Political or not?

(I write this despite the lack of interest I have to include raw and rediculous Political debate on my blog. It might bear some entertaining fruit in the end, so I shall just harden up and do it)

Does it feel like a joke to you? This whole thing is like a weird dream.

He can't be real. It's all just so cheesy.

That being said, I'm in the middle of watching the Nation Under Siege video, courtesy of StreamingFaith.com and the good Bishop. I might even attend a rally and try and score the actual DVD.

The thing is, I tend to agree with the social problems he discusses, I just don't think he's the cure. In fact, in some way, I see him as contributing to a new set of problems.

Charlatan? Who can say. Only history will determine that.

Some thoughts on the video:

1) "I want to reiterate ... this is not ... out of personal political gain"

Yuhuh, sure it's not. Let's just do a nationwide tour and produce a DVD about Politics, Liberal Leadership and immoral laws just before the election. Where is Christ? All I hear is politics.

2) "Helen Clark is a self professed agnostic, meaning that she doesn't believe there is a god"

Really? Is THAT what Agnostic meant, nice to know.

3) He makes some good points about Civil Unions et al. He points out that "writing submissions alone is not enough". Whatever can we do? Luckily this isn't a political DVD.

4) Hate speech legislation. Yeah, that stuff is no good. On the other hand, there'd be less arguing on Blogs ;)

5) "The Media are modern day witchcraft", "I mean this, the media is now the main source of perceptions in our society, true and false. Unfortunately, much of it is false and misleading."

Ok, that's probably true to Media form about the definition he uses, but I don't know where he gets "witchcraft" from. Naturally, he uses it to defend the way Destiny Church is getting slammed by the Media. Figures, I guess. At least we get to see the 'real' version of events via Tamaki-Cam.

Actually, it's funny how everything Tamaki says at the "enough is enough" rally is all purely political. What a coincidence. I'd almost think he was trying to achieve something politically, if I didn't know that all that stuff was solely the job of the Destiny PARTY, not Brian or his church.

6) I agree with Tamaki wholeheartedly about state-run television. It is getting pretty shocking. I think I remember Marge Simpson saying something like, "I think television has become soft porn so slowly that we never even noticed!"

7) The Retreat of Religion in NZ. Finally, he mentions Jesus! He does however only mention Jesus in making the argument that the church is the only vehicle for change in NZ. Really, when did Jesus say that?

Uh oh, more Church/State doctrine!

But we know where Tamaki stands on that, thanks to John, through the quote that has now gone missing on Tamaki's website:

"The State should submit to the spiritual guidance of the Church"

And of course, says the video speaking of leadership in NZ, "if somebody is going to make decisions, surely it should be the people of God." But that doesn't really take into account those people that don't agree with what we think, which would be the original point of a democracy.

8) "The only place that the Christian community can express its concerns is at the polls." Ack! How is this not political?!

In summary, Brian explains how we should vote for him, er... I mean his Party.

Shameless, how shameless.

But, of course, "this is not a Destiny Church Party" as per the Media deception, I mean 'witchcraft'.

At least he had cool music. Nice base.

{finis}

Those were the days, my friends

So do you think that we, like so many "young and zealous", "trying to save the world" types, will eventually succomb to the apathy of world-weariness?

Do you think that we, too, will live our nine to five, monday to friday existences, punctuated by the occasional argumentative deacon's meeting or the latest conversation about contraversial current events over the water-cooler?

Do you think that Bertrand Russell was right?

Such, in outline, but even more purposeless, more void of meaning, is the world which Science presents for our belief. Amid such a world, if anywhere, our ideals henceforward must find a home. That Man is the product of causes which had no prevision of the end they were achieving; that his origin, his growth, his hopes and fears, his loves and his beliefs, are but the outcome of accidental collocations of atoms; that no fire, no heroism, no intensity of thought and feeling, can preserve an individual life beyond the grave; that all the labours of the ages, all the devotion, all the inspiration, all the noonday brightness of human genius, are destined to extinction in the vast death of the solar system, and that the whole temple of Man's achievement must inevitably be buried beneath the debris of a universe in ruins--all these things, if not quite beyond dispute, are yet so nearly certain, that no philosophy which rejects them can hope to stand. Only within the scaffolding of these truths, only on the firm foundation of unyielding despair, can the soul's habitation henceforth be safely built.

(Bertrand Russell, A Free Man's Worship)

Will all our noon-day brightness become whether to have spaghetti or meatloaf for dinner?


CURSE YOU MEDIOCRITY!!



(Living Wisdom, courtesy of David Riddell, taught me about "Unbearable Feelings". Mine being MEDIOCRITY)

Blogger|Reality

You'll never guess what happened today!

As per my threat considered on another person's blog, I took a trip to see the crew down at Cession|Community this evening.

I was fortunate that I got to meet certain people in my blog-O-sphere face-to-face:

I bumped into BJ, Frank, Rhett and good ol' Steve.

Cession was cool, they fed me up first, which is always a cunning ploy (especially when it's free). It was then followed up by a nice session together worshipping God and learning from the Word (courtesy of a rocking worship team and a talk by BJ).

I found it appropriate that I turn up at Cession in time for the series on what makes a good community. Maybe I'll go hear the other parts too, providing none of my blog-o-buddies think I'm stalking them by doing so ;)

I'm really trying to put a lot of thought into different ways of doing church. At the moment I'm beginning to take an interest in the idea of Emergent Church (I'm not saying that Cession is an example, heck, I have no idea anyway). Steve Taylor does some good talk on that topic. One thing strikes me about Cession is that they aren't a bunch of try-hards attempting to be cool, but there seems to be a real genuineness and warmth about Connecting-with-God and paring off things that get in the way of that.

It gave me the chance to lay something down at His feet, that's a good thing.

Smeagol is free!

We tolds the exams to go away and they did! *gollum*

For quizness sake!!

They just keep coming!

Another quiz, a worldview one this time. Somebody claimed that they always produce the same answer, but I went and specifically chose answers to get a certain answer, and i ended up with "Romanticist", so I know they aren't always the same. Maybe this person's friends all think alike. Well, I do too:

You scored as Cultural Creative. Cultural Creatives are probably the newest group to enter this realm. You are a modern thinker who tends to shy away from organized religion but still feels as if there is something greater than ourselves. You are very spiritual, even if you are not religious. Life has a meaning outside of the rational. Cultural Creative 81% Postmodernist 69% Romanticist 50% Existentialist 50% Fundamentalist 44% Modernist 31% Idealist 25% Materialist 13% What is Your World View? (updated) created with QuizFarm.com

Does that mean i can call myself, "a culturally creative, postmodern existentialist"?

What the...?!

No, really, what the...?!

Seriously

You ain't got a hubby there'll be no bubby... bubby-bubby... bubby-bubby

This title is a quote from Paul, thanks to the fantastic laugh his comment gave me.

Beau then pointed us at an article by Investigate Magazine about the "No rubba, no hubba" campaign. Thanks, Beau.

Just because the article will soon disappear into the mists of forgottenness, I thought I’d reproduce it here (no pun intended) for posterity. That way we can also discuss it if anyone finds anything worth commenting.

JUNE 14 2005

FAMILY PLANNING ASSOCIATION ADMITS ‘HUBBA’ CAMPAIGN "MAY NOT BE
ACCURATE"

95BFM’s Noelle McCarthy has gained an admission from Family Planning that the No Rubba No Hubba safe sex campaign may not be accurate. Speaking to McCarthy on BFM’s The Wire this afternoon*, Family Planning’s Dr Christine Roke conceded that the chances of catching Chlamydia, gonorrhea or herpes through a condom may be as high as 60%, as outlined in the latest Investigate magazine.
"But I would have thought that even 40% protection still made condoms worth using," Dr Roke told McCarthy.
The BFM news director asked however whether the Hubba website and TV ads were being "honest" to young people when the chances of infection when using a condom were still so high. Dr Roke then admitted that the Hubba campaign "may not be accurate enough".
The Family Planning spokeswoman then stunned listeners by adding that "abstinence is the best protection".

Continued in comments section here.

Link (not guaranteed)

A Poem: "Postmodernism"

I've just finished my Gospel in a Post-Christian Society exam, hooray!

It went really well, as far as I can see. I answered questions on: Affirming Faith & PoMo, 'Films & Novels' in PoMo, the Emergent Church (hence my epiphany last night), and Violence & PoMo.

I particularly like my 'Films & Novels' answer, I think too much about movies ;)

On the way back to my room, some of the boys and I were joking about how exams were more Modern than PostModern, so we decided we should have haikus on PoMo instead.

Here's mine:

Postmodernity
The quest for truth revealed in
Community's touch

My course mark for 'Gospel in a Post-Christian Society' was: [TBA]

More than a poem

Breathless...

Incredible.

The misty darkness slides away, I see the skies again.

I find a home, strung between the hearts of a global community.

So often alone,

But never by myself.



A place to call my own again.



So often by myself,

But never alone.

Into your arms I commend my spirit, to your children I give my heart.

More navel-gazing

Found the test thanks to Karen.

You scored as Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan. You are an evangelical in the Wesleyan tradition. You believe that God's grace enables you to choose to believe in him, even though you yourself are totally depraved. The gift of the Holy Spirit gives you assurance of your salvation, and he also enables you to live the life of obedience to which God has called us. You are influenced heavly by John Wesley and the Methodists.

Emergent/Postmodern 79% Evangelical Holiness/Wesleyan 79% Neo orthodox 64% Classical Liberal 50% Charismatic/Pentecostal 46% Reformed Evangelical 32% Fundamentalist 32% Roman Catholic 32% Modern Liberal 25% What's your theological worldview? created with QuizFarm.com

I don't actually agree with all of what that text says! I mean, I don't believe in the Calvinistic doctrine of 'Total Depravity', thank you very much. But it's nice to know that I'm both Evangelical and Holy, not to mention Postmodern. Well, I don't know whether being Postmodern is "nice", but it seems okay from where I'm standing thus far.

Nice to know that I'm almost as Postmodern as the Queen of Postmodernity herself, Lynne.

Since I'm first-equally PoMo, I'll include the text for that:

You scored as Emergent/Postmodern. You are Emergent/Postmodern in your theology.
You feel alienated from older forms of church, you don't think they connect to modern culture very well. No one knows the whole truth about God, and we have much to learn from each other, and so learning takes place in dialogue. Evangelism should take place in relationships rather than through crusades and altar-calls. People are interested in spirituality and want to ask questions, so the church should help them to do this.

Aw, that's lovely, innit?

EDIT: I'm more "emergent" than TallSkinnyKiwi! w00t

The day Jesus would never see

[see here for more info: The Scale of the Debt Crisis ]

Remember in the scriptures how Jesus said, "For you always have the poor with you, and whenever you wish you can do good to them; but you do not always have Me." (Mark 14:7)

Well, it occurred to me that in 10 weeks from now the U.S. will have spent US$200,000,000,000 on the War in Iraq and subsequent follow-up action.

They spent this money in just over two years.

Coincidentally, US$200,000,000,000 is the total amount of money that The World's 41 Heavily In-Debt Poor Countries (HIPC) owe to The West.

Two years is not a long time.

In two years, you can't even complete a BA.

In two years, a U.S. President will have only done half of his first term (usually they do two terms in office).

Imagine the legacy of the President that went down in history books for having written off all developing-world debt.

Noam Chomsky said,

Debt is a social and ideological construct, not a simple economic fact. Furthermore, as understood long ago, liberalisation of capital flow serves as a powerful weapon against social justice and democracy. Recent policy decisions are choices by the powerful, based on perceived self-interest, not mysterious “economic laws”. Technical devices to alleviate their worst effects were proposed years ago, but have been dismissed by powerful interests that benefit.

Did you know that the developing world spends $13 on debt repayment for every $1 it receives in grants?

J.W. Smith said,

The size of the debt trap can be controlled to claim all surplus production of a society, but if allowed to continue to grow the magic of compound interest dictates it is unsustainable. One trillion dollars compounded at 10 percent per year become $117 trillion in fifty years and $13.78 quadrillion in one hundred years, about $3.5 million for every man, woman and child in the Third World.

Their debt is 50 percent greater than this and has been compounding at twice that rate -- over 20 percent per year between 1973 and 1993, from $100 billion to $1.5 trillion [only $400 billion of the $1.5 trillion was actually borrowed money. The rest was runaway compound interest]. If Third World debt continues to compound at 20 percent per year, the $117 trillion debt will be reached in eighteen years and the $13.78 quadrillion debt in thirty-four years.

[emphasis mine]

Did you know that the Debt of The Entire World is 18 times greater than the debt of all developing countries? ($37,000 Billion compared to $2,060 Billion) The U.S., the U.K. and Japan together owe more than a third of all world debt.

President Obasanjo of Nigeria made this comment,

All that we had borrowed up to 1985 or 1986 was around $5 billion and we have paid about $16 billion yet we are still being told that we owe about $28 billion. That $28 billion came about because of the injustice in the foreign creditors' interest rates.

If you ask me what is the worst thing in the world, I will say it is compound interest.

What a load of unrighteous and sickening rubbish, to be honest.

"For you always have the poor with you, and whenever you wish you can do good to them;" (Mark 14:7a)

Iain vs. Bob

In proud defiance of Bob Cornuke, allow me to present to you:

Iain, "the Indiana Jones of Biblical Philosophy."

EDIT: Yes folks, that's right, in sepia.

Money in, money out

Courtesy of our friends at ProjectBillboard and the Centre for American Progress.

Considering the G8 debt-relief package involved writing off the debt of 18 two-third world countries to a total of about $50 Billion or so, this is staggering.

[See the sidebar --> , I can't put Javascript in my blog window]

International Evil

A post on Frank's blog got me thinking about this Fair-Trade deal again, in particular the comments by Rhett.

I thought I'd take the time to explain the official positions of various major corporations involved in Coffee Trade.

Some background detail, the International Coffee Organisation (ICO) originally had a price corset keeping the coffee price relatively high and stable, called the International Coffee Agreement (ICA). Oversupply was prevented by countries agreeing to keep to a certain level of production. Much more details in this OXFAM article here as per my old post about this. The ICO's ICA also ensured that the western coffee dealers could go 'this far and no further' in the profit that they gleaned (see page 17).

The USA decided they weren't going to follow these guidelines any further.

Almost two decades on, here is what some of their companies say about the coffee crisis:

Kraft:

On social responsibility: "we support ... a decent and improving standard of living for growers and producers of coffee and their families"

On the crisis: "The market will find its own solution because countries and producers will be driven out of the market. Our role is on the demand side - our role as Kraft is to increase consumption"

On the ICO: "We are fundamentally opposed to any scheme that intervenes on price"

Nestle:

On social responsibility: "A few years down the road, we are going to be asked not only if we have maximised short-term shareholder value, but also ... What have you done to help fight hunger in developing countries?"

On the crisis: "Nestle is concerned about the plight of those coffee farmers who are presently receiving historically low prices for their coffee crop. This situation results in a disturbing increase in poverty and suffering for themselves and their families."

On the ICO: "Nestle fully supports the ICO Quality Improvement Scheme and its application as it pertains to the export of green coffee from producing countries."
"Nestle considers the ICO as the best platform to set up a price stabilization mechanism"

P&G (Procter & Gamble):

On social responsibility: "P&G has always conducted its business with integrity and a strong P&G core value of 'doing the right thing.' "

On the crisis: "No-one can deny the coffee crisis." "P&G is committed to help address the underlying social and economic issues which contribute to this situation"

On the ICO: "P&G is not prepared to support the International Coffee Organisation's scheme because it is not the NCA position" (NCA, the National Coffee Association, is an American coffee-company trade association)

Sara Lee:

On social responsibility: "Sara Lee's objectives is to utilize the corporation's purchasing power to influence those from whom the corporation procures products and services to: embrace high standards of ethical behaviour, comply with all applicable laws and regulations, treat their employees fairly, and with dignity and respect, so at to promote their welfare and improve their quality of life, and be socially responsible citizens in the countries and communities in which they operate."

On the crisis: "Sara Lee and the coffee industry at large do not consider such fluctuations (in price) in the interest of local farmers, the industry, or the consumer"

On the ICO: "Sara Lee is uneasy about price support. The market needs to equilibrate on supply and demand." "Compensating farmers for the burden of lower income by artificially paying guaranteed prices provides an incentive to over-production, while creating unwanted discriminating positions on the green coffee market. For this reason Sara Lee will not promote or initiate the marketing of coffee under the Fair Trade level."

(pages 25b & 25c)

So there you have it. The best quote is either that last one by Sara Lee, or maybe the On the crisis quote by Kraft.

"The market will find its own solution because countries and producers will be driven out of the market"

Isn't that like saying, "I don't support World Vision sponsor children because the population will regulate itself, children and adults will be driven out of existence."

When coffee growers get paid US$0.14 for something that gets sold for US$26.40 off UK shelves, something is wrong (page 24). One grower talks about the days when he could afford whatever his family needed, but now profits are barely above production costs.

The only company that doesn't seem like a complete viper out of those four is Nestle. Funny that, I wonder what I'm not seeing about Nestle ;)

Devaluing the knowledge dollar

I was just thinking how the internet provides one with the ability to be the ultimate general-knowledge freak. But not all general knowledge, the specialist knowledge that one can find with the right amount of initiative is impressive.

It's always funny how people ask me questions via email or instant messaging and are surprised when I know the answers.

Consider these:

Google IMDB Wikipedia Dictionary Amazon Babel-fish

These are the neurons in the ultimate pop-culture brain.

If knowledge is power, are we now all powerful or do we just need a new kind of knowledge?

EDIT: Could it be that, in the future, machines with Artificial Intelligence will use the internet as an integral part of their mind?

My overflowing riches

I just discovered an awesome website.

Apparently, despite the fact that I'm a poor student, I'm in the top 14.66% of the richest people in the world.

That looks something like this:


..............................................................^ me

That means that I'm the 879,793,015 richest person in the world with 5,120,206,985 people poorer than me.

I've put a image on my sidebar which you can click on or you can find out how rich YOU are here.

Another world altogether

I can only imagine what life is like for some people in the U.S.

One of the contributors to the blog, The Gutless Pacifist, has an interesting post, here, about his experiences of those Christians who call themselves fundamentalist.

Some taster quotes:

Yes I do think that American Christian fundamentalists are capable of tremendous violence. I know Phil meant to draw upon some kind of unspoken mutual understanding that Christian fundamentalists are wonderful, peace-loving, not-violent-unless-provoked people who are easy to get along with and love kids and dogs. Obviously I should be able to see the difference.

Unfortunately, our Christian fundamentalist critics who spend their days here on GP defending the use of violence and otherwise being unpeaceable fail to walk a mile in someone else's shoes.

And also,

So yes, let's all have a big chuckle over the notion of Christian fundamentalists chopping off heads while screaming "Jesus!" However, such hearty good times do nothing to change the numerous times I've been told by upstanding Christian fundamentalists that "losers" and "sickos" and "liberals" like me should be "drug out into the street and shot" if they "had their way". The reason I took Phil's comment and ran with it was because, while the delivery was different, I've been told seriously by Christian fundamentalists that this is exactly the sort of thing that should be done to me. I should be killed. I should be executed. And by their own admission it is only because I am protected by the law of a "liberal", "secular humanist" State that I'm not. It's not really all that funny after that.

God defend New Zealand.

Theft of the mind

People are stealing our hearts and our minds.

They're doing that by stealing our voices and our language.

What do I mean? Go to http://www.google.com and try typing in "babel," what happens?

Only one of the ten links shown is actually about the Genesis chapter 11 tale of the Tower of Babel. The rest are translation services (thanks, Altavista) etc.

Now google for the term "Kingdom of Heaven" (quotes or no quotes, works the same). NONE of the first 10 links show anything about Jesus' actual message of the Kingdom at all, they are all links to stuff about the Orlando Bloom movie.

Let's change tack for a moment. Think about the word, "fundamentalist."
What does it mean?

Well let me tell you that it didn't used to mean, "Muslim on television waving an AK47," or, "Christian on television sniping people as they're leaving an abortion clinic." That term has changed meaning more than a few times since the 18th Century.

I tell you that language sets the parameters of thought. Language shapes culture. Yes, it is also true that culture shapes language, but such a shaping occurs inter-generationally whereas we are concerned about the effect of our language on our present lives.

I say that our words are being stolen out of our mouths. If that is so, then the minds that learn these stolen words - our community and our children - will stop hearing what we are saying.

Wormholes, relativity & curries

I'm experiencing a twisting in the fabric of space and time.

Paul, a political scientist with anabaptist convictions, is sitting next to me in the computer suite despite his claim to be "living in Christchurch".

I haven't sorted out the appropriate laws of physics to explain this phenomenon, but I'm sure it has something to do with wormholes.

He's being boring and doing some assignment, so that means that I'll have to annoy him until he gives up and does something more fun.

On a different note - stemming from my missions studies, my training in the area of missiological anthropology and my interest in the Two-Third's World - I've decided to go on a three month missions trip to India at the end of this year.

I have been considering my options for a while now. I feel like I'm fairly near to exploding with all my training going IN but nothing coming out! I really want to get stuck in and doing something and, to be honest, it really feels good to have a tangible goal to work towards now.

I was worried about Short Term Mission (STM) versus Long Term Mission (LTM). Will the STMers trample over the careful progress of any LTMers simply in search of a good testimony to tell at their church when they get back? Will the STMers be able to be 'contextual' if they aren't even spending enough time there that they don't think it worth their while to learn the language? How can STMers do a good job if they don't learn the heart of the people they are reaching through careful learning of their host's culture?

I battled with all this and more. In the end, I think that cautious awareness of these issues will help lessen many of the negative effects associated with STM. One thing that can't be escaped is the fact that I don't have a heart for any one country, more that I want to be a student of the world, so to speak, learning insights about God from whichever cultures I can.

The only way I can get a feel for Missions in general, without dedicating the next 3 decades of my life, is to do STM. So it's either get out of the game or get into STM. So here goes nothing!

India here I come!

p.s. I might get back and be self-righteously sickened by all the opulence of the western world and move to Christchurch for a sabbatical. That's all theory of course, practical issues will dictate reality. Like what to do for a job... (accursed student loan!)

Fight of the Century

Oh man, oh man! Er... oh person!

There has been a fairly excitable flurry of words recently on several friend's blogs concerning feminist theology. I haven't had an argument with anyone in a long while, it's giving me some things to really think about.

I find myself in an unusual position of being stuck between two camps. I'm a christian man, therefore radical and post-christian feminists will think of me as such, but I am also an egalitarian (read: feminist) therefore "conservative" males will think of me as such.

My Fiesty-Female-Friend, Sharyn (here / here), and my favourite Y-Chromosome-Twin*, Paul (here / here), have been arguing against my down-country, ruralite, TSCF pal, Chez (here), including some input from another particularly political & verbally inexhaustible fellow who blogs at, 'Home, Throne & Altar'.

Chez is an extremely nice guy, I've been apprehensive about letting rip along with two other people - I know how it feels when BOTH my parents nag me at once ;)

One thing that has really got to me, however, is that I am really seeing the nature of my latest incarnation (excuse the phrase) clearly for the first time via negativa. The beliefs I used to hold, almost 'by default' I suppose, were a less extreme version of the beliefs that Chez now holds. I now see that I don't believe that, I hadn't noticed because I'd just been getting on with getting on.

We disgree on some quite huge fundamentals, such as the functional versus ontological roles of men and women, the ontological nature of God and the Trinity and certainly how to handle various scriptures. I like to imagine that I don't exclude any Bible verses that Chez has raised during the argument, only I feel that I handle them differently.

It has certainly been interesting, especially in light of learning about Postmodernism, Interpretation and using Metanarratives 'violently'. Almost like a gift, this discussion has come at a timely point to help me tie my course together in a practical and real way.

There has been a more recent set of posts that I'm very keen to hear Chez' reply towards, hopefully we can continue the discussion in a mutually-respectful manner.

All in all, it has been a very Enlightening semester, made as much so through good friends as much as good lectures.

Post on, dear friends, post on!

* paternal cousins share essentially the same Y chromosomes, excluding random genetic variation

A Poem: "Mixed Messages"

I had a brief, erm, "debate" with a friend recently on somebody else's blog. Before that, I had another one with somebody else.

All these at-odds conversations with other equally genuine Christians have got me thinking. So I expressed it in the following poem.

"Mixed Messages"

God, I met a man today who told me that I’d changed.
My word and deed had made me seem more than a little strange.
I didn’t mean to seem that way, I didn’t have a clue!
I thought that I had grown each day a little more like you.

Like you in love and faith and hope, the fundamental parts;
With your compassion and your pain held firstly in my heart.
But now I find I’m wrong, you see, and rather quite confused,
Striving just to be like Christ to only find you lose.

When I was young the world seemed all to sing the same bright song,
But now two people seeking Christ can think each other wrong.
“So who is right,” I wonder now, “and will I ever know?”
My frail message weakens more till nothing’s left to show.

So help us out, Almighty God, creator of the world,
Upon whose mighty sentences the universe unfurled.
This growing need to prove ourselves is getting quite absurd,
And we all know the other’s wrong – we read it in your Word.

What they call me

In the spirit of putting labels on everything (name it and claim it!) I thought it'd be good to do the "What Philosophy Do You Follow?" and "Political Compass" test.

If I can find a denomination test before I post I'll throw that in, too.

Label away...

	You scored as Divine Command. Your life is directed by Divine Command: Your god and religion give you meaning and direction. “Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he is God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations.” --King James Version of the Bible “Even as a tree has a single trunk but many branches and leaves, there is one religion--human religion--but any number of faiths.” --Mahatma Gandhi
Divine Command		90%
Existentialism		65%
Hedonism		50%
Utilitarianism		50%
Justice (Fairness)		45%
Kantianism		45%
Strong Egoism		40%
Apathy		5%
Nihilism		0%

It's nice to see Existentialism following up Divine Command, seeing as I probably would see myself as a Christian Existentialist. One thing to note... Nihilism is at the very bottom. That, too, is telling, but only with certain insights. I am aware of the fact that did I not believe in God then I would probably be a "Nihilist." So think of that 5% being like an inverted 95% (i wiped it off and had to re-sit the test again, this time got 0%), if you see what I mean. God is my absolute reference point which flips my functional opinions regarding Nihilism.

I'm actually apprehensive about taking the next test, due to the fact that so many of my blog-pals seem to be hyper-conscious of politics. Still, I lay my pearls before you:

I'm Economically Left/Right = -7.00 (I presume out of -10 to 10)

I'm Socially Libertarian/Authoritarian = -3.59

So, according to the following picture, I'm pretty much spot on Nelson Mandela. Suits me.

Finally, my denomination THESE DAYS (on a fairly blinkered test, I might add) turns up as...

1: Methodist/Wesleyan/Nazarene (100%)

2: Baptist (Reformed/Particular/Calvinistic) (89%)

3: Congregational/United Church of Christ (89%)

4: Anabaptist (Mennonite/Quaker etc.) (85%)

5: Seventh-Day Adventist (83%)

6: Anglican/Episcopal/Church of England (81%)

7: Lutheran (81%)

8: Pentecostal/Charismatic/Assemblies of God (81%)

9: Eastern Orthodox (77%)

10: Church of Christ/Campbellite (71%)

11: Presbyterian/Reformed (67%)

12: Roman Catholic (65%)

13: Baptist (non-Calvinistic)/Plymouth
Brethren/Fundamentalist (53%)