Your Daily Dose Of Random

We can has negativities!

2010-01-17T08:49:00.001-08:00

"I happened to stumble upon your blog while looking up ridiculous Van Impe blurbs. I regret doing so. Your own personal description makes you as much of a ridiculous and useless creature as Mr. Van Impe. Good luck in your "studies" I hope they continue to keep you too busy to post yor views on the internet any longer."

That's from an absolutely charming gentleman named Casey, who was so kind to express his wonderful, sophisticated and utterly sensitive opinion on me in the comments section of one of my posts. Hi Casey! How are ya?

Ridiculous you say? Why of course I'm ridiculous! It's in my nature to be so, but useless? And putting "studies" in quotes like that? Me thinks that someone here is taking my insanity a little too seriously. And since you haven't met me Casey in real life, who the hell are you to judge me as useless? Granted I may be judging you as judgemental, but that seems to be self evident from your comments. But I don't call you useless do I? That would be so very unfair and dehumanizing of me. No I don't think I'll sink to that level, but you're welcome to stay there if you like.

Now here's the thing folks, what I don't get is: he thinks Van Impe to be ridiculous but doesn't accept modern Biblical Studies? Most interesting. Casey, what's your background, religious or otherwise? I'd really like to know. And keep on posting here, I'm sure it'll make for an interesting debate. You can have your views and I can have mine, and I'll be tolerant of yours as long as you're tolerant of mine, but please, and I realize I'm being a bit of an ass by pointing this out to you so forgive me for it, but please don't be a douchebag about it next time, all right?

I hope to see you around...

Caught Downloading Child Porn? BLAME THE CAT!!!!

2009-08-07T12:21:00.000-07:00

Yeah yeah yeah I know I havent updated in forever AGAIN. However I found something that caught my attention:

MONUMENTAL HUMAN IDIOCY!

Now this has to be one of the most ridiculous things I've seen in a while. This guy is charged with ten counts of child porn and he blames on it his CAT???? HIS CAT???? Good Lord that is the stupidest thing I've heard in a while

Oh it gets better folks

He says the cat jumped on his keyboard while he was downloading music and when he came back he found "strange things" on his computer. Uh huh. Can we say bullshit? I think we can.

I think I should make a monthly award or something. Let's call it the "Proof of Humanity's Stupidity" award, and I'll award it to this guy for the month of August. I'll post again tommorow, I promise!

Some Really Odd Interpretation of Watchmen

2009-03-12T17:51:00.000-07:00

Hey folks I know I know I haven’t blogged in a while. Been surviving the York Strike, finishing up Latin, and doing a very big research paper on the relationship between Canaanite and Israelite Religion in the Hebrew Bible.

But I thought I’d take a break and post something I found while bumming around on YouTube. You’ve no doubt become aware of the film adaptation of Alan Moore’s excellent graphic novel Watchmen. I having read the GN and seen the film, thought it was a marvellous adaption into the film medium and while by no means perfect, thought it stood out as a bang up job by all accounts!

BUT!!!

Back to that thing I found. Some bugger on YouTube has this really weird page full of occult symbolism and its connection to the GN of Watchmen:

Occult Nutjob Interprets the Watchmen!!!

The Moloch one is interesting. I find it really amusing how he uses the Bull idol to represent Moloch here- an icon that was identified with the Canaanite deities El and Baal (a little aside to the paper I’m doing- God will it never let me go???) I think he’s honestly pulling this stuff out of his ass, and although Alan Moore is a self professed user of Magick (and known worshipper of everyone's favourite socket puppet deity Glycon!), a lot of these “connections” seem a hell of a stretch. And I have no bloody idea what he’s even talking about at the end with Sept. 11th, but he seems crazy to me. I will however agree with him that Rorschach is the most moral person in the GN, but then again Rorschach is also INSANE.

Anyways have a look at it and hope you find it as amusing as I did. I’m going to try and make an effort, honestly this time, to update at least once a week, probably on the weekends. Till next time ye lot!

-Nagoda

I can has LOLCat Bible!

2008-09-15T19:45:00.000-07:00

Holy crap! Its real! and hillarious!

LOLCat Bible!

i cant believe someone actually made this

yes...

and in case any of you are interested, heres how you say LOLCat in latin

Cachinnare Magne Feles (Laughing Loudly Cat)

thats it

now enjoy the awesome that is above.

An sum wierd d00dz calld Nephilim wer in teh urths in dose dais to scroos teh Creationists, An also aftr dat, when teh sons ov Ceiling Cat An dawters ov men did PENIS GOES WHERE?! but still no buttsecks, An they begats kidz. An teh kidz were badass powrful liek superman An wonder woman An all teh avatars in WoW, An dey wer all famous An stuf.

Gen. 6:4

-Nagoda

Allram Eest: Why the hell is Malmsteen on a Children's Swedish puppet show

2008-08-26T15:46:00.000-07:00

Malmsteen with Bizarre Swedish Muppets (part 1)

Part 2

I found this very randomly today. It's amazing what things you can find on youtube. right now im supposed to be sending a form off to one of my profs for an independant study course, but i thought id post this... bizarre stuff first. First off, let me say that I think Malmsteen is in fact a complete hack of a guitarist. He solos all the time, barely plays any chords, is all flash and gets really fucking repetitive and boring. blackmore could kick the man's ass without a shadow of a doubt. Did I also mention that he's apparently a dick in real life? anyways...

Allram Eest is something of a strange... children's... talk show I guess from sweden. The bizarre bearded creature is Allram Eest who apparently has had multiple incarnations in sweden and is quite popular with the kiddies. from the bad translation of the swedish wikipedia article i googled, he is quite rude and apparently obbsessed with the 70s. amongst his strange cast is the random muppet that gets randomly shocked beside an old man (i swear without proper context i keep thinking the two are lovers). theres also the two strange creatures... who control the tv studio for some reason. does anyone even know what the hell these things even are? wookie rejects maybe from the muppets? as to why malmsteen agreed to come on the show i have no idea but the results are highly amusing. aside from doing his regular neo-classical shred bit, Allram attempts to have a guitar battle with him (he plays horribly- i mean the thing has no fingers) only to find that his washburn axe is unplugged the entire time. he then, arrogantly i guess, has the camera men put the camera on him while malmsteen shreds to make it look like he's the one who's soloing. he also happens to appear to have a massive seizure while trying to air guitar, which is funny as shit to watch.

my only conclusion is that malmsteen either hates himself or life this much to be on this very bizarre show. if i find more of this shit on youtube, you bet im commenting. now... to the course work...

-Nagoda

You Tube and Random Funness!

2008-04-08T15:06:00.001-07:00

WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

MY CLASSES ARE ALL DONE YE BUGGERS!

AND THEY'VE BEEN DONE FOR MONTHS!

MEANS I BEEN A LAZY SON OF A BITCH I KNOW!

Means I got time to blog again!!

and no theology today I promise just good old random silly fun!

FIRST UP!

CHILDREN PLAYING IRON MAIDEN!

Yay for these little guys and the one teeny bopper dude! these kids rock, minus the vox (vox est malum!), especially tiny little metal girl, you crack me up!

NEXT UP (for all your cute needs)

MOUNTAINS AND MOUNTAINS OF CUTE CUDDLY ANIMALS!!!!

cute overload is possibly the most adorable thing on the internet. cure for ultimate depression, i swear!

FINALLY (because this is just funny)

SACRILICIOUSNESS!!!

OK SO I LIED! this one sort of relates to theology! is sacrilige but man is it ever funny! Host Barn for life, yo!!!!!

oH GODS.... i am dying from heat exhaustion currently (i was dragging 30 books in the middle of the sweltering heat on yonge street today, attempting to sell them. am i insane? YES I AM!!!!!) and need to go rest... later y'all

-Nagoda

Van Impe Watch: The Bible Predicts the Creation of Mutant Cow People

2008-02-05T15:14:00.000-08:00

Yo!

I haven't blogged much I know, I've been busy with school work and I got a book report due in two days. so i'll keep this brief but hillarious

i was watching van impe for the first time in over a month and even though i came in the middle, I'm glad I didn't miss it!

Two interesting things:

the new offer of the week: the Van Impes are now thinking that Decemember 21st, 2012, that crazy date predicted as the end of the by those wacky Mayans, may relate somehow to the second coming. To this extent they've now released a wacky fun filled video as their offer of the week! If i ever get enough funds, I may order it and write a review.

Perhaps the wierdest thing I've seen in a while: finally a return to interesting madness from Jack was his schpeel on how scientists are mixing cows genes with humans and may create hybrids. Van Impe denounced this (as do I cause the idea of Cow People is just messed) and went to the Bible to show that yes, in these times, the Bible does predict the evils of science and the creation of Mutant Cow People in the latter days. Needless to say I was amused for the first time in months.

Finally Jack and Rexella have returned to form. Keep it up guys and make me laugh harder this week! We need more crazy!

-Nagoda

Progressive and Catholic Part 2

2007-11-26T19:44:00.000-08:00

Perhaps I should make this some sort of series? hehe

Its been a bit since I blogged. God called my Grandma home recently and I'm very happy for her even though its been hard, she's with papa now after all.

I thought I'd do a follow up post on being Progressive and Catholic.

I've been informed by my priest, Fr. Roger, a very kind and understanding man (who's very understanding to us libs, even though he disagrees sometimes) that my views on infallibility, church authority and even womens ordination because i submit to the church arent heretical. I'm what you call heterodox. I think my goal is to call for reform and change in the church without polarizing my self and fight for dialogue for people like Fr. Kung who are polarized. Dialogue is so important here!

It turns out ive had to modify my stance on abortion. the scenario of the baby killing the mom in preganacy is completely preventable nowadays thats not a concern to us folks over here in first and second world countries, but what do you do in the case of the third world where medical treatment isnt available to the majority of the populace?

i have to think on this

The church also supports indirect abortion (where abortion happens as a side effect, say if the mother gets cancer in her womb and the baby will die anyways, radiiation therapy is necessary but it can kill the child) which im glad to hear of.

im becoming more pro-life but i certainly dont like the activists on both sides of the debate, nor would i take part in a protest. what do you do about the third world though... women are still mutilating themselves in order to abort children in these countries.... its disturbing

I think the social stigma of condemning pregancy out of wedlock should be fought. all pressure should be taken off the woman and every resource should be made available to make sure she has the child safely. we are not doing enough. the pro life movement spends more time bitching at politicians and going to protests than it does for putting practical solutions in place so that abortion can be avoided.

ive also been thinking, since im opposed to active euthanasia (im all in favor of passive), could we as catholics be opposed to active euthanasia for animals? whats to stop us from mercy killing a human being if we can do it to dogs and cats etc? Why should the right to life be reserved to just humans?

I understand that humans are apart from creation because on faith we believe we have a soul and are created in the image of God. However, just because we are above the animals because we are a special creation does not mean we deny them the right to life. They are God's precious creation! Eating meat to survive is one thing, but killing an animal cause you don't think it's usueful anymore cause its in so much pain? I think that's what it comes down to. I don't think we should treat creation as if it were expendable. when we eat meat we should treat the animal with revernce and oppose the horrific practiices of the meat industry! We should fight for the right to life for all animals and give a voice to voiceless. Isnt this what the pro life movment has been saying for the unborn?

In regards to infallibility (because we have a new reader, cheezer1, and hed like me to clarify):

The Pope is repeating an infallible statement made by god on an issue of faith or morals. Because God who is infallible says the statement, than by repitition what the pope says is also infallible because God said it first. The man himself is a sinner and fallible.

This relates to infallible dogmas and even the ordinary teachings of the church can be infallible (like saying Christ is God for instance) or when the Bishops all come together in Councils and make dogmatic statements (anathemas however can be lifted and are not in and of themselves infallible, otherwise how could they be removed?)

Remeber this relates to Dogmatic statements of faith and morals which can't change

HOWEVER

The interpretation of said infallible dogmas does change, even a full 180 degree shift (we see this in history with Vat 2 where Athiests and Muslims can be saved as part of the Mystical Body of Christ and the Mystical Church, a very liberal interpretation of the infallible dogma of no salvation outside the Church. This is a complete shift from the stance that the Church once took back in the day that the Orthodox were damned to hell and only Roman Catholics could be saved) is possible

there fore it is possible for an interpretation of a dogma to be in error ONLY because it is incomplete. for whatever brief period of time the clergy screws up on interpretation, the Holy Spirit over time will lead the church to the complete interpretation in the end. its all about listening folks. if that werent true, the gates of Hell would prevail. But Jesus made a promise to Peter did he not? so i guess it aint happening. we must always trust in the Spirit (who ive found out recently can be viewed as God's feminine aspect! It's a "woman" guiding a bunch of men! YAY!).

However, the very few ex cathedra statements that have been made by popes (i think its like what 3 or 4? something small) over the centuries are the final revelation by the HS. the popes are dead sure after centuries of being guided that this is the final piece of the puzzle and therefore when the pope officially speaks ex cathedra, thats it its done no more fixing of interpretation is needed.

so i guess im no longer a heretic but a good, loyally critical heterodox faithful progressive catholic

PS: Ive been looking into amazing catholic viewpoints on the defense of theistic evolution. i want to read kung's new book on that and the readings of this brilliant Jesuit priest from the 30s named Fr. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin! More on that later!

-Nagoda

Progressive and Catholic

2007-11-04T18:32:00.000-08:00

It's been a long time since i blogged

yeah yeah i know, i've been lazy

been real busy though what with studying latin and islam and the new testament
i got to see rush live with my buddy daniel and that was a real treat. also, its a rough time for me cause the Lord is calling Grandma home. i just hope she finds peace at the end, i ask you lot to pray for her if you can.

but this isnt what my post is on. ive seen a lot of opposition within catholic communities to people on my side of things, "the progressive/liberal catholics". now there are those of us who are left of center, moderate liberals and then you get what the conservatives call the super liberals. its the super liberals and even the moderate liberals who get labeled as heretics. in some cases i would definitely classify some liberals as heretics (there is a point where i think liberalism goes so far that it isnt catholic any more- you know, the folks who think that christ is just a myth and so on).

so, what is the difference between super libs and mod libs? mod libs, like myself, tend to remain conservative in some areas and radical in others while super libs are generally very radical. what is common in both cases is we are heretics on one or two counts (or perhaps more) in thats some of our views are at odds with the current official church teaching. they may not, however, if given a strong enough case, be ehretical in regards to church history or scripture. i will give some examples from my own beliefs and those of the very famous Catholic super liberal Hans Kung.

My own beliefs

1. Priestly Celibacy- I think this should be dropped entirely as manditory and should instead be an option. this is not heresey, but heterodoxy, because although it is a tradition and my view differs from the official position of the church, the church admits that it is only a guideline and can change.

2. Church Authority- I believe that the Church should not be a political or spiritual heirarchy from the top down but rather a community where all members, clergy and laity, are equal to one another. that means i would be equal to the pope, although he would have authority and a leadership position as head of the church (head does not mean above in thsi case, he simply leads with the help of the other members). cardinals bishops priests and popes should not be hierarchical positions that you "climb the ladder" to get to, but rather roles with authority and that are used to serve the laity and above all, Christ. i back this up with the community the apostles formed in acts, with peter as head of the church with leadership authority, but still equal to the other apostles not above them. i deny none of the clergy their authority, but rather i take issue with how that authority has become manifested. i see a serious decline in faith and morals once the church becomes a political insititution and hierarchical throughout history- in other words, many of the fruits that this has born seem to be not of the Spirit and those that are unfortunately outnumbered by the bad fruits, from what I can. I also wish to see a de-centralized church, free of Roman centralism, where the clergy and laity are not seperated from each other but work together in councils and so on and so forth. the cardinals, bishops, priests and Patriarchs (yes I am including the East in here) are all working together as a truly universal, catholic church with the Pope as spiritual head and leader. The Pope is working together humbly with them and being able to take criticism and apply it, making sure all the churches and rites are working together. the roman rite should not have a dictorial, authoritarian rule over the rest of the church but rather work co-operatively with the other rites. it should be noted that it was the problem of roman centralism, views on the pope aside, that caused the major split between the east and the west. it is a position of pride and arrogance and needs to be replaced with an attitude of care and humbleness. this position is heresey and probably leans closer to how the orthodox view things (although, i suspect, not entirely) since the church views itself according to the catechism as a visible hierarchical authority rather than a visible authority within the community of the church that serves christ and his people. dissidents like myself should as not be shunned and swept under the carpet, but rather the church can learn things from us and us from the church. an honest, kind a gentle dialogue should be approached so we can come to an agreement and peaceful co-existence, rather than outright censorship.

3. Women's Ordination- Although I have no problem with ordaining women as priests as a concept, something that is heretical, i admit and submit to the fact that the church has no authority to do this, something that is orthodox. super liberals will not agree with my orthodox side. I also think that roles for women in the church should be promoted, such as the abbess, and even the deaconess should be brought back. in other words the authority that the church does have in regards to womens roles should be exercised and promoted to its fullest extent. more work could be done here i think on the church's behalf.

4. Contraception/Life issues- I conform to the church's teaching except in the case of AIDS or STDS where one or both the husband or wife has them. i believe condoms are permissable in such extreme cases. a study is currently being done in the church on this, we shall see if my position is accepted. i oppose abortion in all cases except where pregancy will kill the mother and all other options have been exhausted and it is used as the ultimate last resort. as far as i know, the church allows for this in extreme cases.

5. Scripture- I embrace fully the historical critical method, and take a very liberal view of scripture (but not to the point where i would deny the historical christ or moses) and accept such theories as the documentary hypothesis. i believe the bible is full of errors, contradictions, historical innacuracies and embellishments but it is infallible and authoritative in the message that god conveys to his people. i differentiate between the lieral and allegorical sense that the catechism speaks of and am fully in line, as far as i know, with vatican 2. this may be more liberal than consevative views of scripture, but the church allows for my views.

6. Papal Infallibility- I believe the Pope to be Infallible when speaking ex cathedra but my wording is different than that of the church. i would say the pope is not exactly infallible, that is a loaded word, but rather that he repeats an infallible revelation made by god. the statement is infallible because it comes from god, not from the pope and the pope is merely repeating what infallible god has already said. this is what the church believes, they just word it differently essentially. I believe the church can make a mistake on fiath and morals, but only cecause over time they have an incomplete understanding of a topic, in other words in the end the holy spirit will preserve the church from error as ehr teaching evolve to their fullest and understanding and the gates of hell shall prevail against her. i do not know what this would be considered.

Kung:

1. Celibacy- Agrees

2. Authority- Agrees

3. Wom. Ordination- disagrees, presses for full womens ordination and believes the church does have the authority to do so. this would be heresey.

4. Contraception- supports contraception, opposes church teaching. this would also be heresey. views on abortion are unknown to me, but i im pretty sure hes opposed.

5. Scripture- Agrees

6. Infallibility- Disagrees, does not believe the Pope to be infallible. this is also heresey.

So the difference between mod. libs and super libs is that super libs are more heretical. thats obvious but I don't dismiss Kung simply because i think some of his views are problematic and go too far. Rather i think murch of what he has to say is good and should be listened to. Liberals in the church should not be pushed away and labeled as heretics (even though on some counts mods like me are) and dismissed. conservative and progressive catholics have much to learn from each other. Fr. Kung is still a priest in good standing and a brilliant theologian in my opinion and i admire his work. if Kung and i are heretical in our views its not because we want it our own way but rather because we care very much and are concerned for our church and feel it to be harming herself. we want change and reform for her benefit, not just our own. the church must always be in constant reform to the Gospels and Scriptures. roman centralism and authoritarianism or celibacy has no place in the scriptures. i wish for catholics to see that even though my views may be political heresey i am not a spiritual heretic. i do not deny god or christ or the pope their authority. neither does Kung, even though he believes the pope to not be able to repeat infallible statements made by God. kung has never denied the existence of christ or god (i am reading his book Eternal Life? and the amount of scripture he uses is very reassuring- he does not believe god or jesus to be a myth)and neither have i.

what i am saying is, a time for dialogue has come between the conservative and progressive sides of the church. The Pope, finally doing something that hasnt angered me, has been meeting with Kung. Dialogue looks to be possible. Let us hope for it. To the conservatives, please give us liberals a chance. we have so much to learn from you and we feel the same about you in regards to us.

let us work together.

i look forward to the day when i no longer have to believe in heresey to be concerned for my church. let's hope it comes soon.

Progressive, Catholic, Faithful and Loyally Critiical and Caring to my Church I remain.

let's begin to dialogue, our future depends on it.

-Nagoda

Van Impe Watch Super Spectacular!

2007-09-02T18:35:00.000-07:00

Hey you lot its been a long time hasn't it?

Yeah I know I'm lazy what can I say?

So I went camping for 10 days a while back, that was awesome. I found... yes wait for it... a Jack Van Impe video in a dollar bin! And no money went towards him! It's called the "Complete Guide to the Future". Now I know yer all probably laughing your asses off at the title and believe me, its ridiculous. You think his show is bad? I want you to imagine THREE Van Impe episodes in one tape! That's right, a FULL 90 MINUTES of bad theology and crazy!

So now I present to you a DOUBLE HEADER Van Impe Watch, a review of this God-Forsaken video and last night's episode, which I watched with my good friend Tony who came all the way from Chatham to see me. See? He likes Van Impe that much! Hehe... he's angry at me now for being silly.

So, without further adue...

THE COMPLETE GUIDE TO THE FUTURE (AKA VAN IMPE'S CRAP FEST)

Right so it's a full ninety minutes of crap. I'm not joking. I want you to imagine Rexella (SHE STILL LOOKS SCARY 10 YEARS AGO DEAR GOD ITS LIKE THAT WOMAN'S FACE IS FROZEN I SWEAR!) asking Jack question about the Rapture for a full hour and a half. You got that in your head? Good, now you know the torture I had to endure watching this thing. Essentially, here's what you learn in this video:

A) Van Impe likes atomic bombs and nukes A LOT. He likes talking about how were all screwed after the Rapture occurs thanks to some sort of nuclear holocaust. I think if Van Impe re-wrote the Old Testament there'd probably be like a bombs somewhere in there maybe a couple thousand nukes and napalm as well...

B) Their pet Cat is disturbing. You look into that thing's eyes and you get the answer to that age old question, "What would Rexella look like if she were a cat?". Now we know...

C) Van Impe likes talking about AIDS and how it points to the Rapture.

D) The Jews are God's Chosen People. You mess with Israel and you get nuked. End of story.

E) The Van Impes visited Israel a few years back and made a video out of it. I don't know how much they offended the Jewish people, but I can only guess...

F) The Chariots of fire that took Elijah up to Heaven are not chariots, but UFOs. And some day the Holy UFOs will all come to take us away at the Rapture.

G) There is now pictorial proof that the New Jerusalem is a pimped out Borg Cube. You don't believe me? Watch the video.

H) (Thanks to Daniel for this one) JESUS WILL STEAL YOUR CHILDREN AT THE END OF TIME!

I had to get through a lot to write this review and folks this is BAD. It got boring at the end I had to struggle just to stay awake. And I was expecting more crazy. I can only imagine how bad the other "Offers of the week" actually are.

GRADE: F- (and I bet you know what the F stands for too...)

LAST NIGHT'S SHOW

Now I was dissapointed because he didn't mention the giant hole they found in space close to Orion. You can read about that here.

I was expecting him to connect it to the entrance to the Thrid Heaven that he keeps on ranting about that's in the Northwest Corner of Orion. But he didn't, so I expect it comes next week. And just to make sure he does, I'm sending him this email to tell him all about it:

Hi Mr. Van Impe

Have you seen the giant hole the scientists recently found that's close to the constellation Orion? Check out the link below. I'm wondering if it's at all related to the entrance to the Third Heaven you keep mentioning?

Now we all know I think the man's a quack, but honestly, if he replies, I will wet myself. Well, I won't, but you get the idea. But, last night did add a new level to his insanity:

ROBOT CLONE OF THE ANTICHRIST!

Yes, you heard me correctly. He was reading how people in Japan are making robots in their own image. So he then takes that verse in Revelation about the Beast making the people worship an image of him and then implies but does not directly state, that the Antichrist will build a robot clone of himself and that humanity will worship it.

The arguement makes no sense. First of all its complete lunacy like everything else he does and secondly, if I were the Antichrist, why would I want folks to worship a robot clone of me? Wouldn't I want them to worship me instead?

His lack of logic is astounding sometimes.

Here's hoping for that email reply...

-Nagoda

Harry Potter and Romans

2007-07-26T11:18:00.000-07:00

No no its not what it sounds like. I'm not connecting the new Harry Potter book to St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans (be fun if you could though eh?). Rather I'm going to be posting my review of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows and then my thoughts as I continue my journey through Romans. Cool? Okay here we go...

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Review (SPOILERS ABOUND YE'VE BEEN WARNED!)

Thankyou Ms. Rowling for what is possibly the best book in the series. Actually wait no it is. Well written, great character development and one satisfying ending.

THE GOOD

Everything. Honestly the three people I did not expect to die died (that is, Hedwig (YES SHE KILLED THE OWL I KNOW!), Mad Eye Moody and Dobby the loveable house elf who is given a hero's death) and sweet God does Voldemort pull some heavy shit. For one thing he takes over the Ministry of Magic and basically becomes Wizard Hitler. For another his Muggle Registration Committee sends chills up my spine and reminds me of some of the things the Nazis did to the Jews during WW2. This book isn't for kids and I don't think anything since book three has been for kids. This book, as Rowling dedicates it to, is for those of us who have stuck with harry since the beginning. More appropriately I think its for the adults and older teens who read the series.

Now, getting back on track...

Voldemort is finally given the leg room he deserves. Pulling some really creepy shit along the way. Case in point, remember Nangini, his damn pet serpent? Right well apparently Nangini is disguised as an old woman, and in one of the darkest moments in the series (rivaling in my opinion, Voldy's return at the end of book four) the corpse of the old woman crumples away as it BECOMES NANGINI! So cool! Um what else...

Right so the whole point is for Harry to destroy Voldemort's Horcruxes, that is those objects that contain bits of his soul. Along the way Harry and co. quest for something known as the Deathly Hallows, three objects that will make the possessor the Master of Death. But where the book gets real interesting is Dumbledore's (and Snape's) character development. There are so many things in Dumbledore's past which make you question whether he is the saint he's portrayed to be in the past books. Actually near the end when you find out the whole purpose of what he's been doing with Harry (and that I won't reveal here) I called him a bastard to his face.

Such awesome character development (that end bit I mentioned is a real shocker) and a surprise about Aunt Petunia's past along the way. Also, there IS more to Snape than meets the eye...

Now the question many of you will be asking is, does Harry die?

I won't answer that but I will say that he IS killed. Whether or not he actually dies is up for you to find out and read. The ending also ends as it should with the characters all wrapped up.

In the end, Rowling has given the series the best ending it could get. Do I want it to continue? No. It's done and I'm happy. Leave a good thing be.

THE BAD

None.

THE UGLY

Also nothing.

IN THE END?

This book is awesome go read the others if you haven't already and if you have, READ THIS BOOK!

Nagoda's Journey Through Romans

Right so as you lot all know I've been reading Romans, reconciling God's Anger and Discipline (Wrath) with His Love. See my previous post for those thoughts. Anyways I'm done chapter 6 and I'm now finding it to be really encouraging. I like the idea of being alive in the righteousness of Christ. Makes you feel whole ya know? Anyways, ive been thinking about how the righteousness is infused into you. You now it says that it leads to sanctification, being made holy. So my guess is that the sacrifice of christ, the body and blood, its infused into you and grace and righteouness that comes from it changes you and infuses into you and makes you holy. I mean look at John 6: jesus says that we can't have eternal life unless we eat his felsh and blood? What does this mean? Quite simply, the eucharist dwells within us and changes us.

St Paul talks about how we die and get crucified with christ and how we are ressurected with him. Christ's ressurection, gives us new life but here's the real kicker: if jesus is correct in his own words in John 6 then the blood of christ flows in me every time I take a fully consecrated Eucharist as a Catholic (or the same thing if you're Orthodox). The blood of christ must dwell within me, and I dwell in him. This is a union, no, wait for it, it's a COMMUNION!

You see? The righteousness of Christ cannot merely be imputed. Why? While imputation might be a nice starting point, it is not enough. Jesus's own words in the original Koine Greek at the Last Supper are mistranslated as "Do this in rememberance of me". It should read, according to my priest Fr. Frank who has his doctorate in theology and knows his dead languages like the back of his hand, "Do this as my Memoriam". A Memoriam in the Ancient Near Eastern context, was a sacrifice that was re-presented to the deity. In the context of Eucharist (which is a transformed Passover meal, the lamb had to be sacrificed to God, the lamb here IS Jesus so there for the MUST be a Real Presence, it must be his body and blood literally at the Mass in order for the proper context to be satisfied) it becoems a Communion, a way in which we have contact and Unity with God. God desires to be with us, in communion with us, because He loves and cares for us!

You see the blood does more than just give new life, in Judaism the blood of the sacrifical lamb PHYSICALLY protected you from the infinite all powerful presence of God because of your sinful fallen nature as a human! The blood is therefore necessary because it is a way in which God protects us while in Communion with us so we can experience him. This is why the body and blood must be consumed so we are protected for our benefit in order so that God and humanity are in communion with one another. And thus, the sacrifice of Christ is infused into us and trasnforms us, the righteousness is infused into us, not merely imputed.

How can we merely be covered? If we are covered that means that we are still sinful underneath. But sin cannot be in the presence of Holy God. There must only be Goodness in the highest sense. God can see through a cover up, he would KNOW and thus we would be annhilated in His presence due to an incompatibility with His Holiness. But this is not the case. This is why the sacrifice of Christ must be eaten and drunk at Communion so that the righteouness, the GRACE of that sacrifice can be infused into us and transform us. We become SANCTIFIED. WE are are made HOLY and thus the righteousness of Christ when infused, that great Work of Christ when infused into us, transforms us slowly in this life and then finally through act of Purification (which is known as Purgatory) in the afterlife we are made Holy, transformed into our Pre-Fallen states as the first humans were with God in the beginning: Holy, Good, Perfect and Innocent and Blameless.

God does all of this because He loves us and wants us to be reconciled to Him, he wants us to be free of Sin and no imputation, no mere cover up job, can do that! Only God can transform us if we let him! That's why we can't boast of our works, like St. Paul says, because they're not ours! Our active faith, the faith made alive by the Works of God and not of Man, faith energized by God's Grace and His Sacraments, saves us and it is by the Greatest Work of Christ, His Sacrifice of his Body and Blood, that we are transformed during Communion and throughout our lives! God does not want us to be annhilated in His presence he wants us to be with Him in Unity and to be Happy! Truly Happy! So we are infused and sanctified with His Grace and his Righteouness!

We are made Holy so we can participate in His Divine Nature and be in Union with it! If God did not truly love us then he would let the sacrifice be imputed to us and all of us annhilated in his presence due to a poor cover up job. But our God is not Evil, he isn't cruel! He's Daddy! Our God isn't just a Loving God, HE IS AGAPE! And because of this he sent his Son to die for us so that we might be in Union with him in the Sacrament of Holy Eucharist and eventually in His full, infinite presence in Heaven.

One cannot seperate the Sacrifice of the Cross with Sacrifice of the Mass.

They are one in the same.

Thank you Jesus.

-Nagoda

God Forgive Me

2007-07-11T17:06:00.000-07:00

Lord God forgive me for my anger in the previous post. I reacted too harshly. Although I wish for my Bishop to be humble, I also should be humble. Some times, my Liberal ideologies get in the way. Please reform those things that need to be reformed, that is, what you want reformed, not I.

If the Mother of God is Co-Mediatrix, reveal it to me in the Scriptures, show me the basis and foundation for it if it exists. Lord God give my Church humbleness and not arrogance, bring the East and West together and may the Bishop of Rome be humble in his decisions.

I pray that the Mass will be understood and not forgotten. I am confused, Adonai, at my Bishop's issuing of this document and I am dissapointed with what he has done, but if I am wrong, help me to see it. Sometimes I can be very wrong. Kill the anger in my heart. It should not be there.

Above all, I ask your forgivness Adonai and I want to say this:

There is no God but Yahweh Sabaoth
And Yeshua Meshiach is His Son

Forgive me God, for I know not what I do.

Amen

My Bishop is being stupid, Return of the Tridentine and Our Lady of Mount Carmel

2007-07-11T11:01:00.000-07:00

By Bishop I mean the Bishop of Rome, Pope Benedict XVI. He released a document (with no reason as to why) on tuesday that essentially says that the Catholic Church is the only true Church and that the Protestants don't have real Churches and that the Orthodox, although in close bonds and considered valid churches due to apostolic succession, are wounded because they don't acknowledge the primacy of the papacy.

Read the news report here.

Pope= douchebag

Way to go Ratzinger, you idiot.

Yeah I know that's harsh of me and yeah I'm a devout Catholic, and yeah I'll agree with the Pope that the Catholic Church has the full means to salvation and that it is the true Church of Christ in the sense that it is the Original Church founded by Jesus, but saying the Protestants aren't real Churches? Please, they may not have everything but they have a lot of good things. It may not be ideal in my eyes, but they are Churches nonetheless, albeit not in full communion with Rome. Also, he signed the document on a feast day for ecumenism?

Benedict, are you stupid?

Seriously?

And what's with bashing my Orthodox bretheren? They're valid and part of the Original True Church of Christ! Oh they don't accept the primacy of the Pope so what? Suck it up. The fact of the matter is that yes fine, Jesus appointed Peter to lead the Church and yes that would mean the Bishop of Rome is in a leadership position. But look ar Acts, Peter was a humble guy. In the early church all the Bishops worked together. Do I see this happening now? No, I see the Bishop of Rome being an arrogant douche trying to assert power over everyone else. The founder and head of the Church, Jesus Christ, not the freakin Pope, said that the first shall be last and the last shall be first.

Benedict you better damn well humble yourself and smarten up.

I mean you're trying to hijack Vatican II for God's sake! You're trying to turn it into a conservative agenda when it was not. It was a Liberal thing. You had liberal theologians heading it and you had a liberal pope, John the 23rd, at the center of it. It was organised largely by Liberals. Suck it up and stop trying to hijack it for your own conservative agenda and accept it for what it was. Please don't try to turn it into something it's not. This is a huge step backwards to the work of ecumenism put forward by Vatican II and a slap in the face! Going around shouting "I'm in charge, I'm in charge, you all suck! I rock!" gets you nowhere.

Related to the Vatican II hijacking is the fact that the Pope lifted restricions on the Tridentine Mass. This is the Mass in Latin. There's a reason we had it in the vernacular: so that people could understand what the hell was going on. Although i think that lifting SOME restrictions might be ok, lifting all of them is not good. Only a handful of Priests know how to say the Tridentine. This will be hell if anything I think and if we go back into full Latin Mass Mode, well people might once again not udnerstand whats going on and we're back to being in the dark.

I think it's safe to say that the Pope is trying to bring the Church a few steps backwards. This is not good. What we need is progress, not regression and we need reform! I think it's time for a Vatican III my friends.

For reasons why we might need a reform, I now turn your attention to an erroneous (in my opinion) tradition that would worry the hell out of my Protestant bretheren and me.

Our Lady of Mt Carmel is a Marian tradition that's been around since the middle ages. The Carmelite order of Nuns is a result of this. This upcoming Sunday is in fact the OLMC feast day. But here's the creepy: this dude St. Simon Stock apparently gets an appirition from Mary who tells him if he wears a Scapular (its a piece of cloth thing) dedicated to her he will be protected and if he prays to Mary, especially on a Saturday (cause apparently all of this happened on a Saturday), he will be saved. There are people who believe this and its seen as a valid tradition within the Church.

What a load of Bullshit. Yes, with a capital B.

Mary can't save you. Praying to Mary can't save you. Now perhaps asking Mary to ask Jesus to save you might work, but why would you? Why can't you just pray to the Man Himself for your salvation?

Jesus is the only way to salvation, only he can save. No Sacpular can save you, dear God that sounds like a magic charm or something. It sounds completely superstitious to me.

The Church teaches you must do three things to be saved by God's grace:

Believe in Jesus Christ and that he died for your sins and accept his Atonement for your sins.

Repent for your sins and accept the frogiveness that God is offering you through Confession (or if you're not Baptized yet you can ask God to forgive you and then go to Confession after your Baptism)

Be Baptized.

I'll say that again: Believe, Repent and Be Baptized.

Praying to Mary is nowehere near any of that stuff. Honestly I read the messages of some of these so called appiritions and it sets my hair on edge. I don't think they're real. They all try to undermine the Authority of Christ. Calling Mary a mediator with a small m isn't a problem if you understand that she mediates, intercedes and prays for you just like your other Christian buddies or the Saints do. But the title of Co-Mediatrix supposedly revealed at Fatima is sketchy to me. Real sketchy.

Let's get this straight folks:

Mary is the Mother God. Great Honour is due to her because of this. She is an Intercessor like the Saints, she was Assumed into Heaven and she is Queen of Heaven. All of this can be argued on a biblical basis if you do a connect the dots job (it's called what we believe, aka Dogma. Dogma, although not FOUND in the Bible, can be argued from the Bible if you use your logic and reasoning facilities that God gave you).

But saying that praying to her or wearing a Scapular will give you salvation? No I'm sorry that's completely false. It's this false pretense of Works Salvation that was being erroneously practiced that pissed the fuck out of Martin Luther and it's in contradiction with what the Church officially believes and teaches.

Jesus Christ is the only way to Heaven. I don't know the thousands of ways His Sacrifice might be able to save in any given situation, but all I know is that it does save. Our God is a God of Mircales.

Why are these erroneous traditions that are obviously in contradiction with what the Church teaches still around? Scripture, Tradition and the Teaching of the Church, the three pillars of Authority in the Church, must work together! They CANNOT contradict one another!

Some of these traditions must go. Someone needs to start taking the trash out.

This is bad, old baggage that's still around.

We need reform people.

We need Vatican III.

I'll say it again: Jesus Christ is the ONLY way to get to Heaven. If a Christian, a Jew, a Muslim, a Hindu or an Athiest is to be saved, it is by Him and ONLY Him.

Now where's the clean up crew?

-Nagoda

Some thoughts on God's Wrath

2007-07-03T14:48:00.000-07:00

Bet you didn't see that one coming.

Yeah I know I don't like talking about this topic, a lot of Christians don't. It's probably because the portrayal of God in the old testament is extremely disturbing to a lot of people, myself included. I mean let's face it, taken literally, the portrayal of God in the OT paints him out to be a contradictory, possibly schizophrenic, violent, bloodthirsty (in more than one sense of the word), genocidal, egotistical, maniacal, racist, sexist, possibly homophobic, tyrannical bigot.

Thank God I am a not a literalist.

None the less the subject of God's Wrath is one that is touched upon many a time. Even my Catholic Bible says that in the commentary God's Wrath does not contradict God's love. The question then becomes what the hell IS God's Wrath and how is it compatible with his Love?

The answer I think, oddly enough, lies in the commentary of the NAB Catholic Bible for Romans. Yes, I've been reading Romans which is what got me to revisit the topic.

The commentary for Romans 1:18 is as follows:

[18] The wrath of God: God's reaction to human sinfulness, an Old Testament phrase that expresses the irreconcilable opposition between God and evil (see Isaiah 9:11, 16, 18, 20; 10:4; 30:27). It is not contrary to God's universal love for his creatures, but condemns Israel's turning aside from the covenant obligations. Hosea depicts Yahweh as suffering intensely at the thought of having to punish Israel (Hosea 11:8-9). God's wrath was to be poured forth especially on the "Day of Yahweh" and thus took on an eschatological connotation (see Zephaniah 1:15).

God CANNOT and I mean CANNOT be in the presence of evil (at least in His pure, infinite form, why do you think he sent Himself down as a man in order to help us out? It's a Veil, kind of like the Veil in the Temple that protected the High priest from God, or like how God takes on the form of a burning bush with Moses). Evil can't withstand God's pure Goodness because God's just that Good, so really the two cancel each other out or rather God cancels the evil out cause he's unkillable. So with that in mind, if God is the ultimate Good then he wants what's best for us which would be technically Him. Now I don't think God is an egoist going around saying "Worship Me cause I'm the best" he looks at it like a parent or a servant and says "I want to serve you and love you and want what's best for you and want you to be truly, purely happy and not for you to shortchange yourself". Yes, I said servant folks. Jesus Himself, who was God Almighty in the Flesh said that the Son of Man had come to be the servant of all. That means God came to serve humanity by dying for us and taking care of our well being like any good parent would for their own children.

Now, how does all of this relate to sin and the Wrath of God? Well first of all, I think Wrath is a bad word to use, a closer term that would serve as being more accurate would be God's anger, concern (I'll get to that in a moment), dissapointment or outrage. Wrath implies violence for a lot of us. It would be apt to use it if we were describing the portrayal of the OT God (Paul in Romans is writing to an audience who may (I havent finished it so I don't entirely know for sure) be Jewish Christians or at the very least are familiar with the Jewish interpretation and tradition in Scripture. His use of Wrath is very fitting for the context they understand the Scriptures in) however the OT God is an incomplete and mish mashed portrayal of who God is. That's why we got Jesus who gives us a full picture of how we as humans can understand God.

Now I know some of you are saying right about now "oh the Liberal's being a wishy washy, non-Biblical, pussy of a Christian". I'd like to say that I am not trying to make God out to be a cute and cuddly puppy dog. Most of you forget that puppy dogs bite and get angry a lot of the time. That was kind of a joke, but there you have it.

At any rate the depiction of God in Hosea as suffering immensely over punishing Israel is an extremely good one to use. Think of it this way: parents do not like punishing their kids, let's be honest. Neither does God. Think of God's Wrath as your folks, telling you when you were a teen, "YOU DID WHAT?! HOW COULD YOU?!" and then grounding you for a good month. What's more when your parents get angry they get angry becuase they are concerned for your well being over what you did. They don't want you to shortchange yourself. The same goes with God, He wants what's best for you, he wants you to be happy, so every time you sin you shortchange yourself in regards to happiness and God goes, "Why? How could you do that to yourself? I want you to be happy...". God is angry, and he is concerned.

Now I don't think God actually physically punishes people, however, consider the effect of your sins the punishment you bring upon yourself and God does have to allow it to happen due to free will (if you dont want to listen to God no matter how much he tries help you, what the hell can he do, he'd be infringing upon the free will that he himself has and that would make him evil, a bully, a tyrant and then he would cease to be God). Plus if God didn't get concerned for you and outraged and angry over your the seriousness of your actions (there is a difference between mortal and venial sin, I imagine God's reaction MIGHT differ depending on the nature and severity of the sin. Consider it levels of concern/dissapointment/anger), he'd be apathetic with no concern or empathy for anyone. That's as bad as being a tyrant in my opinion.

Now what about God's Wrath as portrayed in the OT? It's too crazy you say? No responsible parent would punish their kids that way? You're absolutely right, but God's portrayal in the OT must be understood as a cultural, historical understanding of it's time. I don't think God did any of the physical punishing, but the people could have understood it as Him doing it and he could have allowed the punishment to happen if the folks didn't want his help or protection. God is painted as incomplete which is why the portrayal is so disturbing. However, the portrayal is useful for two things: it points to complete portrayal of God as seen in Christ and also it can be seen as showing the severity of sin (being seperated from God is LIKE being smote or being struck dead but not that he actually goes and does it).

There's a difference between grounding your kids in concerned, loving dissapointment/anger and beating the SHIT out of your kids with a baseball bat. Therefore, as seen in a more compassionate portrayal in Christ (who also talked a lot about sin and Hell and God being angry, let's not forget, but who also mentioned God's love a lot too), God's Wrath can be understood as a concerned dissapointment/anger/outrage for a child's action because they do not want the child hurting themself (remember God is angry at what you did, NOT you). A punishment or reprimand is used to teach the child a lesson so that they might learn form their consequences and better themselves. Consider the effects of your sin your grounding or your time out. Above all, God is angry and concerned because he loves you and wants what's best for you. He simply says, "How could you? I know you can do better. I want you to do better". It can actually be seen as encouragement to do a better job, in an odd sort of way. Thusly, under this concerned, empathic, emotional and parental context, God simply wants what's best for us and thus his extreme dissapointment in our actions relates back to His Love for us. God doesn't want us to fuck ourselves over. He wants us to be happy. If he didn't get angry or dissapointed or concerned, what kind of parent would He be?

In conclusion, God is severely concerned ("Wrathful") for us becuase sin is a big deal. Our happiness is a big deal to Him. But ultimately, he is concerned for us because above everything else, he loves us.

-Nagoda

34 Things Nagoda Loves About His Church (A Response)

2007-06-22T19:05:00.000-07:00

This is post in in response to the challenge made by my buddy Pastor Paul Martin over at his blog. You can read the original posts here. Paul originally wrote a list of 34 things he loves about the church he pastors (Grace Fellowship Church, a Reformed Baptist Church which I attended for a project for my Christianity in Context class). He then asked his readers to see if they could do the same for their churches and he would tally the results. Well Paul, I accept your challenge, so here goes:

34 Things Nagoda Loves About Holy Angels Roman Catholic Church (1-34):

1. I love how the focus is always on God, whether it be in the readings or the response orial psalm or the consecration. It's all about Him!

2. I love how there is a very solemn and reverent atmosphere the moment you step in.

3. I love how the candles make for a wicked atmpshere (and very calming too).

4. I love how the Scriptures are raised up before the people at the reading of the Gospel.

5. I love how before the Gospel is read, many of us say (or think), "Always on my mind, always on my lips, and forever in my heart".

6. I love how there isn't just adults at my church, but kids and teenagers too. And some of them come with their familes and actually enjoy being there.

7. I love the statues of the Saints, reminding us of the holy men and women of God who have gone before us and set an example.

8. I also love how right beside the statues of the Saints and Mother Mary, there is a statue of our Lord and Saviour.

9. I love how Jesus is in fact that first person you pray to (not the statue, the person!) if you were to actually pray to the Saints and Mary in the order they appear in the church.

10. I love how the Saints and Mary are all at the sides of the church and the first thing you see is a big ressurected Jesus on the cross over the altar the moment you walk in, staring straight at you.

11. I love how God is always present at every Mass I go to.

12. I love the reverence for the Body and Blood of our Lord during consecration.

13. I love how God has moved me to whisper "Thank you Jesus for dying for me and saving me" to Him during Mass and that I just have the urge to cry this out loud along with "Jesus is Lord" during Mass.

14. I love the fact that if that were to happen, slightly disruptive though it may be, Father Peter probably wouldn't mind. In fact, he'd probably smile.

15. I love how the Eucharist IS Jesus's Body and Blood and that He really is present in it during Mass.

16. I love how at the moment of consecration during Mass, at every single Mass I've been to, I have felt God's presence enter the church. I can literally FEEL the consecration as it happens!

17. I love how there have been times after recieving the Lord at Eucharist where after consuming the Body of our Lord, I have felt God's spirit enter into me and dwell within me. The peace and serenity and purity of God is like nothing else on Earth.

18. I love how when God enters into me, it is better than orgasm and beyond good, married sex.

19. I love my pastor, Father Peter, a solid man of God who knows the Word and preaches it so well!

20. I love how Father Peter is so full of happiness and love for the congregation.

21. I love how that I've been to many Catholic Churches and that Father Peter is one of the few priests I've seen preach the Gospel message constantly at Mass. No Catholic gets away from my Church without hearing that Jesus died for them atleast once every two weeks!

22. I love that no matter how close to 7 PM it is when I arrive for evening Mass, even if it's one minute away, Father Peter will always hear my confession!

23. I love that when I have a question for Father Peter, he will always answer me with Scripture and will correct me if I'm wrong on something with Scripture!

24. I love how NO ONE can fall asleep when Father Peter preaches at Mass, his voice fills the Church and makes the Gospel come alive!

25. I love how Father Peter delivers a good, solid, Scripture based sermon!

26. I love how Father Peter's sermons are to the point and don't jump around the bush!

27. I love how Father Peter will crack jokes in the middle of his sermons and make everyone laugh.

28. I love how Father Peter once impersonated televangelists during the middle of his sermon.

29. I love how Father Peter once gave an entire sermon on how kids shouldn't be smoking pot and should instead be focusing on God and going to Church.

30. I love how when he gave that sermon he said, "I see these kids you know, and they are smoking the GRASS" and leaned back and pretended to smoke a reefer.

31. I love the fact that he gave that same sermon to a gym full of 2000 high school kids.

32. I love how he is concerned for my personal well being and cares for me and asks me how my life is going and will offer me advice.

33. I love how he will give me spiritual guidance when I need it.

34. Finally, I love how Father Peter is so full of joy and love for God that he will burst into song at random, praising God!

Well Paul, there you go. I'd like that tally now please.

-Nagoda

Van Impe Watch: Space Alien Satan Movie (Yes I'm not joking)

2007-06-20T10:43:00.000-07:00

You knew it was only a matter of time, but yeah, the offer of the week on Van Impe this week was a Christian science fiction film called Unidentified. Now at first with the whole "Jack Van Impe Presents..." thing at the beginning, I thought he had actually made a crazy sci-fi film. But no, turns out he's like Quentin Tarantino taking all the presentation credit for himself. Anyways, this mess of a film (I knew it was bad as soon as I saw the trailer... my God is the acting horrendous) involves two reporters checking out UFO sightings. Now somehow they're either evangelical Christians or they become Christians along the way with the help of an angry looking old southern man who believes Satan is using the UFOs and this all connects to the Rapture. Remember the first post i made on the new blog about this and the Yacatisma? Yeah, looks like they took Van Impe's theory and made a movie about it.

You can check out this terrible monstrosity (I'm actually thinking of ordering it to see how bad it really is) at http://www.jvim.com

Now I have to get back to work (actual work I have a job for two days) so go have fun kids and see this thing if you dare!

-Nagoda

Grossman's and a Van Impe Watch

2007-06-11T16:15:00.000-07:00

So I was down at Grossy's last night, having a wicked time. Cober was shredding like a mother as usual (and doing some really tricky hammer-on licks that I'll eventually have to steal) and my jam with him was awesome. I'm getting really confident in my playing these days (i was doin some fast shit last night, practice has been paying off nicely, and me octaves are sounding good) and we got to do stormy monday (I'm doing it for my guitar recital in july and i wanted to get a bit of practice in). However my highlight of the night, and i didn't find this out till afterwards when Brian told me who he was, was playing with Tom Stephen, Jeff Healey's drummer! He really enjoyed my playing and even gave me a hug and told me I rocked (he's an awesome guy). Also turns out Brian's partner Diana reads this blog, so I will now say "Hi!" to the both of you and give ye a good ol' "rock on"!

I really wish someone had taken pics of me and Tom. Oh well...

Anyways, VAN IMPE WATCH TIME!

This past week's show (which you can watch for the week beginning wednesday on van impe's site) was all about the Beast (Seven Headed Red Leopard of DOOM!!!!! Go read Revelation its in there!!!!) and 666. Well, Van Impe being his crazy self said that the alphabet when corresponding to numbers that match up with each letter is in intervals of sixes, that the alphabet adds up to 666. Now the the mark will be controlled by computers. How do we know this, asks Van Impe, because the numbers corresponding to the individual letters of the word computer adds up to 666.

WHAT KIND OF FUCKING BULLSHIT IS THAT?!!!

Van Impe, have you become so low that you stoop to groundless, pathetic, jeuvenile conspiracy theory tactics which prove NOTHING?!!! My God...

Like youve done batshit crazy before

But this is just STUPID!!!!

What's worse, look what I found on his website from his Q and A section:

In our Sunday School class at my Presbyterian church, members argued that when we get to Heaven there's nothing in the Bible that mentions returning to Earth. Why won't people today in our churches believe God's Word?
Vaugh Keefer

Oh, Rexella, I received thousands of birthday cards – thank you so much! I heard from Lutheran folks, Missouri Synod, from Roman Catholic priests and nuns, I heard from Nazarenes, Pentecostals, Latter Day Saints and Seventh Day Adventists, all saying that I’ve been helping them spiritually to understand prophecy.

WHY ARE ALL YOU FOLKS LISTENING TO THIS WACKO?!!! Just...

GAAAAHHHHHHH!

Specifically, why are Priests and Nuns from my own Church who are supposed to be well educated, listening to some nut bar concerning prophetic interpretations which are completely out of line with the Church's teaching instead of the Magesterium (teaching office of the Church)?!!!!! Shouldn't you be going to your own rational, scholarly people instead of listening to crazypants-prophet-boy over here?!!!

Oh God my brain hurts. Later everyone...

-Nagoda

An Odd Quote From Jesus in Luke

2007-06-04T11:53:00.000-07:00

Here's a passage that really caught my eye in Luke:

A ruler questioned Him, saying, "Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?"
And Jesus said to him, "Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone.

Luke 18:18-19 (NASB)

Is Jesus actually admitting here that he isn't God? He seems to be offended by the man's comment at first glance. This seems a very strange thing for him to say. However is it possible that he is saying "Why do you call me good?" in a way that would indicate, "If only God is good and you call me good, then perhaps youve caught on to the fact that I'm God"?

This passage is really confusing me. Any help from me fellow bloggers would be appreciated in interpreting this one....

BY THE SACK OF CONSTANTINOPLE, THOSE NEPHILIM ARE REAL!!!!!!

2007-05-28T12:08:00.000-07:00

Yes that's right!

LOOK WHAT I FOUND IN MY INBOX TODAY!

BIG FUCKIN' NEPHILIM!!!!

Now they're not over 5000 feet tall like Enoch says, but HOLY SHIT THOSE BUGGERS ARE BIG!

There be Rephaim in the Earth!

HOLY SHIT!

I'll let you lot stand in awe of those buggers. I'm off to act all nerdy!

-Nagoda

EDIT: I've discovered that these pictures are hoaxes. Bugger. Well, there goes my happy

new ampage, peter popoff and another van impe watch

2007-05-21T13:20:00.000-07:00

New Amp!!!

Yep that's right I got me a new amplifier. Me folks got me a peavey tube amp due to me good grades! 30 watts rms, and made in mississipi, so you know it's one loud muthalovin' piece of awesome!

anyways I saw peter popoff for the frist time on tv. man is that guy phony, with his miracle spring water "yes this miracle spring water is your connection to god and god will send you lots of money if you drink it!". the man also calls himself "god's prophet". not even van impe is that bad! speaking of van impe...

well we all know that old bur bur died this week. I'm talking about Jerry Falwell. I personally did not like Falwell. And although he may have been a crazy, liberal-hating, homophobic corrupt bigot, he's no worse a sinner than the rest of us. he also was saved, a kind man, and even had a good heart and intentions. with that said, I figure god's got a lot of working out to do with him in purgatory before he goes to heaven, but then again who am i to judge?

anyways, van impe had a tribute to him on the show this week. kind of sad really because jerry falwell started van impes crazy ministry back in the 50s. so we can blame falwell for starting van impe up. and it was more of, thankyou falwell for giving us lots of money way back when. really sad.

but here's the real crazy of last week's episode:

according to jack van impe, the bible predicts the creation of airplanes!

WTF!!!!!

apparently its in Isaiah 60:8

let's all turn to that shall we?

we can have ourselves an anti-van impe (hey that rhymes....) bible study

Isaiah 60:8 (New American Standard Bible)

8 Who are these who fly like a cloud
And like the doves to their lattices?

ok so according to my jewish study bible TANAKH commentary:

the verses seem to indicate god ruling israel in the future and not with the messiah

further more the following verses talk about aliens rebuilding the walls of jerusalem and alien kings waiting on them and how god struck israel down and then welcomes them back. cross referencing this verse to Is 49:21 gets the following:

"Then you will say in your heart,
'Who has begotten these for me,
Since I have been bereaved of my children
And am barren, an exile and a wanderer?
And who has reared these?
Behold, I was left alone;
From where did these come?'"

Isaiah 60:8 is a part of a group of writings in the book of Isaiah called Deutero-Isaiah. DI deals with a lot of prophecy concerning the babylonian exile (and so does poor Jeremiah for that matter). considering the above verses and the verses following Isaiah 60:8 about god striking Israel down (the Jews thought God was punishing them and sending them into exile in Babylon) and welcoming them back, I think it would be safe to say that Isaiah 60:8 refers to a time after the exile when God will welcome Israel back to a rebuilt Jerusalem (like doves to their lattices... could be a heavenly image of jerusalem, the doves being Israel returning to their home in the "clouds")and will rule with them.

It most certainly does NOT refer to airplanes!

GET YOUR RESEARCH RIGHT VAN IMPE!!!!

-Nagoda

i need some suggestions

2007-05-07T20:07:00.000-07:00

Hey this is a shout out to all my Christian buddies who read this lunacy that is my blog. I got a confession to make and that's that I have a hard time actually picking up the Bible and reading it (pretty strange coming from a guy who values his scriptures a lot). I find that I'll read a few chapters of a book im working on (right now its Luke) and then I wont pick up the Bible for a another few weeks!!!!! This is a really bad habbit of mine! I was wondering if josher or amac or ryan or anyone else who reads this who's a Christian might be able to think of some things that might entice me to pick up the good book daily and make it permanant habit and break the old one? Any thoughts would be great. Thanks guys.

-Nagoda

An Ecumenical Experiment: Thoughts From The Catholic Side of Things

2007-04-30T19:55:00.000-07:00

This past Sunday, Ryan Lawrence and I participated in what I call an "Ecumenical Experiment": we attended each other's churches for the day. The purpose was to better understand each other's understanding of the Lord's Supper and to experience each other's form of worship. So I attended Ryan's Brethern Church (i think its a baptist offshoot ryan can correct me if im wrong) in the morning (a double service from 930-1230 i had to get up at 7 can you believe it?) and he came with me for 7 pm mass.

The Morning Service at Markham Bible Chapel

So when we sit down at the Church, its a very plain church, not even a cross around, Ryan tells me there's no structure. And there wasn't. Folks just got up, read whatever Bible passages they felt God was moving them to say, or whatever else he wanted them to say or somone would suggest a hymn at random. It was a Gospel centred message and Lord's Supper (completely symbolic, which was emphasized) was done at the end. It was complete anarchy and somehow it worked.

I can only figure that God was keeping the ship together so to speak.

Some interesting things I noticed:

The archetecture of the church was like that of a traditional Catholic Church

They used an actual loaf of bread, much like the Orthodox do.

The loaf was covered with a ceremonial covering, and this sort of reminded me of the covering that is held around the Blessed Sacrament held up by the Priest during Eucharistic Adoration.

The bread and grape juice (i think it was grape juice) were on a seperate table, and i almost mistook it for an altar when I first walked in

On a cool and slightly unnerving note, the scripture readings and themes that were picked at random of Jesus the Good Shephard matched up exactly to the Gospel reading and theme of Mass that night. Funny how God does that.

So there was a break and the second service was basically an hour sermon on faith and the life of OT Joseph (you know, the guy who has a musical about him, not Jesus's human dad).

So we then headed over to Ryan's friends' house, Dave and Gale, a wonderful couple for lunch and hung out for the afetrnoon. There was a Bible study (there's always a Bible study when you're with Bretheren apparently) and lots of good times to be had and I tried to explain the Catholic need for the Priesthood and Confession... I think they understood where I was coming from a little bit, so that was good. Then we left around 530 and headed off to South 'Tobes (for that my friends, is what the cool kids call my neck of the freakin woods these days) for Mass.

Evening Mass at Holy Angels Roman Catholic Church

So we walk in to Holy Angels and the first thing Ryan notices is how different my Church is to his. He wasn't used to the the big cross and the ressurected Jesus and the paintings and statues of the Saints and Jesus and Mary. We sat down, I pointed out to him what everything was (i explained to him in a nurshell what Mass was on the ride up) and then went off to see my buddy Father Peter to give him my host and go for a confession. So after I'm all sqeuaky clean from confession, I told Father that ryan was there, who he was and what we were doing. I then went to say my penance (i prayed in front of the statue of Mary and asked the Mother of God to pray for me to God to ask him to give me grace and strength) and ryan asked me what that was about and i explained. Father Peter then came up to us and gave Ryan a very warm welcome and then Mass started.

Ryan participated as much as he could which i was glad to see and he even got a blessing from Father Peter. After Mass was done he said he understood why I found his service to be anarchic, since mine is so organized and formal. He was pleased to see the scriptures elevated and the heavy scriptural basis for the consecration at Mass. I was very pleased to hear this, since its not every day I have a non-Catholic friend who recognizes this. He enjoyed Father Peter's homily (who doesn't? that man's awesome) and said he was still trying to wrap his head around the congregation presenting the bread and wine to God as a memorial sacrifice (so that they might be transformed into Jesus's body and blood) so he said he'll do some research into the catholic understanding of it. He also asked me to explain about the candles in front of the statues of the saints which I did. And that was pretty much it.

All in all we had an awesome day together and came to a better udnerstanding of each other's poiint of view and I was glad to see Ryan being so open to how I understand things as a Catholic. Ryan, if you want to relate your side of things on your blog you're more than welcome to.

-Nagoda

so THATS how its done

2007-04-21T19:34:00.000-07:00

So I was at Mass tonight, like i usually am on a weekend and during consecration (when the priest asks God to transform the bread and wine into the body and blood of our Lord)I thought: I wonder how God actually does the transubstantiation bit. Like does He have some long, complicated process that defies the laws of physics (He usually does for other things)? Catholics view the Eucharist as a mystery, we don't know how God does it but we take it on faith that He does based on our divinely inspired interpretation of Scripture. As I was thinking this, a small voice whispered into my ear (guess who I figure it was from): He just wills it. And it all made sense! God doesn't have to do any process, any form of magick or whatever, he just WILLS things into existence! The creation myth is a good example of this: God wills with words (aint that awesome for a writer like myself). God could probably will with a single thought or whatever. But the point is, God wills the bread and the wine into the body and blood of Christ because it is done according to His divine will. I mean, do we really need to view Eucharist as such a mystery as Catholics? It sounds pretty simple to me. Some of my Protestant friends cant grasp how the sacrifice fo christ is infinite and made available at every Mass (the answer is is that it is at all points in time- hence the infinite sacrifice- therefore God can will the transubstantiation at any point at any Mass at any time because the Eucharist IS the body and blood of Jesus, the infinite sacrifce of Christ shed once for the remission of sins) but I guess metaphysics like this just seems like child's play to me. Guess I'm too much of a nerd. Whatever. Peace out and whatever else goes with it.

-Nagoda

jack van impe crazy watch

2007-04-15T18:07:00.000-07:00

My friends Jack Van Impe reached a whole new level of crazy this morning at 1230 am. Remember my real old post about him getting his facts wrong about how the new jerusalem would be a freakin' space city? Well he's changed his tune! It will ONLY be a space city for the 1000 year reign of jesus. Anyways in order to get to this crazy pimped out borg cube, we need to reach the third heaven according to Jack. Now how do we get there? Why through the entrance found in the second heaven. And how do we get there? Simple! BY FLYING THROUGH SPACE DURING THE RAPTURE!!!!!! Yes, that's right, we need to get to the constellation ORION and when we fly through it during the Rapture, we'll go to the northwest corner of the constellation which is EXACTLY where the entrance is located (yes i know constellations can't have corners) and we'll get into the third heaven and the borg cube. Oh, God's throne is also 16 billion feet wide.

Watch the full ep next week here!

crazy ep shit

WHAT KIND OF CRAP IS THIS!!!!!

OF ALL THE CRAZY SHIT I'VE SEEN VAN IMPE DO, THIS TOPS IT!!!!!

OH WAIT.... JESUS IS CONNECTED TO THE END OF THE WORLD IN 2012 ON THE MAYAN CALENDAR?!!!!

WTF?!!!!

jesus=mayans?!!!!

MY GOD WILL HIS INSANITY NEVER END?!!!!!

EDIT: My mistake it was the incas... not the mayans...

-Nagoda

Happy Easter! Yeshua is Risen!

2007-04-08T10:27:00.000-07:00

Happy Easter everyone!

Today's the day I celebrate 'cause my best friend in the world Josh/Jesus/Yeshua defied the laws of physics and rose from the grave! I even got to play the lappy at Mass today! Anyways I'm gonna go enjoy the day. And to those of my friends who celebrate this as a non-relgious holiday, enjoy your easter eggs and chocolate.

And just so were keeping score, I believe it is (since the last count over 2000 years ago):

God- 1 Satan- 0

Have a good Easter you guys. Peace!

-Nagoda

Good Friday Prayer

2007-04-06T18:20:00.000-07:00

A prayer in Hebrew and English that I've been saying all week, and posted here for rememberence of what my Saviour did for me on this great day:

Yeshua is Adonai
Yeshua is Bene Elohim
Yeshua is Ba'al
Yeshua is Elohim

There is no God but YHWH
And Yeshua is His Son
God is Good
God is love

I love you God
I love you Yeshua

Thankyou for dying for me
Thankyou for saving my soul
Thankyou for loving me

Yeshua is Adonai

Amen

The Fallen Ones: a Cultural-Historical Analysis of the Nephilim as Demonic Prototypes

2007-03-28T20:05:00.000-07:00

The Fallen Ones: a Cultural-Historical Analysis of the Nephilim as Demonic Prototypes

By: Michael Nagoda

Author’s Note on the use of Diacritical Markings

Certain diacritical markings do not appear for the term "satan" in this paper, while the markings for "nĕpilîm" remain intact, due to an incompatibility with the word processing program that was used at the time this paper was written. The diacritical markings for the name of Mastema found in the quotation for the Book of Jubilees remain intact and look to be the interpretation of R.H. Charles. The name appears in plain text throughout the rest of the paper.

Introduction

The subject of the Nephilim is something that appears only a handful of times in the Hebrew Bible. Despite their lack of prominence in the Hebrew scriptures, I feel that the Nephilim are an important subject to discuss in relation to both Judaism and Christianity. This paper seeks to provide a cultural-historical analysis of the Nephilim throughout the ages, from their origins in ancient Ugarit in the late thirteenth to early twelfth century BCE, to their inclusion in the Maleus Maleficarum in the fifteenth century CE. I will be examining the Nephilim as spiritual entities and not as a part of the theory that puts them in the lineage of Cain and Seth. It is my intention to argue three things: firstly, that the Nephilim are the prototypes for the demons in Christianity. Secondly, that the divine fathers of the Nephilim, the Watchers (The Book of Enoch, 1 En. 7:1-2), are the prototypes for the fallen angel figures of the Christian faith. Finally, I will argue that the leader of the Nephilim in the Book of Jubilees who is known as Mastema (The Apocrypha and Pseudepigraphia of the Old Testament, Jub.10:8) is the prototype for the Lucifer figure in Christianity. My focus is to remain on the Nephilim while using both the Watchers and the figure of Mastema to aid me in my historical analysis of the Nephilim as I show their evolution into the demons of Christianity. Finally, I will show the demons’ complete separation from their "source material" in the fifteenth century CE. I will be drawing on sources outside the Hebrew Bible, including the Christian New Testament, the Book of Enoch, and the Book of Jubilees. With that said, I now wish to turn to the pre-Biblical origins of the Nephilim in the ancient Near East.

Ancient Near Eastern Origins

The word Nephilim (nĕpilîm in Hebrew) comes from the root npl which means "to fall", which seems to be the basis for referring to the Nephilim as "the fallen ones". They are referred to as "giants" in the Pseudepigraphia and the Apocrypha and are later on connected to the Rephaim in the Book of Deuteronomy ("Nephilim"). According to the Book of Enoch, their fathers are the Watchers (The Book of Enoch, 1 En. 7:1-2) who are also known as the Sons of God in the Genesis account of their origin (The Jewish Study Bible, Gen. 6:1-4). The term "Sons of God" has a direct precursor to the term, "Sons/Children of El" in Canaanite mythology. The Sons of El derive direct parentage from the high god El (Hendel 18) and are members of El’s divine assembly (23). The Sons of God are also on God’s divine council (18) and so we can see a precursor to this in the role of the Sons of El.

The Nephilim, since they are connected to the Rephaim in Deuteronomy ("Nephilim"), can be seen as having their origins in the Ugaritic Funerary Text (KTU 1.161). In his book, Cults of the Dead in Ancient Israel and Ugarit, Theodore J. Lewis provides a translation of the Funerary Text as well as his own commentary. The Rephaim (represented here as "heroes") are mentioned in lines 2, 4, 5, 8 and 24 of the Text (Lewis 7-9). Lewis dates this Text to the reign of King Ammurapi III, the last known king of Ugarit. Lewis thinks it likely that his predecessor, Niqmaddu II, has just died and that the funeral liturgy in KTU 1.161 is directed towards him (32). Based on this, and that Ammurapi III is thought to have reigned from 1200-1170 BCE (Liverani 204), we can date KTU 1.161 to around the late thirteenth century, early twelfth century BCE. Lewis indicates that the Funerary Text is a mortuary ritual, designed to indicate how one should interact with the deceased. He feels it is only depicting a part of a more elaborate cult of the dead in ancient Ugarit (Lewis 31). He tells us that the "heroes" (rp) in this text, the long dead, are the previous rulers of the Didanu tribe of Ugarit who have died and joined their ancestors in the underworld. This ritual, according to Lewis, is directed towards them (32). The fact that Lewis identifies the Rephaim (the "heroes") as the long dead ancestral royalty of Ugarit is important because the Nephilim are described as "the heroes of old, the men of renown" in Genesis (The Jewish Study Bible, Gen. 6:4). It would seem then, that the Nephilim have their origins in the late thirteenth century, early twelfth century BCE as long dead royal ancestors, part of an Ugaritic cult of the dead. The Nephilim being identified as "the fallen ones" could be originally referring to the long dead royal ancestors of the Didanu tribe who "fell" or "descended" into the underworld in order to join their predecessors.

The Biblical Context: Gen. 6:1-4

"When men began to increase on earth and daughters were born to them, the
divine beings saw how beautiful the daughters of men were and took wives
from among those that pleased them.— The LORD said, "My breath shall
not abide in man forever, since he too is flesh; let the days allowed him be
one hundred and twenty years."— It was then, and later too, that the Nephilim
appeared on earth — when the divine beings cohabited with the daughters of men,
who bore them offspring. They were the heroes of old, the men of renown."
(The Jewish Study Bible, Gen. 6:1-4)

The dating of the account of the Nephilim in Genesis puts it two or three centuries later than KTU 1.161. Since this account is associated with the J source (Hendel 13), that would place this text in the tenth century BCE, supposedly during the reign of King Solomon (Bandstra 42). The account is very small, so small that we have no more accounts of the heroic deeds of the Nephilim in the Hebrew Bible. The question now becomes what have the Nephilim evolved into since KTU 1.161? The Septuagint translates the Hebrew nĕpilîm into "giants", and there is an indication that most early interpreters understood them in this way too (Hendel 21). The account in Genesis moves from the spirits of the fallen long dead ancestors in KTU 1.161 to a race of giants. As well, "fallen one" in Biblical Hebrew invokes images of a warrior who has fallen in battle (22). The Septuagint also translates the Hebrew phrase "warriors [heroes] of old" into "giants of old" (21). This would seem to indicate that the Nephilim of Gen. 6:1-4 are thought of as gigantic warrior offspring from angel-human marriages who have done great deeds and have fallen in battle. As for the nature of their creation, Gerhard Von Rad seems to think of it as a "demonic invasion" on the world of men (Rad 114). However, I would disagree with Rad’s interpretation in this context because there seems to be no evidence of a demonic spiritual intrusion (the "spirit" in the text refers to God’s spirit). I would instead say that the creation of the Nephilim is partly spiritual in nature. There seems to be no influence of demonic activity in their creation (this is something that we will see comes much later with the Malleus Maleficarum) or that the Nephilim themselves in this context are demonic. I would argue that the Nephilim being demonic in nature is something that comes later in Second Temple traditions and that Rad is probably drawing from these traditions and placing their interpretations on the text of Gen. 6:1-4. Rad’s interpretation is fitting however, because it sets the stage for the later interpretations of the Nephilim as demonic beings, beginning with the Book of Enoch.

The Ethiopic Book of Enoch (1 Enoch)

Since the discovery of Aramaic fragments of chapters 1-36 and 72-108, the Ethiopic Book of Enoch (1 Enoch) can be dated from the first century BCE to as early as the third century BCE. Aramaic fragments of chapters 37-71 have not been found (Sullivan 200). It is also important to note that 1 Enoch influenced many, if not all, of the fallen angel narratives that came after it (201) and that chapters 6-16, known as the Legend of the Watchers (Black 27), contain what is possibly the largest expansion of the account of Genesis 6:1-4. In it, the Sons of God (the divine beings in Gen. 6:1-4), who are named here as the Watchers (The Book of Enoch, 1 En. 7:1-2), make a pact with themselves so that they may go and mate with human women, taking them as their wives (1 En. 6:1-5). The women then bear offspring, giants of three thousand cubits in size who begin to cause excessive amounts of bloodshed and begin to slay mankind (1 En. 7:2-5). Because of this violence caused by the giants, God plans to send a flood down to the earth to annihilate everything on it (1 En. 10:2). One of the leaders of the Watchers, Asael, is to be bound in chains and cast into a pit in the desert of Dudael (1 En. 10:4). After the giants are killed by the flood, the other Watchers are to be cast into "valleys of the earth" until a judgment takes place, after which they are incarcerated in a fiery abyss forever (1 En. 10:11-13). The fate of the Watchers in chapter ten is an account that will influence the later Christian tradition of the fall of the angels. The Watchers act as the prototypes for the fallen angels of the later Christian tradition. Their imprisonment in a fiery abyss mirrors both the myth of the Christian demons being cast into Hell (Jung 33) and a similar fate of the character of Satan at the end of the Book of Revelation (The Jerusalem Bible, Rev. 20:10).

As for the Nephilim, their appearance in chapter fifteen of Enoch is as follows:

"And now the giants, who have been produced from spirits and flesh, shall be
called mighty spirits upon the earth, and on the earth shall be their dwelling-
place. Evil spirits shall come forth from their bodies, for from men they have
come, and from the holy watchers is the beginning of their creation and ‘the
beginning’ of their origins. Evil spirits they shall be called upon the earth.
As for celestial spirits, heaven shall be their dwelling-place: but for
terrestrial spirits, born upon the earth, on the earth shall be their dwelling-
place. But the vicious spirits (issuing) from the giants, the Nephilim —
they inflict harm, they destroy, they attack, they wrestle and dash to the
ground, causing injuries; they eat nothing, but fast and thirst and
produce hallucinations, and they collapse. And these spirits will
rise against the sons of men and women, from whom they
came forth." (1 En. 15:8-12)

It is very important to note that 1 Enoch makes a distinction between the giants in their physical form and the evil spirits that come out of the giants’ bodies and torment humanity, the Nephilim. Here the Nephilim are fully seen as evil spirits, prototypes to the evil demonic spirits of Christianity. The term "the fallen ones" could also be seen as demonic in this context. Matthew Black, in his commentary on 1 Enoch, notes that the early Christian author Lactantius regarded the demons or evil spirits as wicked angels (Black 153). The afflictions caused by the Nephilim are further expounded in the Book of Jubilees (The Apocrypha and Pseudepigraphia of the Old Testament, Jub.10). Before I focus on chapter ten, however, I wish to turn my attention to the fourth and fifth chapters of Jubilees.

The Book of Jubilees

The Book of Jubilees, found at Qumran and dating to the second century BCE, is a midrash on the Book of Genesis. It is very likely that the author was aware of the traditions set down in 1 Enoch. Jub. 4:15 tells how the Watchers were sent to earth to teach men and to bring forth judgement, but that they sinned and transgressed their duties when they had intercourse with the daughters of men (Sullivan 213). Jubilees makes it very clear that the Watchers sinned and "fell", making their status as the first types of fallen angels clearer to the reader than in 1 Enoch. Because of this, Jubilees further solidifies the Watchers as the prototypes for the fallen angels of Christianity. The fate of the Watchers has them bound and cast into the depths of the earth (The Apocrypha and Pseudepigraphia of the Old Testament, Jub. 5:6), much like in 1 En. 10:11-13. Both of these passages will have an effect later on in the development of early Christianity.
In Jub. 10:1-3, we learn that unclean demons are seducing and destroying Noah’s grandchildren. R.H. Charles’s commentary in his translation of Jubilees confirms that these demons are the, "souls of the children of disobedient ‘watchers’" (Charles 27), the Nephilim. Now we see the evolution of the Nephilim into demonic entities made clear within the text, going from the "evil spirits" found in 1 En. 15:8-12 to the "unclean demons" found in Jub. 10:1-3. Along with this interpretation, there is one other detail found in Jub. 10 that will have a major impact on Christianity: the character of Mastema.

Mastema, ha-satan and the Book of Job

"And the chief of the spirits, Mastêmâ, came and said: 'Lord, Creator, let some of
them remain before me, and let them harken to my voice, and do all that I shall
say unto them; for if some of them are not left to me, I shall not be able to execute
the power of my will on the sons of men; for these are for corruption and leading
astray before my judgment, for great is the wickedness of the sons of men.' And
He said: Let the tenth part of them remain before him, and let nine parts descend
into the place of condemnation.' And one of us He commanded that we should
teach Noah all their medicines; for He knew that they would not walk in
uprightness, nor strive in righteousness. And we did according to all His words:
all the malignant evil ones we bound in the place of condemnation and a tenth
part of them we left that they might be subject before Satan on the earth."
(The Apocrypha and Pseudepigraphia of the Old Testament, Jub. 10:7-12)

Jub. 10:7-12 introduces us to the character of Mastema, which means "enmity" ("Satan"), who becomes the chief of the demonic Nephilim spirits. It is interesting to note that Charles also translates Mastema as "Satan". Since Jubilees existed before the advent of Christianity, this cannot refer to the Lucifer figure, but to the concept found in the Hebrew Bible of ha-satan. Ha-satan, which can be translated as "the accuser" or depending on the context, "the adversary", was a figure that made a few appearances in the Hebrew Bible, in Terrestrial or Celestial forms ("Satan"). We are concerned with ha-satan in its Celestial form. Peggy Day, in her book, An Adversary In Heaven, argues that there is potential for more than one Celestial satan (Day 15). Based on this argument, the idea of more than one Celestial accuser or adversary will become important when applied to Mastema and his effect on Christianity. Before I look at that, I wish to turn our attention to the Book of Job in the Hebrew Bible, where I feel we can draw upon a close relationship as well as a comparison between Job’s portrayal of ha-satan and Jubilees’ portrayal of ha-satan found in Mastema.

"One day the divine beings presented themselves before the LORD. The Adversary came along with them to present himself before the LORD. The LORD said to the Adversary, "Where have you been?" The Adversary answered the LORD, "I have been roaming all over the earth." The LORD said to the Adversary, "Have you noticed My servant Job? There is no one like him on earth, a blameless and upright man who fears God and shuns evil. He still keeps his integrity; so you have incited Me against him to destroy him for no good reason." The Adversary answered the LORD, "Skin for skin – all that a man has he will give up for his life. But lay a hand on his bones and his flesh, and he will surely blaspheme You to Your face." So the LORD said to the Adversary, "See, he is in your power; only spare his life." The Adversary departed from the
presence of the LORD and inflicted a severe inflammation on Job from the sole of his foot to the crown of his head." (The Jewish Study Bible, Job 2:1-7)

It is important to note that ha-satan in Job acts as a prosecuting attorney in God’s divine court (Freehof 45). To me, it appears that his goal is to prove Job unjust in God’s eyes, attempting to have Job blaspheme by putting afflictions on him. This is very similar to Mastema’s role as a dispenser of judgement on the unjust, in the sense that Mastema brings judgement upon the wicked and the corrupt in Jub. 10:7-8. Both the Adversary in Job 2:1-7 and Mastema in Jub. 10:7-12 convince God to exercise their judgement on people. The difference between Mastema and the Adversary in Job however, is that although they both execute judgement on good men (Job and Noah and his sons), Mastema executes his judgement on both the wicked and good men, such as Noah. Noah must go so far as to protect himself and his sons from the demonic Nephilim spirits by the use of herbs in Jub. 10:11-14. It is clear then that Mastema does not discriminate in his judgement and that suffering is carried out by the demonic Nephilim under Mastema’s control. It could be argued then that the demonic Nephilim as a source of evil and suffering and Mastema as their leader could be seen as a prototype for Lucifer as the leader of the demons in Christianity and a source of evil and suffering.

The Christian New Testament

The effect of the Nephilim, Mastema and the Watchers on Christianity can first be seen within the Christian New Testament. The letters of Jude and 2 Peter, written around the end of the first century CE to the beginning of the second century CE (Bandstra 509), reference the fate of the Watchers, with both letters referencing Jub. 5:6 (Charles 10) and the letter of Jude referencing 1 En. 15:8-12 (Bandstra 505). This would indicate that the early Christian community was familiar with both the fate of the Watchers and the demonic interpretation of the Nephilim. As for the influence of Mastema, if we take Peggy Day’s theory of there being more than one type of Celestial satan, the Christian figure of Satan could be seen as a combination of two versions of ha-satan. The first version would be that of the Adversary/accuser in Job, with parallels found in Matt. 4 with the temptation of Jesus. Satan, in this passage, is seen as a tempter figure (Beare 107). Just as the Adversary in Job tests Job to see if he will turn away from God, Satan similarly tempts or "tests" Jesus to see if he will deviate from God’s Law as found in the Scriptures (The Jerusalem Bible, Matt. 4).
As for the interpretation of ha-satan found in Mastema, R.H. Charles notes in his introduction to Jubilees that the Christian Satan is the chief of demonic spirits as seen in Mark 3:22, just like Mastema is the chief of the demonic Nephilim spirits in Jub. 10. The demonic Nephilim spirits of Jubilees are disembodied, coming forth from the bodies of the giants and the demons of the New Testament are also found to be disembodied in Matt. 12:43-45 and Luke 11:24-26. The Nephilim are allowed to wreak havoc and chaos on men until Mastema is judged or the Messianic kingdom is set up, mirroring the similar fate of Satan in Rev. 20 (Charles 10). Furthermore, Matthew Black, in his commentary on the Book of Enoch, asks if the unclean Nephilim spirits found in 1 En. 15:8-12 could be the unclean demons or spirits found in the Gospel tradition (Black 153). While there is no evidence to suggest that Mastema and the demonic Nephilim and Satan and the demons are the same, the influence of the Nephilim and Mastema as prototypes can clearly be seen in the Christian Gospels.

The Church Fathers and the Malleus Maleficarum

Justyn Martyr, one of the early Church Fathers and one of the earliest Christian apologists in the second century CE, acknowledged both Gen. 6:1-4 and 1 Enoch in his writings on the Watchers and the Nephilim. He also agrees with the interpretation of the Nephilim as demonic entities, not even bothering to call them giants. There is also evidence from a survey done by J. VanderKam that suggests that the Watcher myth found in 1 Enoch was widespread in Christian circles from the first to fourth centuries CE and that it may have even been substantiated throughout the Roman world (Sullivan 222-223).

Moving ahead to the fifteenth century CE, a final reference to the Nephilim may be found in the famous "witchcraft manual" of the Malleus Maleficarum. Authored by Heinrich Kramer and James Sprenger and most likely published in 1486, the Maleficarum was one of the most important and authoritative volumes on witchcraft of its time (Kramer and Sprenger vii). The third section on the Question of whether, "children can be generated by Incubi and Succubi" find this singular reference to the Nephilim:

"And again in Genesis vi the gloss makes two comments on the words: And the
sons of God saw the daughters of men. First, that by the sons of God are meant
the sons of Seth, and by the daughters of men, the daughters of Cain. Second, that
Giants were created not by some incredible act of men, but by certain devils,
which are shameless towards women. For the Bible says, Giants were upon the
earth." (22-23)

Although this passage marks the Nephilim as part of the lines of Cain and Seth, there are two very important things to note about it. One, that a new tradition has now arisen and has seen the demons in Christianity being cut off from their prototypes in terms of their origin and two, that the Nephilim are now seen as giants, ironically produced by the very beings which they helped to influence and create.

Conclusion

In conclusion, I believe that the Nephilim have had a monumental impact on Christian demonology. They have evolved from the long dead ancestral "fallen ones" of the Ugaritic Funerary Text into the prototypical demonic "fallen ones" found in 1 Enoch and Jubilees. Mastema has in turn influenced the formation of the Lucifer figure in Christianity as the leader of demons and by the fifteenth century CE, the Christian demons have become completely separated from their prototype figures, evolving into separate entities. It would be hard to imagine what the demonology of Christianity might be like if the myths of the Nephilim found in 1 Enoch and Jubilees had not existed, but I suspect that it might have looked very different in comparison to the demonology that exists today. With that said, Christianity owes a great deal to the Nephilim and remains forever indebted to the traditions surrounding them as well as their evolution throughout history as "the fallen ones".

Works Cited

Bandstra, Barry L. Reading the Old Testament: an Introduction to the Hebrew Bible. 3rd ed. Belmont, California: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning, Inc., 2004.

Beare, Francis W., trans. The Gospel According to Matthew. New York, New York: Harper & Row, Inc., 1981.

Black, Matthew. The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch: a New English Edition. Leiden, the Netherlands: E.J. Brill, 1985.

Charles, R.H., ed. The Apocrypha and Pseudipigraphia of the Old Testament. Vol. 2. London, England: Oxford UP, 1913.

Day, Peggy L. An Adversary in Heaven: Satan in the Hebrew Bible. Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars P, 1988.

Freehof, Solomon. Book of Job: a Commentary. New York, New York: Union of American Hebrew Congregations, 1958.

Hamilton, Victor P. "Satan." The Anchor Bible Dictionary. 1st ed. 5 vols. New York, New York: Doubleday, 1992.

Hendel, Ronald. "The Nephilim Were on the Earth: Genesis 6:1-4 and Its Ancient Near Eastern Context." The Fall of the Angels. Ed. Christoph Auffarth and Loren T. Stuckenbruck. Leiden, the

Netherlands: Koninklijke Brill Nv, 2004. 11-34.

Hess, Richard S. "Nephilim." The Anchor Bible Dictionary. 1st ed. 5 vols. New York, New York: Doubleday, 1992.

The Jerusalem Bible. Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1968.

The Jewish Study Bible. New York, New York: Oxford UP, 2004.

Jung, Leo. Fallen Angels in Jewish, Christian and Mohammedian Literature. 2nd ed. New York, New York: Ktav House, Inc., 1974.

Kramer, Heinrich, and James Sprenger. The Malleus Maleficarum. Trans. Montague Summers. 3rd ed. New York, New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1971.

Lewis, Theodore J. Cults of the Dead in Ancient Israel and Ugarit. Atlanta, Georgia: Scholars P, 1989.

Liverani, Mario. International Relations in the Ancient Near East, 1600-1100 BC. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: PALGRAVE, 2001.

Rad, Gerhard V. Genesis: a Commentary. Trans. John H. Marks. 3rd ed. London, England: SCM Pres Ltd, 1972.

Sullivan, Kevin P. Wrestling with Angels: a Study of the Relationship Between Angels and Humans in Ancient Jewish Literature and the New Testament. Leiden, the Netherlands: Koninklijke Brill Nv, 2004.

And a good time was had by all

2007-03-26T20:14:00.000-07:00

So, sunday night Josher, amac and I went down to my usual stomping grounds (for it has now become that) of Grossman's. Johnny Winter didn't show up but I don't care. It was awesome. The Nationals kicked ass and I got to sit in for a good 5-6 songs rockin' some Elmore James and Ray Charles. I even got offered the chance tom play some gigs in a country tribute band a guy's trying to form how cool is that? Plus, this is just a possibility, I may get to appear on Breakfast Television with Brian and his band! I'll keep you guys posted on that. Thanks to my two best buds amac and Josh for hangin' with me, ya made it worth while laddies. Here's some pictures that were taken by Mrs. Carol Cain:

Jammin' with the Nationals and an awesome lady whose

name I don't know! Man she had a wicked set of pipes!

BEHOLD! Awesome perspective shot of the lappy in action!

Your friendly neighbourhood double-slide guitarist (one of them anyways)

My comrades, Josh and amac. Wait... why do they look like vampires... oh crap is there something I don't know about them....

Me and Brian Cober shredding the blues like a bunch of muthas! This is why double slide owns!

That's all for now. Hope you enjoy the pics. Whatever. I'm out.

-Nagoda

What's a Christian to do with the Nephilim?

2007-03-16T12:32:00.000-07:00

As many of you know, I'm doing this insane research paper on the Nephilim which I'm taking a break from today because I'm too stressed out and exhausted from it. This post will act as a precursor of sorts because I will post what is probably my biggest scholarly work to date later on. I'm also really proud of it, something that's usually not common with me and essays. While that one looks at the Nephilim from a scholarly perspective I thought it'd be nice to look at the subject of the Nephilim as believers.

Because, I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but there's a bit of a dilemma involving Christians and the crazy giants.

Let me explain (I will be going outside of Scripture here, it is necessary)

The other day me and Josh and Andrew calculated the height of the Nephilim according to the Book of Enoch. They are supposedly 3000 cubits tall. That makes them 5000 FEET TALL! That's more than a mile high and taller than the freaking CN Tower!

This wouldn't be a problem.... except for the fact that both Jude and 2 Peter make reference to Enoch, in using the fate of the Watchers (The Nephilim's daddys) as an example. This would probably indicate that the early Christians a) knew of Enoch b) believed what it said about the Watchers and the Nephilim.

So what does one do when a text that we believe is divinely inspired makes reference too and believes in a text that we don't hold as divinely inspired (except for the Ethiopian Orthodox Church... but they don't matter here)?

We may have to take the whole thing as a mythological explanation for some tall folks. Yes, yes, I know some of you will be going no no no we must take the Scriptures at their Word but it seems to be the only logical way to get around it.

There are other problems. We know that after the flood as the generations went by, the Nephilim (aka Rephaim) got smaller. Goliath was one of these smaller Nephilim, as were the Caananites at this time.

There are two problems with this.

1) If Enoch is to be believed by the early Christians, that would indicate that the original Nephilim were in fact HUGE. That would mean that for further generations to happen, they would need to rape human females. Notice how the Bible calls them mighty MEN. There is no indication what so ever of female Nephilim, even in Enoch. The problem with this is that at 5000 feet not only would it be impossible for them to rape women, but their penises ALONE would crush several women stone dead. The second problem is that if women were impregnated, how the HELL would a Nephilim be able to grow in a regular human womb?

2) Genesis 6:1-4 talks about how they were created (a story later expanded upon with Enoch): a bunch of Angels come down, marry women and sleep with them and kock them up. 1) Since when did God allow Angels to marry, especially with a race not of their own? 2) How is it even possible for a spritual being to sleep with a physical one? Remember the Angels could appear in physical LIKENESS, but were not of the flesh themselves.

There are 3 possibilities here, from what I can see.

1) The authors of Jude and 2 Peter were in error to use Enoch as an example.

2) Ignore all of the above and take the events literally and have a HUGE suspension of disbelief (or faith, if you want to call it that)

3) The Caananites were probably people 6 to 7 feet high. Remember, folks were smaller in those days and so the Israelites WOULD have looked like grasshoppers to them. Therefore the story of the Nephilim is a myth that embellishes the size of the Caananites and Enoch is a complete myth as well and should be treated as such. It would be wise to take the LESSON found in the example from Jude and 2 Peter but choose to ignore the myth.

Being my liberal self, I opt for #3. What do the rest of you think?

-Nagoda

Apolegetics Is A Nasty Business

2007-03-03T18:39:00.000-08:00

Right some of you may be wondering about the title. This post is not about apolegetics in Christianity being evil or wrong, but about how its done between Protestants and Catholics. Mainly, what is wrong when those on us of either side debate and "apologize" to one another. I've been doing my essay on Anti-Catholicism in the Baptist traditions and while doing the research and noticing how awful some of the attacks are on my own faith I got to wondering: how do Protestants feel when Catholics attack the Protestant faith?

I think Catholics are guilty of Protestant bashing, just as much as Protestants are guilty of Catholic bashing. What do I mean by this... I think we have the wrong goal in mind when Protestants and Catholics debate and apologize to one another. We're trying to convert one another. We're saying you're wrong I'm right and beating each other over the head with a large stick (or perhaps many sticks). We attack each other out of a caring attitude and good intentions but as the old saying goes: the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

What then, should our focus be?

I think the answer is sharing. We should treat apolegetics like we treat Evangelism. For instance, when we evangelize as Christians, our aim is not to convert, but to share. We shouldn't even be thinking of conversion, we leave that up to God. The same should apply to Protestant-Catholic relationships in apolegtics: when we talk about the differences in our faiths it should be about sharing and learning from each other. The attitude should be "here is what I believe and why I believe" or "here is why I don't agree with this doctrine, but I'm not saying you're wrong" and not "I'm right, you're wrong, let me show you the truth" or "heretic! apostate! blasphemer!" etc. There is an opportunity here to learn from each other.

I think there's a second danger in apolegetics. This will sound completely crazy for those of you who are Protestant friends of mine or those of you who are Catholic friends who take much stock in the Word, but I think there is a tendency to debate over Scripture and to invest in the Word of God so much to the point where it becomes dangerously ritualistic and overshadows the rest of our Christian walk.

Ironically, I'll now draw from Scripture to help my point.

There are bits in Samuel, Isaiah and certainly the Gospels where it talks about God not delighting in burnt offerings and sacrifices and rituals but rather in a good, pure heart. Doesn't Jesus say that the Law should be on our hearts? I think we make a huge mistake as Christians where we say the Bible says this the Bible says that on and on and on and yet we completely forget to be Christian in our daily lives. We forget to be Christ like, to be good people. To have good, clean hearts, ones that make God and the people around us happy to be with us. What good does it do us to obssess over what the Scriptures say, to obssess over Bible studies, to debate over theology, to put all our stalk in what a book says if we don't act on what the book says? How can we call ourselves Christians if we obssess over the rules but not practice the rules ourselves? Its better for us to have the Word on our hearts than to be concerned over what the Word says.

I think we have a Scripture fetish folks and its unhealthy and needs to be stopped.

Lastly, I have a confession to make.

And this is very hard for me to say.

I, Mike Nagoda, am a Protestant basher. I admit it outright, there is a hatred for Protestants in my heart that should not be there. I ask for the forgiveness and the prayers and help of all my Protestant friends that I have hurt or not hurt. I ask God to change and sanctify me and to heal me of my hatred through His grace.

There, I said it.

-Nagoda

Welcome Back My Freinds To The Show That Never Ends...

2007-02-20T19:00:00.000-08:00

Well everyone guess what? NEW BLOG! Your Daily Dose Of Random has been moved to blogger because the server over at blog.com kept on crapping out on me and was really really unreliable. I've provided a link to the old blog in case you lot want to look at old posts for archive purposes.

So let me welcome you to the new and improved YDDR (I omit the O cause it sounds stupid)

So orders of business to attend to:

I have just watched the entire first season of the Boondocks

let me say this: its truthful, hillarious and utterly offensive and brilliant

Especially Uncle Ruckus and Ronald Regan and White Heaven and White Jesus

So, it kicks ass

What else...... oh yes. More madness from Jack Van Impe!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUTfKoYPhfE

I knew it! I knew he had to have had a space alien conspiracy theory some where! Dudes its Jesus and bloody star wars! How awesome is this! Can you imagine if Bush took over the world with a fundie Christian theocracy and these space aliens were all coming and he was like, "It's time to use the Cthulhu Button bitches!"

And then the space aliens would look at earth and they'd be all like,

"What the hell is that?"

"It's the Cthulhu button sir."

"Oh. Shit."

And then the space aliens would have this huge battle between them and Bush riding Cthulhu like he was on horse back or something. It would so fucking own!

Now let's take a look at the probability factors here:

What are the space aliens.... the Yacitisma

And Bush has Cthulhu.

So its the Yacitisma versus Cthulhu.

But Bush has God on his side

And since its Van Impe, God is in his pimped out Borg cube space city with his throne that has hydrolics. Remember, God's one bad ass motherfucker. So I'd say God's crew, the angels, would be capping some of the space aliens' asses and God would pimp slap the majority of the Yacitisma to the other side of the Universe and Cthulhu would eat them for supper.

That sounds about right.

Until next time kiddies, play safe.

-Nagoda