvation, it is freely given by God to those who chooses. Romans: 9:11-25

  • Link

   

• Sarah Elizabeth Tygert posted at 9:06 pm on Tue, Jun 12, 2012.

  Posts: 41

  I have to agree with Crowder here, Baumbach. It is "drivel."

  What issue of fear? This has nothing to do with fear of punishment and consequences, the context is clearly speaking of the fear, aka reverence, of God. This is speaking of a fear of damnation, of an eternally punishing God. There is no need for this type of fear in society.

  The majority of this letter is speaking of the rejection for the word of God. Mention of this "word" is mentioned 5 times in the above letter... obviously the main focus.

  And I say - Good! Away with a 2,000+ year old document written by an ancient culture and on to a new construction of ethics and morality! Religion and the following thereof has nothing to do with "evil" in our world and any scholarly sociological study will clearly show that.

  I, for one, am very tired of reading these articles. I am tired of the religion column being filled with condescending, belittling, religious dogma. Can we not find something better to write about? Something more enlightening and empowering than an admonishment to "follow God" or "serve Jesus"?
  

  • Link

   

• Darrell Baumbach posted at 10:15 am on Mon, Jun 11, 2012.

  Posts: 9403

  I do not practice religion and am closer to Mr Crowder's postion, but I fail to see why he does not get value from this letter even if he is an atheist.

  For example... the issue of fear and what role it plays in behavior is an important topic which is addressed. In this case, it is the fear of god and the consequences ( punishment) that is perceived by the people who fear punishment for inappropriate behavior. BF Skinner and many behaviorists agree that fear, reward and punishment is significant in behavior people engage in. Instead of calling this letter drivel, why not be constructive and talk about the issue of fear and the point this letter addesses.

  In my view, good letter for all no matter if a person is religious or not.
  

  • Link

   

• Andy Crowder posted at 7:42 am on Sat, Jun 9, 2012.

  Posts: 244

  Since you are printing Willie's drivel week after week anyway, you might as well take his photograph and give him his own religion column.

  • Link