I have a good friend who has recently made the decision to identify himself as a "Christianarchist". While his disdain for systemic corruption is something that I applaud, the overall philosophy I find is flawed in nature. There is much for me to research on this topic and I'm very much looking forward to conversations in the future. That being said, I'd like elaborate on why I think Christianity and Anarchy will never ever mix. Let's begin with the text book defintions of anarchy:

an⋅ar⋅chy [an-er-kee]  –noun
1. a state of society without government or law.
2. political and social disorder due to the absence of governmental control: The death of the king was followed by a year of anarchy.
3. a theory that regards the absence of all direct or coercive government as a political ideal and that proposes the cooperative and voluntary association of individuals and groups as the principal mode of organized society.
4. confusion; chaos; disorder: Intellectual and moral anarchy followed his loss of faith.

My friend most likely identifies with the third and less commonly (read: less controversial)  thought of definition. He is so fed up with the state of things in the political arena that he wants to cast government off completely, thus the anarchy portion of his hybrid philosophy. The catch though is that my friend is also a Christian - meaning that he accepts and follows the teachings of Christ. So his philosophy becomes a two-step process: a denial of Government and the evil it often represents (anarchy) and in it's place follow the teachings of Christ (Christianity). On a very basic level it makes sense. Kind of.  

The conflict in terms are many when you dig deeper. The first being that anarchy as a philosophy fails to hold water; at it's best it is a noble ideal (nothing wrong with a healthy protest) but the practice of it in reality assumes that you would live in a tent in the woods with handmade clothes and homegrown food. Few anarchists ever go to these levels for their philosophy without law. Second, is the nature of Christianity is one of obedience to God through the laws and lessons of scripture, Therein lies the conflict, one philosophy holds to no laws while the religion holds to many laws. The workaround for the "christianarchist" is simply "I'm in an anarchist because I don't believe in the systems of a fallen world AND I choose to follow the laws of God instead". The problem isn't so much in either statement it's the "AND" that ruins it. 

Hybrid philosophies have never made sense to me; it seems to me that this is the philosophical equivalent of trying to "have your cake and eat it too". When people attempt to smash two philosophies together both are diminished in the process. Metaphorically it's like having only "one foot in the pool". My attitude towards that is simply this: Jump in and stop wasting your time.

This isn't to say though that I don't enjoy learning about all manner of philosophies. As you can tell from most of my blog, I love the subject but as much as the different schools of thought I learn about inspire me I never force one into another even if I can find one philosophy paralleling another.

One last note about anarchy and Christianity: Let's consider history for a moment. There was once a people group that lived during the time of Christ that cast off the empire and held to their religious beliefs. It was a sect of Judaism, the Essenes. They never said that they were Jewish AND anything else. They were simply Jewish and they lived differently.   

Last week, I mentioned that I was going to see Terminator: Salvation and as timing would have it I was able to check it out with my good friend Nathan. He's going to do an excellent job covering the philosophical implications of robots this week. As I mentioned in my previous post about robots I believe there is also more weight to the zombie flick genre than cheap scares and blood and guts. It's easy to assume that movies with zombies hold no greater message but the great zombie films of our time have stories that stand the test of time. I think that I would devote at least one post to this idea so hear me out over these next hundred plus words.

Disclaimer: this post means little without Romero
One of my top ten favorite films of all time is the 1968 classic 'Night of the Living Dead'. This film exemplifies the timeless quality that I mentioned above, my hope is that you've seen this to have a frame of reference as I work through some of these attributes that hold meaningful merit. If you have yet to watch this movie; get to work because it has my full recommendation.

Zombies as a symbol
When zombies become the star of the show simply because of their condition everything is lost. In the Greek tradition of metaphor zombies have to stand for something more. I maintain that the best metaphoric use of zombies is that which Romero used in his story; zombies as the "mass". You have to peel past the layers to grasp this but when you do the film hits you like a ton of bricks. The protagonists in this particular story are minorities; a black man and a white woman considering that this film came out in 1968 the controversy is clearly more than just the blood and guts. This is a survival story of the minorities fighting against the mass. The zombie horde represents more than just dead people walking; they represent a warning about what humanity can become when they no longer use their minds. 

Zombies as a vehicle
Zombies by themselves are nothing but a cheap special effect thrill but if they are utilized in such a way that propels a meaningful narrative then they have done their job. As I mentioned above a mode of the zombie narrative is the story of survival; what people do in unthinkable situations - this is the foundation of any good horror film but the zombie genre in particular conveys this especially well. The tried and true model of a zombie film is to have a group of survivors holed up in a safe house trying to either A) Outlast the outbreak or B) Figure out a way to outrun the outbreak. Either way in these stories you will see people fighting against all odds to survive. This illuminates the strength, will, and improvisation people have when they have to fight to survive. This survival also shows the dark side of humanity when people turn against each other to save their own necks. As these ethical dilemmas play out; you must ask yourself "what would I do?"

This topic could easily be turned into a book and I'm sure it has but, those are my brief two cents. Here is a clip that sums up my point of "zombies as a vehicle" from 28 weeks later:

Opening Scene courtesy of Fox Atomic

I had no idea that Halo 2 would fly by this quick. I'm not sure if it's because the game was actually shorter or that my skills have become more adept and therefore made the game less of a challenge. 

Now that Halo 2 is over I'm ready to move on to part 3 and see how this all ends.

I'll be playing the orange box between now and then; these FPS campaigns are so over-the-top. I can understand now what all the fuss is about. Somewhere down the line I have to tackle the Gears of War games to get a handle on the increasingly popular 3rd person shooter genre. I'll keep you posted.

Some time soon I'm going to see the new summer-time-special-effects-extravaganza Terminator Salvation despite it's very lackluster reviews. My hope is at the very least it'll entertain in kind of a "that explosion is amazing" kind of way. I might be surprised though because I've found that there has been quite a bit of philosophical kindling in movies with Robots. Here is a quick list:

2001
Artificial Intelligence
I, Robot
Blade Runner
Bicentenial Man
The Matrix
Metropolis

The original Terminator even posed some ideas worth consideration, maybe the latest installment will add to the mythos in this way. It might not though, and I'm completely cool with that. What is it though, aside from all of the ridiculous production that makes watching robots so compelling? I don't want to read too far into it but what I'm offering is my two fold take on the question:

Robots as a metaphor:
Like Zombies (another blog-worthy topic), robots are a metaphoric warning of what humans can reduce themselves to if they try. Robots often look like people but no sooner are you taken in by appearences are you drawn into how anti-human these machines can be. Even in the heart-warming stories of Robots aspiring towards humanity we are reminded of the imposibility of the prospect. These stories allow us to look mechanical, programmed logic in the face and somehow get a sense that humanity means more than that. 

Robots as the embodiment of technological progress:
Similar to Frankenstein's monster, Robots are what happen when humanity tries to play god. The thinking goes something like this "we should make something that does that for us" which usually turns south with the artificial intelligence going haywire in these stories. It's compelling to watch nonetheless as scientists attempt to achieve the impossible and succeed. When you are taken in by these stories their success becomes your success and you begin to wonder "how amazing would that be?". Keep that last sentence in mind as you watch this: 

My teacher Skip recently gave an illustration that has stuck with me. The thought that "being equals doing" is nothing new, it's a theme that has been rolling around in my head for the past year or so as I serve the community that meets in our home. 

For a long time though my life was wrapped up in books, every book I read patted me on the back and my sense of Ego puffed up in a way that was unhealthy. I remember a time a few years ago where I had a pretty bad flu, I stayed home from work and Emilie came to visit; what she found was a very sick me and four open books that I was reading in one sitting. Being the realist that she is I believe the comment was "why are you doing this to yourself? I'd go crazy if I tried that". Suffice it to say, I was in the business of gathering information.

The illustration that Skip gave described the difference between Greek and Hebrew thought. Here in the west the Greek influence is everywhere, to them it was all about accumulating - from wealth, philosophy, food and drink, sex et cetera. This decadence is what fosters this school of thoughts self-worth; the more you have the better you are. Skip described it as boxes that are kept just to pile high, the contrast in Hebrew thought is that your life is lived not when the boxes are a tower but when the contents are in motion being poured out into the lives of those around you. I believe the quote was "faith is like running, it only exists when you do it". This comment echoes the book of James and the idea that "faith without works is dead".

I have to keep myself in check regularly, if I chase too many philosophical/spirituality rabbits I lose my focus in what I commit my hands to. If I am more eager to read than I am to wash dishes then something is very wrong in my heart.

Just a quick update for those that choose to not look at blog sidebars:

I added a handful of new links to other sites. I approve of all them but Lifehacker in particular is a standout.

And in other news, 5/20-5/22 I'm working 11am-11pm so you can expect real blog updates soon. If for nothing else than to keep me sane while I work these long hours.

If you can break yourself away from big budget games and go for something a little more retro/indie, the community games tab is a great place to get games that offer experiences you wouldn't play elsewhere. I added the XNA Roundup to the sidebar. Strongly recommeded.

I've observed that the tendencey of the immature is to be bound by circumstance or of the philosophically immature to be bound by a weak understanding of the nature of time. The last enemy of choice is the naturalist who claims our genetics and chemical functions determine our choices. 

The emotionally immature claim that "incident X" forced them to have "ethic Y". The responsibility of that thing they live with, their life, is lost in this fit of immaturity. It reminds me of a children's fight "so and so hit me, so I HAD to hit back". There was no responsibility held for the choice that was made, it was simply relegated to reaction to stimuli. This is no better than animal instinct. If you are human, you always have a choice.

The philosophically immature will hold that time is predestined and that life is simply along for the ride. This poor evaluation of metaphysics is held together by a pseudo-spiritual perspective on God's character. "God knows all time, so clearly what I do is what I have been determined to do". Again, the responsibility of choice is passed along. The result and desire these people won't name is that they want to feel free to do anything they want.   

Those that hold to science will diminish choice by stating it's "chemical X" or "gene X" that makes choices in life happen. I am not so naive to say that a degree of influence isn't had but again, if all we are is physical makeup then that makes us no better than anything else living on Earth. There is a reason why we are distinct and seperate from the rest of life and there is a defining characteristic that does the seperating; our rational mind.

The rational mind is what gives humans the ability to choose. To determine what works and what doesn't. This is the thing that drives us through life and how well it functions will determine the effectiveness of our life. For better or worse our choices are ours. May we never pass responsibility of that to someone or something else.  

I've only really begun to scratch the surface of exegesis and I can already speak volumes on what a benefit it has been to the life of myself and the company I keep under the study of Skip. This is the closet thing I'll have in the way of formal education in terms of understanding Spirituality and I'm very grateful for the opportunity. I'm thinking about this in part because this is tuesday and tuesday is our study group related to Psalms. 

What impresses me most and leaves the greatest impact on my life is the insight related to exegesis. The emphasis on what the text actually says, the background and the practice of the text in the time of the writing over a loose interpretation of what it might mean to me is so incredibly valuable. Which isn't to say that hermeneutics isn't important. The grasping at meaning is something I'll never diminish but I'm convinced a greater meaning can and will always be held if proper background is held. 

The major problem in Christianity is that of a lack of thought and consideration of where the term was birthed out of. Christianity as it exists today I'm finding is still sectarian and exclusionary (although I think strides have been made to break down those walls). This exclusion was concocted by a conservative ethic based on weak hermeneutics. Even if the same conservative ethics conclusions are drawn, with proper exegesis the claim would be substatiated. 

This doesn't happen though and what we end up with is people staking claims on "what makes sense to me". The mental legwork is taken out and the damage is a deformed worldview. This of course doesn't do any favors for those outside of the knowledge of God because what they get is a represatation of religion in the form of a brainless, emotional mess. 

I'm so thankful for those scholars out there that are somehow able to write books that dumb down exegesis for the everyday person. Through their work legitimacy might be restored to Spirituality.

This week has been a stressful one. I'm realizing in retrospect that I didn't do myself any favors when over the course of this week I drank three lo-carb Monster energy drinks. This was in addition to the coffee I normally drink. The caffeine highs and lows were unruly; my mood was altered. 

I'm attempting to course correct this weekend and not consume any caffeine at all. 

The thought did occur to me though that I'm not the only one that has caffeine as a drug of choice; between the coffee houses and energy drink companies there is no shortage of options for average joe consumer to get their fix. I've been around the addict; it's almost tangible when someone hasn't had their coffee. The mood is not beneficial. I'd like to liken it to a baby who hasn't had their nap yet.

If you blow this idea up to a macro level the thought is scary. How many people consume caffeine on a regular basis in America? How many of those skip the occasional fix or two due to their busy lifestyle? The answer is obvious; too many. The result? Mood altered lives. If a life is altered by chemicals then the capacity to know that life is diminished. Sad isn't it that relationships are diminished because of a missed cup of joe?

The physical and the mental are tied together. Read: Nepesh.