Actually, i find this incredibly fun. but truthfully, you have to know a lot to do it. First, you have to know the bible and your perspective of it inside and out--as well as the supporting theology. Second, you have to understand their origins and their theology, and be able to point out it's place in historical development and how it deviates from various orthodoxies, and also how those orthodoxies change over time--so what is orthodox now was not always orthodox, and that there has always been debate about scripture, application, etc, which is why we have these different schools of thought to begin with.

i also find that some other tactics are great, such as intimidation. I like to break out the greek and hebrew--most christians who want to debate you only know a few translations--the RKJV and the NIV. These are modern translations, with varying degrees of quality based on the perspective of those who are reading it and comparing it with other transations. Also, knowing the history of the biblical canon is incredibly helpful.

So, it can be really fun and also educational--particularly to what i consider to be the really unknowledgeable other side. But then, i like my research.

And, i've had years of practice. I'm really lucky in that i'm deeply connected with the jewish community, so i can always fall back on that for interpretation elements, and i'm also deeply rooted in orthdox catholic and 'eastern orthodox' theology, and also the debates within that that gave rise to the various theological schools within those churches/communities, so i can always fall back on that.

your average fundy has very little clue in light of this very basic history, and even some of the more educated pastors have very narrow visions of church history. So, you can always go back to the history--away from the bible, pointing out that the bible was developed by the church, not the church developed by the bible--which really turns them on their heads.

And then you get left alone for a while. I miss my jehova's witnesses. they used to come around far more regularly.



which link? the renzai or kobutsu malone's? ah well. you can try the whatever whatever .org without the end piece and get to the center in little rock from there, and whatever.

Well, nothing is particularly odd about luke. they all have their flavors. matthew is written for a deeply jewish audience. mark is written for a diasporic jewish audience, john is written for a gentile audience. luke is written for a mixed audience and has a particular social-justice based bent to it. The other three tend to focus on the larger mythological pictures of the judeo-christian culture; luke tends to focus on the nitty-gritty of christ's teachings as far as social justice goes. this is why i have such a preference for luke.

at the time, though, i was 14 and i had jsut started translating the bible from greek and hebrew. i started with luke as my greek studies because it is my favorite of the biblical canon (although, i do like sirach as well). anyway, at 14, i started hebrew studies with the rabbi--we started with genesis and such, and greek studies with my parish priest who was also a canon lawyer (and is now a monsignor and still my confessor, though not sacrimentally.) i'd started taking latin in school and i spent much of my spare time translating historical church documents (i've also translated the latin vulgate as well, which is a translation of the greek/hebrew texts into latin). The project took all 4 years of high school for the greek/hebrew and well into college to finish the latin vulgate. it was a hobby.

anyway, translation is a fascinating process that invovles a great deal of introspection. so, i took the whole thing seriously. I am also deeply rooted in contemplative prayer, so this was an aspect of my translation work. I would translate some of the hebrew, then engage that in contemplative prayer. Then, i would do a bit of the greek, and do the same.

Understandably, i was also looking for the practical personal and inter-personal applications of the teachings while going through this process. So, if i couldn't quite grasp the meaning or application of something, i'd eventually have to give up, do my math homework, do yoga, and go to bed. Or listen to U2.

anyway, it probably wasn't anything too troubling or difficult, but my 14 yr old brain was struggling on a number of fronts. I was a huge social outcast and yet i was deeply interested in social justice (i felt largely oppressed by my own society in a number of ways, school being the most outward and obvious source of my oppression). I found it difficult to connect and communicate with my fellow students--largely because they were talking about hair, make-up, and boys, and i was talking about poverty, social equality, and engaging death (through my work volunteering in the oncology ward at the hospital). So, there was a bit of a 'disconnect.'

I struggled greatly with how to honor and care for my fellow classmates even though they were nitwits. you can see, that it's difficult to honor someone whom you generally consider a nitwit. So, a large part of my work--yesterday and today--was learning about my own self and self hatred, and how this is turned outward onto others, such that i create the oppression under which i find myself. Ah, convoluted!

anyhoot, i do not know what particular verse in luke i struggled with at that fateful time (it was a couple of days) when i read that zen story--it's in the journals somewhere--but i know that it was luke, because i find luke deeply comforting and i continually turn there for all sorts of wisdom and inspiration, just as i would turn to buddhist stories as well.

anyway. does that answer it?



well, the mindfulness meditation group in our area meets once a week for sitting meditation. often, there is a little buddhist ritual before or after the whole thing. It was largely young people--people our own age--with a few who were older (but not by much, Cyndi's age and stuff). Most everyone was very hurt by christianity in one way or another, and had experiences similar to Cyndi's that she wrote above in both the past and particularly in the present now that they were active buddhists.

we attended for a number of months, actually, and it was christmas that set the whole thing off. Now, i don't generally feel the need to tell people that i was doing yoga 4 days a week at the studio and teaching two days a week there, while attending the catholic church on saturday or sunday (or both), and then coming to this buddhist gathering once a week. Ain't nobody's business what i do in my spare time. When i was there, i was there doing that, and that was that. No problem.

Christmas comes up--well, advent--and it's a huge season of services on specialized days (all sorts of mary-related feasts and such), and of course vigil services, and then there are the fasting requirements and all this other great stuff--most of which i observe. There are a few that i don't observe but it's because they're considered optional and often require pilgrimages and i can't manage those, law school (at the time), and my yoga obligations.

So, i was going to back down a bit because of wednesday mass being at the same time. my husband was going to continue to go to the buddhist meetings, and then the buddhist group wanted to plan 'children's day' which is sort of their version of 'christmas' for the kids. we didn't have many kids in the group--maybe 5 or 6--but they wanted a group celebration for christmas time, and wanted to do children's day. So, they were trying to pick a day in which 'everyone can come.'

problem is, the whole catholic thing really kicks in, and i feel strongly that i need to participate. I mean, i even go to certain st's days throughout the year which my husband says 'who what huh?" you should hear my mother in law's explitives about it. Anyway, i told them not to worry about me; i'd make it if i could, but that i have a lot of other activities during the holidays. When pressed, i mentioned that i was attending catholic services throughout the season. I brought out my litergical calendar to see what was what. Most of the days in which i would be 'free' were also fasting days, which puts a damper on holiday parties (not for me really, i can go to a party and not eat, no problem. it's not difficult when you're vegetarian.).

so, the fit hit the shan at that point and people started to get really upset about how i'd ahve to choose between buddha and jesus and i pointed out that the very leader on which they based their organization--thich naht hanh--wrote Living Buddha, Living Christ and Christ and Buddha as Brothers, but they strongly felt that i should choose and what not.

So i chose to not hang out with them. When i went to another group--that actually meets in a catholic church--i met slightly less resistance, but they were strongly connected with the local AA meeting (one of the largest in the area), and i found that the whole hting had a strong AA bent and that's just not my deal. I mean, more power to them, but that's not my deal.

That's why my husband and i ended up hanging with the quakers. Although, admittedly, many of them were sorta 'anti establishment' of the church, as in fact it is a response to the catholic/anglican heirarchy, but under St Hildgard, a mystic from the 800s, it is obvious that in catholicism even the heirarchy only holds so much spiritual power. Anyway, that's a digression. We hung out with the quakers because they were very 'zen' about their christianity--and just about anyone could go there. They were christo-centric, as opposed to evangelical quakers (who are very christian) and the more liberal quakers (who can be anything from atheist to whatever else). We hung there until we just got to dang busy for me to attend so many churches.

and this year, i've been invited to a lot of hindu services--which is a real honor--so i've made every attempt to go to every one to which i've been invited. they seem to have no problem with my wandering through catholic and buddhist circles. I've also been invited to many in-home jewish celebrations throughout the year and i feel great about that. too.

most people realize that i'm just doing my thing and most people are very cool about it. All of the jewish people whom i know love the fact that i love to come to their services and that i've studied the talmud and the scriptures in hebrew--and that i'll refer to jewish theology in regards to those texts when speaking with christians or any others.

i've also been to two muslim celebrations at the mosque in philly. really a honor to be invited.

look, i just tour around.



i have a JD. i was surprized at the people that they let into advanced education. Sometimes, they don't have the sense god gave a post.

my dad has a PhD. I swear if i hear another conservative rant about "the gays" or "the liberals" i'm going to have to turn him upside down and shake him. But, i can debate better than him and i understand the constitution better, which usually shuts down his frustrations/arguments, and i always ask "who are the gays? your sister is gay. is she doing this? is she leading it? is this her agenda? is there a gay agenda?" and so on like this. My dad is actually very open and loves his sister and totally and completely supports and defends her. So it doens't make sense that he goes on these weird rants about "the gays" but then i bring it back down.

my mom hates it when we debate. It's because dad gets louder--as if that's going to work--and i get quieter in tone--which is a negotiation jiujitsu method that i learned is highly effective for female debaters who aren't going to back down.

and when my dad looses and makes a complaint to my mom, she says "you raised her that way." and gets smug.

Ugh! I hate arguing with Christians. It's worst than AY's quote about arguing on the internet. No matter what happens you lose. You can't argue based on logic, because they don't accept it. You can't argue based on the bible, because they know it better, and can explain the inconsistencies. Finally, you can't hope to convince them that they're wrong because they not!