to all you question answerers, be they by post, comment, or email. (See previous post)
I guess the one thing that I did learn is that some people don't want to be prayed for. Part of me want to do spiritual vandalism and do so anyway, but I think that's just me being a jerk. (for the record, I haven't done it for those that didn't want it, and I have for those that have).
The other thing is that the church does a lousy job of being what it is supposed to be about. There are so many things that people think of when they here "church," that have so little to do with the message of Jesus.
Also, there have been so many bad inviting experiences. I want the Lafayette people to invite, but I also want to make sure we have our stuff together, so that we don't contribute to more bad experiences.
(It reminds me of a conversation I had with an improv guy that knew he was giving bad shows, but didn't think it would effect his future audience when the group got better? But how many people go back to the restaurant that made them sick?)
Anyway, thanks again--I do appreciate all of you sharing.
Drew's Journal
My Podcast Link
03/12/2008 00:15 #43630
Thanks . . .Category: religion
03/10/2008 22:01 #43608
Questions: my homeworkCategory: religion
Janelle and I are taking/leading a class about talking to people that don't have faith about faith, and one of the things that the book tells us is that we don't get it. People that go to church, according to the book, don't understand what people that don't go to church think. So the book asked us to interview somebody that doesn't go, so that we could understand somebody else's perspective.
If anybody wants to answer these questions in person, coffee/beer is on me. If anybody wants to answer them on estrip, comment below.
The questions:
1. What pops into your mind when you hear the word "church?"
2. Has anyone ever invited you to their church? What did you think when they asked you? Did you go? How did it feel? If you didn't go, why not?
3. Have you ever had a sense of God or Jesus communicating with you? What was it like?
4. If you had one question you could ask God and knew you would get an answer, what would it be?
5. Would you like prayer for anything?
Thanks in advance! If anybody wants to answer these in person, the best time for me is Wednesday night, after 8 (homework is due Thursday)
If you don't want people reading your responses, sending me an email is fine, too.
If anybody wants to answer these questions in person, coffee/beer is on me. If anybody wants to answer them on estrip, comment below.
The questions:
1. What pops into your mind when you hear the word "church?"
2. Has anyone ever invited you to their church? What did you think when they asked you? Did you go? How did it feel? If you didn't go, why not?
3. Have you ever had a sense of God or Jesus communicating with you? What was it like?
4. If you had one question you could ask God and knew you would get an answer, what would it be?
5. Would you like prayer for anything?
Thanks in advance! If anybody wants to answer these in person, the best time for me is Wednesday night, after 8 (homework is due Thursday)
If you don't want people reading your responses, sending me an email is fine, too.
jenks - 03/12/08 18:50
1- overbearing
2- after a sleepover in 2nd grade I went to catholic mass with my friend b/c I didn't know any better. My mother sheepishly told me later that I should not have taken communion since I didn't know what it was. Was invited to go to church with a mormon friend, but didn't.
3- not at all
4- sadly, this is sort of so far beyond my comprehension that I can't even think of something to ask aside from the stupid questions like "why isn't everyone nice?"
5- not really, but thanks.
1- overbearing
2- after a sleepover in 2nd grade I went to catholic mass with my friend b/c I didn't know any better. My mother sheepishly told me later that I should not have taken communion since I didn't know what it was. Was invited to go to church with a mormon friend, but didn't.
3- not at all
4- sadly, this is sort of so far beyond my comprehension that I can't even think of something to ask aside from the stupid questions like "why isn't everyone nice?"
5- not really, but thanks.
megan - 03/11/08 22:43
1) Obligation
2) Yes. I was excited to go to church of different faith(I went growing up as a Methodist). I went, and it felt very manipulative and pushy (it was born again Christianity, so maybe my experience was a little heavy handed. They were determined to "save" me...)
3) No. I never have. :/
4) I would ask Him if karma was absolute, or if bad people sometimes live fully good lives without any repercussions for their misdeeds.
5) I would like prayer for my family's health and well-being. I think I pray in my own way. Whether it is directed at God or not isn't my main focus. It's more in the strength of positive thought.
1) Obligation
2) Yes. I was excited to go to church of different faith(I went growing up as a Methodist). I went, and it felt very manipulative and pushy (it was born again Christianity, so maybe my experience was a little heavy handed. They were determined to "save" me...)
3) No. I never have. :/
4) I would ask Him if karma was absolute, or if bad people sometimes live fully good lives without any repercussions for their misdeeds.
5) I would like prayer for my family's health and well-being. I think I pray in my own way. Whether it is directed at God or not isn't my main focus. It's more in the strength of positive thought.
kookcity2000 - 03/11/08 00:26
dude I think we conversed for hours about similar topics in New Orleans
dude I think we conversed for hours about similar topics in New Orleans
drew - 03/10/08 23:08
yes. Christian rock in general is bad. Done badly, it becomes exponentially worse.
yes. Christian rock in general is bad. Done badly, it becomes exponentially worse.
james - 03/10/08 22:59
1) Catholic pomp and circumstance. My cousin biting the back of the pew as a child.
2) Yes and yes. A church opened up a few blocks away from my childhood home. The youth pastor went door to door looking for anyone remotely young to bring. Being young, arrogant, and having read a bit of Jung I thought I was informed enough to engage in a reasoned debate about religion with this guy. Since I made the point that all religions are fundamentally the same he invites me to a service. It would have been hypocritical of me to not go, so I do. Christian rock generally is terrible, but the Christian rock house band they had was profoundly terrible. When he asked me how it was, I felt so awkward. I didn't want to insult his band, but man. He later invited me to a party. Thinking a party was a party I said sure. No, it ended up being an intervention where strangers drank strong kool-aid* and confronted me about my lack of specific faith.
3) When I was a real little kid I thought god and I were tight. Puberty did away with that. It was such a magical feeling. Like at any second I could have stigmata, or make statues cry just by being in my holy presence. Nothing kills that like a cracking voice and pubic hair.
4) And take the mystery out of things? No way.
5) No thank you.
1) Catholic pomp and circumstance. My cousin biting the back of the pew as a child.
2) Yes and yes. A church opened up a few blocks away from my childhood home. The youth pastor went door to door looking for anyone remotely young to bring. Being young, arrogant, and having read a bit of Jung I thought I was informed enough to engage in a reasoned debate about religion with this guy. Since I made the point that all religions are fundamentally the same he invites me to a service. It would have been hypocritical of me to not go, so I do. Christian rock generally is terrible, but the Christian rock house band they had was profoundly terrible. When he asked me how it was, I felt so awkward. I didn't want to insult his band, but man. He later invited me to a party. Thinking a party was a party I said sure. No, it ended up being an intervention where strangers drank strong kool-aid* and confronted me about my lack of specific faith.
3) When I was a real little kid I thought god and I were tight. Puberty did away with that. It was such a magical feeling. Like at any second I could have stigmata, or make statues cry just by being in my holy presence. Nothing kills that like a cracking voice and pubic hair.
4) And take the mystery out of things? No way.
5) No thank you.
- note: I meant literal kool-aid.
03/10/2008 11:22 #43601
HoopsAnybody around Elmwood that likes to play basketball, can come by my Church (Lafayette Ave Presbyterian--see the link on the right) on Tuesday nights starting at 8pm. We aren't particularly good, so don't let that intimidate you.
The gym isn't all that well heated, so you may want to wear your warm-ups.
The gym isn't all that well heated, so you may want to wear your warm-ups.
03/05/2008 12:38 #43561
What if?Category: politics
About 30 years ago, the parties flipped. Republicans used to like abortion, and Dems did not. If you think about this callously, it makes sense. More poor people have abortions, more poor people vote for Democrats. More abortions = more power for republicans. Democrats were always for "the little guy," and that once included the unborn.
I don't know why Democrats flipped.
The point of this is not to advocate for or against any abortion law. I understand both sides of that argument. I just want to point out one thing:
Many Christian voters, including many in my family, only vote for Republicans because of abortion. The rest of the platform doesn't matter.
For whatever reason, torture and war don't matter, but abortion does.
Once upon a time, the whole Roman Catholic church voted for Democrats.
I wonder, if that "flip" never happened, if the war would have happened? I wonder if Ronald Reagan would have been elected president?
Today, A pro-life democrat may never get the party's nomination, but he or she would walk in the general election. It would be a Reagan-style blow out.
I don't know why Democrats flipped.
The point of this is not to advocate for or against any abortion law. I understand both sides of that argument. I just want to point out one thing:
Many Christian voters, including many in my family, only vote for Republicans because of abortion. The rest of the platform doesn't matter.
For whatever reason, torture and war don't matter, but abortion does.
Once upon a time, the whole Roman Catholic church voted for Democrats.
I wonder, if that "flip" never happened, if the war would have happened? I wonder if Ronald Reagan would have been elected president?
Today, A pro-life democrat may never get the party's nomination, but he or she would walk in the general election. It would be a Reagan-style blow out.
jason - 03/05/08 13:00
Fascinating. I have some Liberal friends who are pretty much the same way - one issue voter on the abortion argument. I really don't understand that mode of thinking. What, the economy, national security, taxes, foreign policy, none of that stuff matters?
Call me cynical, but I think the Democrats flipped strictly because of fealty to powerful special interests. A pro-lifer could never be the Democratic nominee today, and probably not in the near future either. They would get the usual treatment, get castigated, called anti-woman, a 1800's throwback, and that's on the nice end of things.
Regardless of this flip, yes I do think Reagan would have won, because Carter was so unpopular (Kennedy even mounted a challenge), and his administration was so ineffective. Abortion policy was the least of our concerns in those days. I think he's been a much more effective personality outside of US politics, for what it's worth.
I don't really disagree that a Moderate (Pro Life) Democrat could win handily these days. The opportunity is certainly out there.
Fascinating. I have some Liberal friends who are pretty much the same way - one issue voter on the abortion argument. I really don't understand that mode of thinking. What, the economy, national security, taxes, foreign policy, none of that stuff matters?
Call me cynical, but I think the Democrats flipped strictly because of fealty to powerful special interests. A pro-lifer could never be the Democratic nominee today, and probably not in the near future either. They would get the usual treatment, get castigated, called anti-woman, a 1800's throwback, and that's on the nice end of things.
Regardless of this flip, yes I do think Reagan would have won, because Carter was so unpopular (Kennedy even mounted a challenge), and his administration was so ineffective. Abortion policy was the least of our concerns in those days. I think he's been a much more effective personality outside of US politics, for what it's worth.
I don't really disagree that a Moderate (Pro Life) Democrat could win handily these days. The opportunity is certainly out there.
james - 03/05/08 13:00
About half the country supports abortion, if both major parties did not support abortion and worked towards a constitutional amendment outlawing it a third party would have formed. Women make up 55%-60% of the democratic party. It is hard to imagine them remaining a viable party with much of their base disinterested.
Also, my mom used to be a Democrat. Then she found Jesus and became super Catholic. She was suckered into the GOP on abortion. Now she is a war hawk, thinks all people on welfare are black welfare queens, and is disappointed Mike Huckabee did not get the nomination despite the fact I told her she thinks everyone with AIDS should be sent to an island and homosexuals are just as 'bad' as necrophiles and zoophiles. I think abortion gets people into church and they later drag you to the alter.
But, it is certainly an interesting 'what if?'
About half the country supports abortion, if both major parties did not support abortion and worked towards a constitutional amendment outlawing it a third party would have formed. Women make up 55%-60% of the democratic party. It is hard to imagine them remaining a viable party with much of their base disinterested.
Also, my mom used to be a Democrat. Then she found Jesus and became super Catholic. She was suckered into the GOP on abortion. Now she is a war hawk, thinks all people on welfare are black welfare queens, and is disappointed Mike Huckabee did not get the nomination despite the fact I told her she thinks everyone with AIDS should be sent to an island and homosexuals are just as 'bad' as necrophiles and zoophiles. I think abortion gets people into church and they later drag you to the alter.
But, it is certainly an interesting 'what if?'
03/03/2008 13:31 #43538
102 Million over 8 years.Category: football
Wow.
Let's pretend that I was given such a contract.
102 Million.
No wait. That's even too much to comprehend. Let me just deal with the signing bonus: 25 Million.
Lets assume half goes to taxes (I would try to avoid this, but I am going to play it safe with each number.)
That leaves me just over 12 million. I would give 10% to the church, (this is not a legalistic thing--just a good idea) so after taxes and giving, that leaves me 10 million dollars.
Half a million would go to paying off student loans and mortgage. Hmm. Never mind the mortgage. I would move. But I wouldn't go crazy--I would probably buy a condo. So lets put aside a million for all for all of that (I am assuming that I stay in Buffalo).
9 Million to Go.
4 Million gets invested, and I budget myself to live off of 5% of the fund each year. I know that I COULD spend more and still make it for life, but my house is already paid for, as is my education, so my $200,000 a year will go pretty far.
$200k allows me to drive a nice car, eat out whenever I want, go to the shows/concerts/games I want to, and get cable. I can probably switch to mac now, too--and get an iphone!
Wow. 5 million to go, and I am already set for life (and this is just the signing bonus, mind you).
Let's designate another million for gifts. I could probably be generous from my budgeted salary, but now Dad gets a new motorcycle, and Mom gets a luxury car and a vacation. (They might not take these things--I think they could buy them if they really wanted them--ditto houses and stuff like that). Janelle's family gets in on it, too. As do my friends. Estrip gets whatever server it needs.
4 million to go.
1 to Wittenberg University, and another to Palmer Seminary.
1 million to opportunity international, one of the better micro-enterprise groups.
1 mil for Janelle to designate. I probably should have consulted with her on all the other stuff, but she gets to live off of the investment returns and all of that anyway.
And this is all imaginary. I don't throw a football that well.
So there it is: what I would do with a quarterback's signing bonus.
(and I still would have another 77 million in salary to deal with, plus what I would make in endorsments)
Wow.
I would hire a maid, too. I hate doing laundry.
metalpeter - 03/03/08 18:19
(e:jenks) (and others). Here is why athletes get paid so much money {my View). First of all you have the TV deal. It used to be that the NFL TV deal was devided equaly between all the NFL teams and that gave each team 1 million dollars over the sallery cap. The reason the NFL can charge so much is because of everone who watchs then sees the ads. Companies want there products to sell. Here is the kicker all you need is one thing to cause the NFL to fall apart. If anyone wants to kill pro sports do this: Prove that ads don't cause people to buy a certain product, I don't think it is possible. But once Bud, Pepsi/Lays, and all the other companies stop paying for ads then the TV companies don't make money that means the TV deal becomes a lot less that means player don't get paid as much. Yes there is other sources of money like shirts, hats, and Jackets. But again if the NFL wasn't on TV no one other then people at the stadium would watch so only those people would buy them. It is also a business for the owners also. They want a good team to bring people into the stadium. If the game gets blacked out I would assume they make less local money. The other thing to is on like some other sports Owners are part of the show in the NFL and often put winning before money (unlike the leafs and sabres) there should be a balance but sometimes it is hard to find. For example Jerry Jones (cowboys) often goes down on the sideline and stands next to the coach. It is the same reason why everyone on friends got that pay raise years ago. They all went to the network and said we want more money. The network was making so much money from the ads in that time slot they gave them all what they wanted and still killed it dollarwise. It is just the economics of the situtation. It is the same reason why Lacrosse Players don't get very much money. If you want to see a game you have to go to it live or watch it over the internet there is no TV contract so there isn't a lot of money coming in. As the league gets bigger this may change and ticket prices may rise.
(e:jenks) (and others). Here is why athletes get paid so much money {my View). First of all you have the TV deal. It used to be that the NFL TV deal was devided equaly between all the NFL teams and that gave each team 1 million dollars over the sallery cap. The reason the NFL can charge so much is because of everone who watchs then sees the ads. Companies want there products to sell. Here is the kicker all you need is one thing to cause the NFL to fall apart. If anyone wants to kill pro sports do this: Prove that ads don't cause people to buy a certain product, I don't think it is possible. But once Bud, Pepsi/Lays, and all the other companies stop paying for ads then the TV companies don't make money that means the TV deal becomes a lot less that means player don't get paid as much. Yes there is other sources of money like shirts, hats, and Jackets. But again if the NFL wasn't on TV no one other then people at the stadium would watch so only those people would buy them. It is also a business for the owners also. They want a good team to bring people into the stadium. If the game gets blacked out I would assume they make less local money. The other thing to is on like some other sports Owners are part of the show in the NFL and often put winning before money (unlike the leafs and sabres) there should be a balance but sometimes it is hard to find. For example Jerry Jones (cowboys) often goes down on the sideline and stands next to the coach. It is the same reason why everyone on friends got that pay raise years ago. They all went to the network and said we want more money. The network was making so much money from the ads in that time slot they gave them all what they wanted and still killed it dollarwise. It is just the economics of the situtation. It is the same reason why Lacrosse Players don't get very much money. If you want to see a game you have to go to it live or watch it over the internet there is no TV contract so there isn't a lot of money coming in. As the league gets bigger this may change and ticket prices may rise.
drew - 03/03/08 15:07
I think he is a Manning type of QB. I also think that he is enough of a team player, that he might even give some back if the salary cap demands it.
The Rooneys will make back way more than they pay.
That's the thing that I don't like: everybody complains about player salaries, but nobody complains about exorbitant profit.
If a league is going to have a monopoly (as the major sports do), and if people are going to be willing to spend $100s on tickets, jerseys, etc (to say nothing of tv and luxury boxes and such) then a lot of money is going to come in, then there is going to be a lot of cash out there. Either we nationalize professional sports (which I don't think even the most liberal of Dems would do) or we live with things the way they are.
As much as I love football (and I do love football) I don't spend much money on it. If there were more people with my attitude, salary and profits would both be lower.
I wish I could find the article that studies pay multiples. Basically, if the highest paid employee makes more than, I think 25 times that of the lowest paid employee, the company will begin to function worse. What I like about a cap in multiples is that it could be good for everyone. CEO's could still make a ton of money, but not without paying their employees.
Of course, this would just lead to sports teams going to an all volunteer cleaning staff (or contracting things out), but limiting pay differential to an overly high number, say a multiple of 50 would be a good start.
I think he is a Manning type of QB. I also think that he is enough of a team player, that he might even give some back if the salary cap demands it.
The Rooneys will make back way more than they pay.
That's the thing that I don't like: everybody complains about player salaries, but nobody complains about exorbitant profit.
If a league is going to have a monopoly (as the major sports do), and if people are going to be willing to spend $100s on tickets, jerseys, etc (to say nothing of tv and luxury boxes and such) then a lot of money is going to come in, then there is going to be a lot of cash out there. Either we nationalize professional sports (which I don't think even the most liberal of Dems would do) or we live with things the way they are.
As much as I love football (and I do love football) I don't spend much money on it. If there were more people with my attitude, salary and profits would both be lower.
I wish I could find the article that studies pay multiples. Basically, if the highest paid employee makes more than, I think 25 times that of the lowest paid employee, the company will begin to function worse. What I like about a cap in multiples is that it could be good for everyone. CEO's could still make a ton of money, but not without paying their employees.
Of course, this would just lead to sports teams going to an all volunteer cleaning staff (or contracting things out), but limiting pay differential to an overly high number, say a multiple of 50 would be a good start.
jason - 03/03/08 14:33
What do you think about that figure, Drew? Sounds to me like this last season for him (which was damn good) got him his dough. Not like he was a bust or anything before that, but you would think that is Manning type of money.
What do you think about that figure, Drew? Sounds to me like this last season for him (which was damn good) got him his dough. Not like he was a bust or anything before that, but you would think that is Manning type of money.
jenks - 03/03/08 13:58
UGH.
Frankly, that makes me ill.
(not what you would do with the money drew- but the fact that athletes (or anyone for that matter) make so much money.)
How about they pay him 10 million (still more than enough to live comfortably) and give the rest to charity? lower ticket prices? anything.
Why on earth does this guy deserve that much money? i know, i know, b/c the market supports it.
again UGH.
UGH.
Frankly, that makes me ill.
(not what you would do with the money drew- but the fact that athletes (or anyone for that matter) make so much money.)
How about they pay him 10 million (still more than enough to live comfortably) and give the rest to charity? lower ticket prices? anything.
Why on earth does this guy deserve that much money? i know, i know, b/c the market supports it.
again UGH.
mrmike - 03/03/08 13:37
Good for Big Ben, here's hoping his accountant is on his A game
Good for Big Ben, here's hoping his accountant is on his A game
i certainly don't MIND if you pray for me- but I wouldn't ASK you to is all.
Oh hell! If you pray for me Drew I am going to pray for you and you do not want to be messing with those gods Drew. Though please note, if your home is suddenly infested with rats or wiccans it is a complete coincidence.
"The other thing is that the church does a lousy job of being what it is supposed to be about. There are so many things that people think of when they here "church," that have so little to do with the message of Jesus."
true that. But I suppose 2000 years of precedence is tough to not follow.