Jay wrires:
This movement, led by folks like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens, very much support Pullman’s themes and use his work to promote an agenda.

What agenda does he think they are promoting? Satan’s? Or the agenda of critical thinking? Or what?

Do you think this critical view of religion has anything to do with the rise of religion in politics amd theocracies world wide? I think it may.
Perhaps it’s an appeal to reason.

In a similar vein, what is the reaction of Christians to the Zeitgeist Pt I documentary? Have opinions on that?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeZB2EsPqGE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmzailhVl-U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6UdQxt7b24

I own The Golden Compass, but it looked like a regular snooze-a-rama, so I haven’t read it yet.

I own The Golden Compass, but it looked like a regular snooze-a-rama, so I haven’t read it yet.

I’d say that’s a fair assessment.

Do you think this critical view of religion has anything to do with the rise of religion in politics amd theocracies world wide?

No. There has always been religion in politics and there have always been theocracies. And there have always been those who decry both.

I don’t think there is anything new under this sun.

Oh, and the reaction of THIS Christian to the “Zeitgeist” documentary is that I’m tired of seeing all the blogs I read spammed by Zeitgeist’s boosters. (I don’t mean you, William, because you are a participant here. I’m talking about folks I’ve never heard of dropping in here there and everywhere with the farkakte YouTube links to that movie.)

Oh, and the reaction of THIS Christian to the “Zeitgeist” documentary is that I’m tired of seeing all the blogs I read spammed by Zeitgeist’s boosters.

Sounds like Ron Pauls supporters.

Well … I have no opinion of The Golden Compass, not having read it. But (deep breath) I found the last couple of Narnia books to be mighty boring and depressing themselves. I was not, at the time/age I read them, aware that the series supposedly carried any Christian message, but was reading them, as an early teenager, for the fantasy. And I, um, found them lacking. I know I’m not supposed to admit that, as a lover of fantasy and all. But it’s true. All the whimsy that had made the first half of the series so entrancing got stale, or disappeared.

I feel so much better now that I’ve admitted that in public.

some of the most depressing things I’ve read outside of Russian fiction.

If you think that’s depressing, try reading Russian facts/history.

Sounds like Ron Pauls supporters.

Some of them, yes. And there’s quite a bit of overlap, too.

But (deep breath) I found the last couple of Narnia books to be mighty boring and depressing themselves.

That’s funny. Those are two of my favourites. Of course, they benefit greatly from a) the knowledge of just how much of them is allegorical and b) Oh crap. I forgot what “b” was.

All the whimsy that had made the first half of the series so entrancing got stale, or disappeared.

Really? I can see that in “The Last Battle”, which is pretty much C.S. Lewis’ version of The Book of The Revelation to St. John.

But I thought “The Magician’s Nephew” was mighty full of whimsy.

I feel so much better now that I’ve admitted that in public.

I’m glad to have helped.

If you think that’s depressing, try reading Russian facts/history.

Oh, I’ve done plenty of that in my time. More than plenty.

Oh, The Magician’s Nephew is the penultimate book? Then I read them out of order, or have them out of order in my head. I love it. I was thinking of the book with the prince who falls in love with the snake princess — is that The Silver Chair? Just didn’t work for me At All.

BTW, most Russian fiction (the stuff that’s been translated and that we read here) isn’t depressing. In fact, if you avoid Dostoevsky and/or any of Constance Garnett’s translations, it tends towards the exhilarating. IMO, of course.

Oh, The Magician’s Nephew is the penultimate book? Then I read them out of order, or have them out of order in my head. I love it.

It’s my fault.

There are actually two orders.

The set that I had as a child was in the publishing order, which put “Magician’s Nephew” as the penultimate.

The actual reading order puts Silver Chair as the penultimate book.

People still fight about the reading order; I just go with the publishing order since that’s what I’m accustomed to.

I’ll state here that I don’t have a real dog in the reading order fight other than to say that “The Last Battle” is a better book if you read it right after TMN, in my opinion.

It seems less bleak that way, I think.

I’m just really tired of every other person in my address book forwarding me the “warning” e-mail about this movie. *sigh*

I’m just really tired of every other person in my address book forwarding me the “warning” e-mail about this movie. *sigh*

I wondered what was going on. My parents and sister were here for the weekend, and my dad and I had a heated discussion about it.

I figured something must be up–fantasy and sci-fi usually fly under my dad’s radar.

I’ve read some pretty depressing Russian fiction, but not more depressing than T.C. Boyle (depressing, but wonderful).

I read “Narnia” when I was about 30. The more I read the uneasier I got.

Actually, the strangest fiction I’ve read (SF, that is) is Scott Orson Card. Uggh.

I have a great Orson Scott Card read, the novel “Empire”.

Review here:

http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2006/12/08/is_a_second_civil_war_in_america_possible/

Oh and there’s this also:

http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2006/11/30/orson_scott_card_confounds_the_far_left/

Orson Scott Card rocks.

Just a word to provide the context of my writing on The Golden Compass. As I clearly said, I have not yet read any of the books in the series, and frankly was not aware of the series until the e-mails started flying. As the pastor of a religious community I wanted to ensure that folks were thinking critically about these emails, since religious folks are notorious for spreading spurious rumors. Please trust that I am not asking for anyone to avoid offering critique of the church, Christianity, or religion as a whole. I have read writings by Dawkins and Hitchens and heard many speeches by Sam Harris regarding their critique of faith and don’t see them as tools of the devil; rather, they are men who hold an epistimology different from the one that I hold. The church must always be ready for critique — to do otherwise is to deny the gift of rationality and reason that we believe was given to humanity by God. My concern is whether we respond to that critique by engaging in conversation or by simply trying to shut up the critics. Far too often we have tried the latter approach with horrific results.

Well said Jay. I wish more people understood that.

I haven’t read the Golden Compass books, and my feelings about the Narnia books were cemented when I read them as a preteen. I’ve retained about as many details as you’d expect from books I read almost 30 years ago, so I can no longer discuss them intelligently.

I just wanted to chime in to say, I love Russian fiction. I’m not scared of a good, long, deep book. Russians seem to be good at that.

…[blank] must always be ready for critique — to do otherwise is to deny the gift of rationality and reason that we believe was given to humanity by [blank]. My concern is whether we respond to that critique by engaging in conversation or by simply trying to shut up the critics.”

Put science in the blanks, and you’ve a conversation on Global Warming.

With Al Gore as the Grand Inquisitor.

(sorry…left out the link…

The church must always be ready for critique — to do otherwise is to deny the gift of rationality and reason that we believe was given to humanity by God. My concern is whether we respond to that critique by engaging in conversation or by simply trying to shut up the critics. Far too often we have tried the latter approach with horrific results.

This is refreshing.

Before 2000 it would never have even crossed the faintest recesses of my mind to start a blog dedicated to resisting the cultural marginalization of non-believers and the intellectual criticism of faith. It was totally a non-issue to me. I just found myself being part of the backlash against the type of thinking that led to the policy wrought by our executive branch.

I am glad that I am witnessing very little of that from the Christians here at MCB.

Serr8d: Last time I checked, Al Gore hadn’t commented on MCB recently. If you’ve got a criticism of science, by all means present it.

Kat wrote:
“No. There has always been religion in politics and there have always been theocracies. And there have always been those who decry both.”

Not like there is today. Never before in recent history have religion and politics in America been so close and divisive.

For example - this quote from former reformist Vice-President of Iran, Mohammad Ali Abtahi:

“Relations between Iran and America won’t get better anytime soon. Leaders in both countries don’t see themselves as just politicians, they see themselves as carrying out the work of God. They’ve left the ground a bit. And that’s very dangerous for the world”
–Interviewed on PBS Frontline

If you can’t see why this is dangerous for the world and why reason is trying to conquer the irrationality of religion, you haven’t learned the lessons of history. Space age weaponry has no place in the hands of leaders on ‘a mission from god’

Never before in recent history have religion and politics in America been so close and divisive.

By recent history, you mean your short life time.

Then you quote the vice-president of Iran to back that up? Huh? Well, if anyone knows about religious extremists holding the reins of power, it would be those assholes.

If you can’t see why this is dangerous for the world and why reason is trying to conquer the irrationality of religion, you haven’t learned the lessons of history. Space age weaponry has no place in the hands of leaders on ‘a mission from god’

I want to agree with that, just not as written.

Sarcastro:

The average Iranian is, like the average American, not a religious fundamentalist. If you think the Iranians as a people are assholes, because of what their goofy, fucking religious zealot masters do–imagine how the rest of the world views us. I know you don’t care, because they are all wrong, but try wrapping your head around it, anyway.

Reading is Fun-damental, democommie.

Mohammad Ali Abtahi is not an average Iranian. Nor did I infer that he was. Nor was it inferred that any one other than those who hold power in Iran are assholes.

I know you don’t care, because they are all wrong, but try wrapping your head around it, anyway.

What you know wouldn’t fill a piss cup.

I don’t know who’s more willfully ignorant, the secular lefties who think George Bush is some kind of Christian theocrat or the fundamentalist Christians who think he’s really one of them.

He’s neither of these things. He’s a Christian, sure, but he’s a WASP-y Christian who just happens to mention God and Jesus and so forth just enough to set fundamentalist voters all a-twitter. But it’s just for show.

Sarcastro:

How very convenient of you to think that I was talking about the VP of Iran when I said “average” Iranian.

I do so love it when someone uses every bit of their substantial intellect to counter an argument with something like,

“What you know wouldn’t fill a piss cup.
”

Now, I’ve never thought of you as being stupid, but I may have to reasses my opinion.

Let’s recap:
1)I’m talking about A.

2)You chime in with a comment addressed to me, presuming to lecture me about A and telling me what you know I think about A.

3)I respond that you have don’t seem to grasp either A or your Lucky Astrological Psychic Awareness of my thoughts toward A.

4) You now claim that you weren’t talking about A.

Thank you for allowing us to put your earlier comment down as either poorly thought our or poorly written.

Sarcastro:

It is you that is failing to grasp what is going on. I never indicated that I was talking about the same person, hence the “average” Iranian. I don’t give a rat’s ass what you think of me, but you’re just plain wrong on this one.
Get over yourself.

Your response is to change the subject and claim that wasn’t what you were responding to.

Got it.

Sarcastro:

You are pouting. You know damned well that you mis-read what I said. But, feel free to pout.

Awwww. That’s so cute when you change the subject when you feel uncomfortable and are wrong.

Now you want to try to make this about me. That’s just precious.

Psst, he thinks he is “debating”.

Mr. Sarcastro:

Obviously you are convinced that you are right. I can add nothing to this. Bye.

I can add nothing to this.

Dude, you should get that tattooed to your forehead.

Wow…That was a feisty exchange…What ever happened to debating civilly?

As far as religion and politics go:

“Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is.”

-Mahatma Gandhi