Sunday, August 13, 2017
The inclusive/diversity mind set is very difficult to decipher. That is because it contains a logical inconsistency. On the one hand is the desire to include all viewpoints and people. On the hand is the fact that there are viewpoints that are not as “inclusive and diverse” as you would like them to be. The advocates of (their version, at least) inclusivity and diversity could avoid falling into insanity by simply being inclusive enough to tolerate even those who don’t completely agree with their views of inclusion and diversity. It seems that they cannot, but they are loath to admit this.
That is because they are almost always inclusion and diversity hypocrites. This has been very obvious for a long time, but we see it again in the incident of the software engineer fired by Google after expressing his views about Google’s internal “culture.”
Of course, a private company should be able to hire and fire as desired, or at least I think so. But it appears that the Google empire has for some time prided itself on being inclusive and diverse. It just couldn’t “swallow” an employee who held and expressed ideas that did not comport with the views of Google.
The Google CEO could openly admit this. He could just say, “You can’t express just any ideas here at Google. We have certain standards and limits, and some ideas are off-limits.” That would be very honest. He could do that, but if he made it that clear, it would sound like their inclusion is not quite all that inclusive and their diversity is not really all that diverse. That would appear to be a little insane at worst, or hypocritical at best.
So, instead, he has to say things that, taken together, make him, and his Google culture, sound a little bit nutty, to say the least, and perhaps a bit dishonest. Now some examples.
Separated by just a few words the Google CEO says “we strongly support the right of Googlers to express themselves” and then says that the fired employee’s view is unacceptable because he “suggest[s] a group of our colleagues [females] have traits that make them less biologically suited to that work [software coding].” So Google “strongly” supports the right of Googlers to express themselves unless Google doesn’t like the view that an employee expresses. That borders on insanity, or if it is not insanity, it is dishonesty.
The memo goes on to say, “there are co-workers who are questioning whether they can safely express their views in the workplace (especially those with a minority viewpoint). They too feel under threat, and that is also not OK. People must feel free to express dissent.” But wasn’t a Google employee just fired precisely because he expressed dissent? Is this insanity, or is it dishonesty?
Near the end of the memo the Google CEO says, “The past few days have been very difficult for many at the company, and we need to find a way to debate issues on which we might disagree - while doing so in line with our Code of Conduct.” But that is just another way of saying that Google employees are not allowed to debate and disagree with a set of ideas supposedly included in the Code of Conduct. In fact, the section of the Code of Conduct quoted by the Google CEO did not directly prohibit raising the kinds of questions raised by the fired software engineer. One of his key points was that there might be good reasons, other that some kind of discrimination, why there are fewer female coders than there are male coders. Is that something that cannot even be discussed in a place where “people must be free to express dissent”?!? Again, is this insanity or dishonesty?
In a previous memo the Google CEO said, “All your voices and opinions matter . . . and I want to hear them.” Well Sundar Pichai, apparently you do not. One software engineer expressed some opinions that you and your company did not like, and you fired him. That has to mean that you did not want to hear his voice and his opinion, and you didn’t want anyone else at Google to hear his voice and his opinion. If you continue to insist that you want to hear all opinions while firing those who express opinions you do not like, you are either nuts or a liar.
From this distance, I cannot quite tell which it is. Could it be a bit of both?
Thursday, March 23, 2017
I want to post what amounts to a warning about the company Biblesoft. Find them on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/biblesoft/
I have used Biblesoft's PC Study Bible since the days of MS DOS and command lines. I always liked it, and the way their whole system worked. Now and then they would come out with a program update, and for a modest fee current users could upgrade just their basic program engine. All the collections you owned, which had often been purchases separately as add-on, could continue to be used.
That was both reasonable and to be expected. In the last year, however, Biblesoft has destroyed its good standing with me by attempting to pull off what seems to something close to a con job on its users. I am very sorry to have to say this.
A little over a year ago I received an email from them saying that they would be coming out with an upgrade in the future. Those who wished to make this coming upgrade needed to upgrade, they said, to the latest program engine. I had the next-to-latest, but I was glad to upgrade. Biblesoft promised the cost of this would apply to their coming new version.
The new version has come out, and Biblesoft has been offering all sorts of additional discounts to get people to upgrade. But it turns out that if you own many of their resources, the least expensive upgrade you can use will cost, even with discounts and credits, about $400. That made the need to upgrade to the latest software engine something of a trick. The ridiculous price of the coming major upgrade was not announced at that time, so if you did that but are not now willing to fork over another $400 "ransom" you completely wasted that money.
This I find to be utterly unacceptable and something akin to highway robbery, of the digital variety. Biblesoft claims that people have problems running their "old" program in windows 10. I have had no problems on two different desktop PCs. They continue to send their ridiculous offers for their over-priced upgrade with the warning that your old version might stop working any day now.
So here is my concluding note to Biblesoft: with this customer of long, long standing, you have blown it. I will not pay you $400 "ransom" to keep using the resources I have purchased from you over the years. If at some point Windows 10 stops running your old program, I will just create a Windows 7 virtual machine on one of my PCs and run your old, good program from that. Other than that, I am done with you and your ill-managed company. Rather than put up pointless "devotional" material on your Facebook page, why not run your company with some Christian integrity?
Thursday, February 16, 2017
At something called Christianheadlines.com I saw this amazingly idiotic so-called headline:
Britney Spears Quotes Bible Verse after Being Mocked by Katy Perry
So a messed-up former Mouseketeer quotes the Bible at a rude remark by the wayward daughter of a Methodist “clergy couple.” It damages a mind to think of something like that as a “headline.”
The short “article” that follows the headline reads like the kind of gossip one might hear in particularly boring small-town circles. It really still is just that, even if those involved are famous in spite of doing anything important in life.
Hey Christianheadlines.com – somewhere in this world something important is going on in relationship to Christianity. But this just isn’t one of those things. It’s not even close.
Tuesday, January 31, 2017
I read this today: "Business owners have been gifted a much-needed reprieve thanks to Donald Trump's swift action to reduce red tape." My comment has nothing to do with the political side of that statement.
One piece of twenty-first century jargon that needs to be hated is this idiotic word “gifted.” A “gift” is “given.” I understand inventing a word when one does not exist. But what is the point of inventing a stupid-sounding word when a perfectly good one already fills the needed role?
In the sentence at the beginning, “given” does the job needed with elegance, style, and grace. Those who insist on dropping the worthless jargon word “gifted” in such places need to whacked up side the head with a grammar stick.
There are some other examples of this sort of thing, but this one is perhaps the worst of them.
Wednesday, December 14, 2016
Churches Close for Easter
as “reported” by Kent B. True
In a move that came as a surprise to some, one area church has decided to cancel services for Easter Sunday this year. While some expressed concern with the change, church leaders defended the move as Biblically correct and practically necessary.
Pastor Ben Right of The Church of What’s Happening Now refused to be interviewed about the matter, but earlier in the week spokeswoman Ima Chatterly issued statements to the press about her church’s decision.
“Easter is all about eggs, bunnies, and families,” she said. “Our focus has always been on families, although we have absolutely no objection to eggs or bunnies if families decide to use those” she added.
But Chatterly insisted that there were even more important reasons to cancel services at What’s Happening Now on Easter. “It requires approximately 17.8 church member volunteers to induce each unchurched individual to attend services here at What’s Happening Now,” said Chatterly, “and we decided that those dedicated people needed another Sunday to spend with family and friends.”
The Church of What’s Happening Now was one of the first in the nation to cancel services on Christmas Sunday, and Chatterly cited the great success of that idea as one factor in the Easter decision. “We noticed that after our Christmas Sunday break last year, only 12.3 volunteers were needed for several weeks to draw each unchurched person to our church. The volunteers seem to work a lot harder if you let them rest now and then. That made us realize just how important these Sunday sabbaticals can be for a healthy mega-church,” although Chatterly quickly added that they do not call their church a “mega-church.”
But in an unexpected move, Pastor Right addressed the canceled Easter controversy in his sermon last week. In his sermon, on a stage decorated with thousands of plastic Easter Eggs and flanked by all the members of his church’s “Advisory and Affirmation” Team dressed in Easter Bunny suits, Right made an emotional defense of his decision.
“The Advisory and Affirmation Team and I met, prayed, and cried over this decision for several hours this week,” said Right in his Thursday afternoon sermon last week, “and in the end we decided to make a stand in favor of families.” At one point, Pastor Right said, “Easter is for families. We don’t want ‘church’ to get in the way of that.”
But it wasn’t only about saving the family, according to Pastor Right.
“It’s not just an Easter thing,” said Right. “It’s a change I have been studying for some time now. In fact, as a result of this study, I was granted my D.M.A. (Doctor of Megachurch Administration) from the prestigious World Christian University.” W.C.U. grants this degree only to students who have completed its intense ten-month program.
Right told his mesmerized congregation, “I have been able to do some detailed New Testament study, which I don’t suggest you ordinary people should try at home. But what I found was that in first-century Judea, Sunday morning actually fell somewhere between what we call Thursday afternoon and Friday night. This follows from a careful consideration of time zones, calendar changes, church controversies, and the international date line. So beginning on Easter Sunday, our church will be observing the correct meeting time for the church, which is Friday evening.”
Right sees this as a way to make his church more Biblical. “Easter is really a pagan holiday,” Right explained in one of the less emotional moments in his sermon. “So if we can overcome all this societal Easter pressure, we can help make our church a less pagan place than it is right now.”
Later in his sermon, Pastor Right reminded his congregation that not only was Friday evening a time, indicated by Biblical studies, when the church should meet, but it also happened to be the church meeting time preferred by 8.6 of every 10 unchurched persons. “We want to be unchurched-person sensitive,” said Right, “and you can’t do that if your church insists on meeting at times the unchurched find inconvenient.”
Right hinted that some who disagree with his Easter cancellation policy might be a little jealous. “It’s hard to argue with success. In fact, you shouldn’t even try.” Right said. “People at smaller churches shouldn’t be wasting their time disagreeing with us. Instead, they should be trying to become more like us,” Right insisted.
Right’s sermon at What’s Happening Now was interrupted several times with lengthy standing ovations punctuated with cheers and whistles from the thousands of unchurched who were present. After the sermon, many of the unchurched present at What’s Happening Now offered their support for Pastor Right’s decision.
“I’m an atheist,” said Patti Pettibrain, “but I love What’s Happening Now, I love Pastor Right, and I’m a regular here.” She added with tears in her eyes, “I don’t know why all the mean people around town are attacking Pastor Right. After all, he can’t be wrong when his name is Right.”
One of the elders of What’s Happening Now, twenty-three-year-old I. B. Yesmann, told this reporter, “Church isn’t about days of the week. Our church’s critics are, like, way too worried about Sunday. Friday is just as much one of the Lord’s days as Sunday, isn’t it?”
While it is not clear if other churches will follow the lead of What’s Happening Now, it is clear that the Easter controversy will probably affect churches around the country. One What’s Happening Now member, who asked not to be identified, said, “Some churches are just stuck in the past. But we are, just like our name says, ‘What’s Happening Now.’ God’s always doing new things, and we are the latest and greatest.”
Christmas Past Strange
“Why do churches close on Sunday?,” Lexington Herald-Leader, December 4, 2005
“Some Megachurches Closing for Christmas,” Associated Press, December 06, 2005
“Evangelical churches such as suburban Willow Creek will close on Christmas,” Chicago Tribune, December 6, 2005
“When Christmas Falls on Sunday, Megachurches Take the Day Off,” New York Times - December 9, 2005
One thing was obvious in all these articles: the secular press thought it was strange that churches would make a point of closing on Christmas. It was almost as though some of these writers were C & E (Christmas and Easter) Christians, and they were puzzled as to why churches would cut out one of the two days they might show up! (By the way, all the citations below are from one or more of these stories. But I won’t try to identify them more than this because it quickly becomes far too complicated.)
Beyond what the newspaper writers might have thought, it was clear that for many of these church people, it became a matter of Christmas trumping Sunday. I know that sounds strange, but this is the Strange Club, after all.
In the days of yesteryear, it always seemed to me that most church people considered it an extra-special bonus when Christmas fell on Sunday. Here was the day of the year traditionally set aside to celebrate the birth of Jesus the Christ falling on the same day of the week the church is supposed to meet to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus. Of course, Christmas has, for a long time, been a big social event as well as a religious celebration. So sometimes churches would adjust their schedules somewhat to accommodate all that. But the idea that we would “cancel Christmas” never crossed a churchman’s mind, at least as far as I ever knew. But in “the year of our Lord” 2005 - if we should still so call it - all that has changed.
The really interesting question is: why? While the answers were not identical, there were some mysteriously common threads.
Let us begin up on Willow Creek:
Cally Parkinson, a spokeswoman for Willow Creek Community Church in South Barrington, Ill., said church leaders decided that organizing services on a Christmas Sunday would not be the most effective use of staff and volunteer resources. . . "If our target and our mission is to reach the unchurched, basically the people who don't go to church, how likely is it that they'll be going to church on Christmas morning?" she said.
The decision makes sense in today's hectic world, said Willow Creek spokeswoman Cally Parkinson. "It's more than being family-friendly. It's being lifestyle-friendly for people who are just very, very busy," she said.
"At first glance it does sound contrarian," said Rev. Gene Appel, senior pastor of Willow Creek. "We don't see it as not having church on Christmas. We see it as decentralizing the church on Christmas--hundreds of thousands of experiences going on around Christmas trees. The best way to honor the birth of Jesus is for families to have a more personal experience on that day."
So, up on Willow Creek, they think church on Sunday, when Sunday is also Christmas, is a waste of resources, because the “unchurched” won’t come to church on Christmas morning, since they are “very, very busy.” So the Willows decided to “decentralize” church on Christmas Sunday.
I admit that I am still confused. Of course the “unchurched” are “too busy” to come to church - otherwise they would be “churched.” But aren’t there any “churched” people up on Willow Creek who might like a great Christmas Sunday of assembled worship? If calling off Sunday worship is just “decentralizing” the church, why not “decentralize” every Sunday? That way ALL of the unchurched would become the “Church of the Decentralization”! Wouldn’t that be great?
But since I really don’t understand things up on Willow Creek with their women elders and Rev. Gene, I think we should just move south - south to “God’s country” down in central Kentucky where Cindy Willison, a spokeswoman for the evangelical Southland Christian Church, said at least 500 volunteers are needed, along with staff, to run Sunday services for the estimated 8,000 people who usually attend.
"If we weren't having services at all, I would probably tend to feel that we were too accommodating to the secular viewpoint, but we're having multiple services on Saturday and an additional service Friday night," Willison said. "We believe that you worship every day of the week, not just on a weekend, and you don't have to be in a church building to worship."
I am not a big fan of conspiracy theories, but I could almost believe that these spokespersons had a little phone conversation before these interviews. Southland, like the Willows, didn’t want to waste the time of their volunteers, and they want us to remember that the church doesn’t have to get together on Sunday to worship.
So again, I have to ask: since the church need not worship together on Sunday, why not save the time of these 500 volunteers every Sunday and just let people stay home and worship separately? (Remember, up at Willow Creek they call that “decentralized” worship.)
Since I don’t have a ready answer for that question, we move on to another central Kentucky - which I think still might be God’s country - church.
Crossroads [Christian] Pastor Glenn Schneiders says Dec. 25 is no longer considered sacred by many Americans -- especially those who are not regular churchgoers. "It's viewed more as a holiday than a holy day," he said.
The unchurched are more reachable on Dec. 24, said Schneiders . . . "Studies would say the best opportunity to invite people is Christmas Eve. It's, for whatever reason, the least threatening service of the year to attend ... so what we do is really point all of our energy in that direction," Schneiders said. "We don't think we're compromising. We're actually reaching more people by doing that."
I thought the main reason the church gathers each Sunday is so that those who have been “reached” can worship God together. I wasn’t aware that what non-regular churchgoers thought about this was a deciding factor. In fact, I thought the church was obligated to gather on the first day of the week to celebrate the Lord’s Supper together. But apparently pastors, reverends, and spokeswomen don’t think that anymore.
Now I don’t know who Laurie Goodstein is other than the writer of the New York Times’ story mentioned above. But here is what she commented concerning all this:
What some consider the deeper affront is in canceling services on a Sunday, which most Christian churches consider the Lord's Day, when communal worship is an obligation.
Laurie has a bit of insight here that mega-church spokeswomen seem to lack. But she still needs to dig deeper for her reports. There appear to be many Christian churches these days that do NOT consider Sunday the Lord’s Day. Rather, they seem to think that (sing it, now!):
The Lord’s Day can be on a Friday, a Thursday, a Saturday - whatever you like best,
but never, never on a Sunday, a Sunday, a Sunday, ‘cause that’s our day of rest.
You know it’s true when Christmas trumps the Lord’s Day.
Perhaps the pastors, reverends, and spokeswomen need to expand their thinking. There are other holidays that are no longer holy days we should consider. When Independence Day - another big family time in the U.S.A. - falls on Sunday we might want to consider canceling church meetings. What about New Year’s Day? All the “unchurched” will be hung over from New’s Year’s Eve celebrations, so when Sunday falls on New Year’s day, there will be no one to reach and thus no reason for the church to meet. (This was the case in 2005, and yet no one seemed to consider calling off New Year’s Day Sunday meetings.) How about Super Bowl Sunday? (It’s always on Sunday, of course.) The unchurched will be far too busy getting ready for Super Bowl parties to come to church and get reached on that day. So there’s another candidate for cancellation.
But there is one more “problem” Sunday we need to ponder. Another big family holiday that is no longer a holy day is Easter. That pesky little thing always falls on Sunday, given our Western church calendar. So keep an eye on the newspapers to see if any churches are canceling Easter. It’s definitely next.
Wednesday, November 23, 2016
Thanksgiving: we have celebration day for it every year. It’s a very American holiday, and it is deeply ingrained in our culture. We devote a day just to thanksgiving - at least that is what we claim. You wouldn’t think it would be all that difficult. But it turns out to be difficult than you might first think.
Think about what the origin of the word “holiday.” It is a day that is, for some reason or other, “holy.” Besides the demands that holy things can make on us, there are other reasons why “holy” days can make people a little uncomfortable.
The existence of the “holy” implies the existence of God. When you start talking about God, try as you might NOT to identify this God, it becomes very hard to avoid that question at some point.
A “holy” day brings up this very question, a question asked and answered very often in the Old Testament: just who is God? Is everything God? Are human beings their own god? Are there lots of gods, one for one locality and a different one for another locality? Holidays bring up these very sticky questions that a lot of modern people would just rather avoid.
Still, people love “holidays” because we get to change our routines and can, if we allow ourselves, have a little rest from the normal “grind.” So we run into a very interesting, and somewhat depressing, modern phenomenon. People want holidays, but we wish they were just “days” and not “holy.”
I have noticed how this has been handled lately. Christmas has become just “the season” for which we send “season’s greetings.” It’s a pretty slick trick if you think about it. You don’t have to bother about that worrisome, politically incorrect “Christ” part of Christmas. Thanksgiving has faired no better. It has become “turkey day.” But this nifty little arrangement takes the “thanks” out of Thanksgiving.
There is, however, a little milder version of the holiness avoidance syndrome (you can call this H.A.S. if you like). This milder version keeps the word thanksgiving intact, and it even let’s us talk about being thankful, but we just don’t specify TO WHOM we are being thankful. While you can try that, at some point inquiring minds want to know, “thankful to whom?”
For those who think much about it (and many do not) Thanksgiving Day and the whole season is a traumatic experience for our society. The old saying tells us that the road to hell is paved with good intentions, but the apostle Paul tells us that the skids to hell are greased with thanklessness. You can find that in Romans 1:21. People are sliding down those horrible rails all the time. Again, there is no excuse for this, but if you think about it, it has a certain kind of understandability because thankfulness is very hard for us humans.
Thankfulness is especially difficult when we have so much stuff. We are so accustomed to our abundance of stuff that we don’t even realize just how much stuff we really have. When I take a moment to think about it, I am awed by what I see in department stores and supermarkets. Almost anything you could ever want is there, and even those of us the most modestly provided can buy everything we need and much of what we want. The only reason we don’t notice this abundance is that we are in the habit of having.
Even people like my parents, who lived through the “Great Depression” (hey, what was so great about it?) were VERY aware of abundance when they were young adults. But the memory of depravation is fading, even with some of them. Those of later generations have no memory of depravation. Let’s face it - we have STUFF, so much stuff, in fact, that it rather engulfs us sometimes, making us unable to move around in our houses, making it impossible to see some of the best things in life. That doesn’t make stuff somehow evil. It just reveals that we can be.
You might think that people with very little stuff would have a more difficult time being thankful. But surprisingly, the Bible presents just the opposite picture. Notice what the Apostle Paul says:
Command those who are rich in this present world not to be arrogant nor to put their hope in wealth, which is so uncertain, but to put their hope in God, who richly provides us with everything for our enjoyment. (1 Tim 6:17)
It is those with much who are more likely to be ensnared by thanklessness. That’s a little ironic if you think about it, but it’s true. It’s not only true, but especially dangerous for Christians in our society, because we have all the stuff, and we also have salvation that comes from the grace of God through Jesus Christ.
Thanksgiving Day is a good idea. But if you think through what it implies, it is not easy, because it makes us think about the things that often make us the most uncomfortable. But that is part of what makes it a good idea.
Have a very happy and very uncomfortable Thanksgiving!