A Convenient Christ at Easter

Not long before buying a new  Chromebook last summer, I watched Lexx, a sci-fi series that I more and more think may be the best description of humanity and our foolishness since the Books of Samuel. The savior in Lexx is a young man who is thousands of years old, being not really alive but not really dead, either. His name is Kai, and he can conveniently be put into cold storage when he is not wanted, but he is willing to do his friends' bidding when they want him. I decided that since my lap top functions much like Kai, sleeping until I want it, and since it was black, i decided to call it Kai.

I have been thinking of some of the more interesting parallels between Kai and religion this Easter Sunday. Lexx of course can be seen as a play on Lex, the law. It is a space ship that is the most powerful thing in the universe.  Kai is a cognate of Chi, the abbreviation for the holy name of Christ, the abbreviation that so offends modern sorts who don't know why some people think Xmas is more reverential than Christmas. Like the Christ of Christianity, Kai was killed by the evil empire, only to be brought back to life by a creator character, a god-head of sorts.  Kai has all sorts of cool super powers, which he never uses for his own desires--he says that the dead have no desires--but in the service of the god-head, or, after the god-head is killed--this is a post-Nietzsche story, after all--in the service of those whom he calls his friends.

Yesterday I watched a video of Tom Wright, one-time Bishop of Durham, describing his understanding of Christ and the resurrection. ( https://youtu.be/1WjKdBWFl24 ) It is a compelling explanation of Christ in what seems to me the most orthodox and biblical understanding of the resurrection, an understanding that I explored six years ago as I looked at palingenesis. It is also an understanding of Christ and the resurrection that seems to have no place in Christianity. I am not claiming that Jesus did indeed rise from the dead, something which seemed very unlikely even to his disciples, as Wright points out, and which is claimed far less in the New Testament than one might expect. Wright, however, does make that claim, and says it means that there is work for us to do. I am merely acknowledging the inconvenience of such a person in the everyday lives of human beings who want to find sex and riches, the goals of Kai's friends on the Lexx. The achievement of the goals of Kai's friends is made  much more difficult because they keep using Lexx to destroy worlds that might be good homes for them. Again and again, Kai reminds them that their choices will probably not bring about their ends, but they again and again argue that the ends justify the means, and Kai answers their prayers.

The parallels between Kai and Christ are not perfect, but the conclusion does involve his sacrificial death, one from which he is not expected to return, and a new creation, a new Lexx. There are parallels to other myth systems working here besides Christianity.

But out what really struck me today is the convenience of a savior whom one can put in cold storage to bring out as needed, whom one feels comfortable asking for help as one thinks one needs it but who's suggestions one feels comfortable ignoring. Indeed, the history of Christianity might be described as the development of more and more ways in which Christians can ignore Christ and still claim to use his power for their own desires. (Thinking about writing this rant, I re-read the letters of James and Peter and John, the New Testament writers who are the most likely to have been eye-witness to whatever went on. I'll let you draw your own conclusions about how their understanding of Christian action compares to the activities of Christians IRL.)

What can be more convenient than a savior one can put in storage to bring out as needed? Kai had his cryochamber, Christ has his chair at the right hand of the Father. I have hesitated to write this little rant, and I don't know if there is really any use in sharing it. But, I do wonder, having my Chromebook Kai open and reading about what us folk are doing to one another, whether it might be possible for us to start again, to forgive one another. Probably not. Probably the best I might hope is that someone else will find the sci-fi series Lexx and get to chuckle along with Puck and me, 'What fools these mortals be',

Revelations

It has been a very long time since I have added anything to this blog. Partly this has been because I have been living a less wandering life, and partly it has been because I have more or less stopped playing the game of Christianity, mostly scaling issues. I have tried not to be harsh towards those who continue to call themselves Christians, because it is such a deeply-interwoven part of western culture that pulling on loose threads could be disastrous. However, today I want to think out loud within the Christian tradition again. Please understand this is a ramble, another kind of peregrination, rather than a scholarly discourse.

One of my favourite parts of Facebook is 'On This Day'.  Eight years ago on this day, I posted a link to this blog about what was my Lenten tradition: meditating on a 'word'. Being given 'a word' for meditation was the western monastic parallel in many ways of the Zen koans. Eight years ago, my word was 'genesis'. I had been particularly struck by the use of 'palingenesis' in the Gospel according to Matthew. Reading my old post, I realized that although I had not formally chosen a word this Lenten season, I have informally been meditating on one: 'privacy'. And that led me to think about privacy in the life of Jesus, a life that was ended by the church and state of his day in a very public way that allowed for no privacy at all. It struck me that not only was there no privacy in Jesus' death, but there had been no privacy in the modern sense in his life, either.

In orthodox Christian belief, Jesus is Son of God. This is a strange thing in among folks who are more likely to think of God in the images of the Walter C. Smith's hymn: 'Immortal, invisible, God only wise,/In light inaccessible hid from our eyes . . . .'  These images did not apply to Jesus.

Again and again the situation was like Philip's reply when Nathanael wondered if Jesus, coming from the fringes of Jewry, could be a good thing: 'Come and see.' Three years later, when the high priest was questioning Jesus, the answer was similar: 'I spake openly in the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing.' There were in between of course those times when Jesus wanted to be alone, but it was not from need to do something secretly, but from need to rest.

In orthodox Christian belief, Jesus is not just Son of God, but the Son of Man. This is his most frequent title in the gospels. Jesus is what man can be at his best. This makes more important Pilate's famous 'Behold the man' statement, a statement he made as he was showing his prisoner to the crowds. It is not Jesus or his disciples who claim that he is Son of God, but a roman centurion who witnessed his death.

This is a short blog post triggered by an eight-year old memory, so I am not going to fill in all the times in between the beginning of Jesus' preaching and his death to show how public was his life. But amidst the concern over privacy that pervades our public outcry this week, I would suggest that what made Jesus so remarkable, what made his life salvific even, was it's being public, it's being a life lead out loud, with no shouting but also without whispers. He warned us that any other sort of life is unsustainable: 'whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light, and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops.'

It has been fascinating to me as I have pondered privacy in contemporary life that many of us are calling for more transparency in 'social media' so that we may keep our lives more opaque. I guess I looked at social media as 'some Power the giftie gie us To see oursels as ithers see us.' It is a tool I can use better to know myself, as well as better to know my fellow travelers on this little planet.

Twenty-five years ago I knew a wise woman in Santa Fe who said that what made Jesus' singularity came from his knowing who he was. If she was correct, this knowledge was not a given. I don't think that his questions to the disciples, 'Whom say the people that I am?' and "Whom say ye That I am?' were merely rhetorical. Self-knowledge needs feedback.

One of the wiser voices I have heard on the internet about privacy issues, Grey Scott, speaks about 'our data being used against us to advertise things to us'. I find it odd to think that my data can be used against me. Rather it seems to me that the adverts generated by my data help me understand what the real 'devices and desires of [my] own heart' are rather than what I pretend that they are.

Six years ago, following  R. J. Stewart's ideas about winter quests, quests in darkness, from his understanding of celtic traditions, I spent three months in a tiny camper near Port Angeles, pondering mostly what were the 'devices and desires of my own heart'. The darkness was actually quite enlightening, and I changed many of my habits to allow myself to be what I wanted to be rather than what gave me 'likes' in social acceptability. Not everyone has the luxury to take three months off to do such a thing. Nor, I suspect, is everyone ready to know oneself. There is also a very important difference between putting oneself out there as a sort of exhibitionism and simply not hiding oneself. I do think it is very helpful to know one's 'one identity', as Mark Zuckerberg said our Facebook identities should be.

So, I ponder on this Good Friday, as Christians remember Jesus' being strung up naked for all the world to see on a cross, how much of what we hide from others are we really trying to hide from ourselves? The Gospel of Thomas claims, 'If your bring forth what is within you, what you bring forth will save you. If you do not bring forth what is within you, what you do hot bring forth will destroy you.

at long last

it's been seven months since i have posted anything. that's largely because i haven't perambulated. the ai class i was hoping to take was full,  but i explored some other stuff.  the only one that took was a symposium on sufi literature, which was lots of fun and a fascinating window into a world of which  i had only glimpses.

classes with all the chairs in ranks and files,  talking head up front, i just found too boring to endure.  i dropped several classes about interesting topics because i found independent study so much more satisfying.  most of the students are much less vocal than i.

the seven months have given me a new understanding of the current state of secondary, official,  education. it seems mostly a waste.

the best part of the seven months has been over hearing conversations.  i am considering goin feral again, wandering around on bicycle and listening to folks in coffee shops. the world is a fascinating place.

but a bicycle is a lot like a horse. i'm not sure chad would approve.

ai thwarted: peregrinate on

after much wanderinf from office to office, and being told I was being enrolled in the ai course of my dreams 'even now (then?)', it was full. every chair. so i decided to try for cosmology,  which needed an override from the instructor.  he said he would be happy to have me in the class, but he never signs overrides. so, analytic philosophy.  frege and wittgenstein. fascinating enough folks, who along with sufi literature and a history of interior design should keep me out of trouble.

but. being a student gives me access to the university of arkansas libraries.  re-enter bruce chatwin, whose songlines made me feel less weird as a walker and a nomad even before i met chad. i've been reading nicholas shakespeare's biography of chatwin along with his books and letters. what surprises me most is how much of chatwin's own life i missed when i was first reading his works back in the 1980's and 90's. all writing is autobiographical in many ways.  it is the way chatwin revealed himself by hiding himself that i am finding most helpful this time around. chatwin's works are making me look at what i reveal about my own life in what i veil.

ai: 1. brazil

my koan from pascha 2012, 'what is life? ', has been rolling around in my pocket ever since, and since life and intelligence are sometimes related,  it seemed like a potentially helpful idea to take advantage of being an old fart and take an a.i. course at the university of arkansas. this post was to be called brazil at first becaue of the architecture of the j. b. hunt center, where the class will be held. and it was going to be an encouragement to me to blog more regularly. not that the unexamined life isn't worth living; more that the examined life can be fascinating.

but, I have spent rwo afternoons roaming the walks and halls of the university of arkansas with sheets of paper (!) in my hand, more or less--well, always less actually--like the form that generates the ploy of terry gilliam's movie. I had thought I could register for the class on monday. wrong, it was friday, I was told by lady at desk a. but if I gave class information to lady at window a, she would probably just enter it early. lady window a said my course has a prerequisite, and I must take form 00-67582/3 to professor for signature, and that the computer engineering department could take care if the whole rest of my registration.

that's when I discovered the brazilian architecture of the j. b. hunt building. said professor was not in office. so I emailed him, and he said if I left form 00-67582/3 with department secretary at desk b, all would be well. lady desk b said all would be well, but form 00-67582/3 was all wrong, and 'generated form 00-67585/4 for me to sign. and, what was my student number?

. . .

cut to the end of the chase. back and forth, with trips to the card room finally found me in front of a huge apple screen re-registering. now I await email confirmation. but, I at least have an application number.

the troubles of abundance

The northern end of my default bicycle ride in Fayetteville is Starbucks.  Like nearly everyone else there,  I sit and sip my coffee--and unlike many of the others,  mine is plain coffee--while touring the world on an electronic miracle device. I can look out the window and see blocks of stores selling items that didn't exist fifty or even fifteen years ago. A century ago most of the area around this shopping complex didn't have electricity. Although a random and unscientific survey I've been taking of the people here reveals that most of us consider ourselves part of the 99%, we are wealthy beyond the dreams of the 1% before the quite recent past.

And the good news is that although northwest Arkansas is a particularly wealthy area, where the prosperity has grown at a remarkably rapid rate, we are not alone. Although much of the attention of the news is often on poverty and catastrophes, the whole world is getting richer. The United Nations Mellinium Project is ahead of schedule in most areas.  It is expected that as early as 2030 no one will be left so poor as to go hungry.  One thing I find really amazing about this expectation is that critics abound to say it's not enough. Now, the United Nations and the World Bank certainly do not see this as a final goal,  but at no previous time in history has even this level of abundance been attainable.

Why do I call this a problem?  Because we still think politically and morally as if we live in the times of the famine in the land of Canaan, when the Egyptians have all the food. People who have gracious plenty are jealous of those who have even more. We still think we need to rob Peter to feed Paul.

I am not blind to the real possibility that some of the problems we face,  particularly global warming and religious chauvinism, will dash my rosey expectations.  But I nevertheless hope we will be willing to let go of our fears and look around at what's really happening here, and be thankful.

de rerum natura

it's been a while since I've posted anything to this old blog, but that doesn't mean I haven't been walking around. it was tempting to write a follow-up to my lenten post, hanging out as I do with so many churchy-types, about the general inanity of the church. but the general inanity of the church is widely recognized, so I'll leave that dead horse lie and abuse another cliche, the baby in the bathwater. there is wisdom often, I would suggest, in places we scorn, places of which we are afraid.

as silly as it is in the 21st. century, there is still perceived to be a conflict between religion and science. silly, I suggest, because the conflict is not between two modes of knowledge or relating to the world, but between two groups of people who often shut ourselves off from one another in fear. indeed it seems to me clear that science is indeedva religion. many of my friends who are scientists object strenuously to that suggestion,  but many of my friends who are christians insist that christianity is not a religion.

whatever we call our favoured way of organizing our knowledge, it needs to correspond to the nature of things if it is to be helpful to our life as individuals and a species.

this has been a long-winded way to introduce my pascal koan forvthis year: he is alive, and to set it in context. what does it mean to say someone, something, is alive?

this question has a long history, but it has taken on a new dare-I-say? life recently with our confrontation with artificial intellegence and genetically engineered foods, two loci of consideral conflict between folk coming from self-identified 'religious' or 'scientific' viewpoints.

so, for my purposes I want to suggest a definition, in the strict sense of de-fining, what is natural and avoid ptoscription for description: if it is possible, it is natural. things unnatural are also impossible.  it is also perhaps helpful to avoid the use of 'natural law', despite its long and sometimes honourable history. rather than law, i will use tao. there is the way things are.

so, it's off to see what life is. please wish me luck on the journey.