https://preview.redd.it/wmv3mflr3pc71.jpg?width=320&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6d9a90faa7859c869dadded394a12e25c13e5c98
Richard Beck examines conspiracy theories and Christianity in a fascinating 12 part series. He considers the epistemic, existential and social motivations that draw Christians towards these ideas and suggests approaches to understanding and dealing with family members who have conspiracy beliefs.
Part 2, Turning the Return of Christ into a Grand Conspiracy Theory
Part 4, Cracking the Bible Code
Part 5, God's Providence and Plan
Part 6, Satanic Baby-Eating Pedofiles
Part 7, We All Want to Live a Heroic Life
Given all the rival ways of interpreting Scripture, and all the good arguments on every side, my students asked me the question, "Dr. Beck, given this situation, how do we know what the Bible says?"
Links to each of the three parts in the series examining that question are below.
Reading the Bible: Part #1, Make Your Call
I finished it very recently and wanted to post on here before I forgot. It's a really interesting book which focuses on the Satanic Panic cases of the 1980s, which focused on alleged satanic ritual abuse occurring in daycares and similar environments. It obviously contains a lot of discussion on sex crimes, child abuse and other potentially upsetting subjects, so I'd recommend avoiding it if that's particularly upsetting for you, or if you're not in the mood for something which gets quite dark and pessimistic. But besides that, it's more than just a book about the court cases- it's a book about the social conditions which give rise to mass or localized movements where people legitimately believe in the mass abduction and abuse of children using veiled means of transport and facilitation, all going on beneath their noses. It's very insightful about the developments in psychology, unethical and coercive behaviours and anxieties about women's rights and homosexuality which created the environment in which these allegations seemed, to many, reasonable, and which the allegations emerged in the first place. This insight really mirrors a lot of what we're observing in today's world, except on a global scale (most outrage was localized- people knew about it from the news, but no social media meant there wasn't quite the information deluge and platform for the incensed there is now).
There are many uncanny similarities described in the book- most evocative and most immediate to me was the allegation of secret sex tunnels underneath a daycare, which immediately brought to mind the secret sex trafficking tunnels supposed to exist underneath US soil. Also relevant is how the unwillingness to consider societal issues as a significant factor in child abuse led to a lot of panic about the abduction and torture of middle-class children aged 2-7/8 or so from nuclear families, which the author goes into in detail as a projection of societal anxieties about divorce rates and other things considered related to sexual perversion or deviancy rather than being an accurate reflection of real vulnerable children. Who, just like today, were/are often poor, had/have unstable living conditions, are LGBTQ+ and/or were subjected to abuse and/or neglect first by their own family members, and take up very little space in the narrative of child sexual abuse/trafficking.
There are some differences- QAnon places a lot of blame on politicians as leaders of the conspiracy, and obviousl
... keep reading on reddit ➡Hey! First time using this sub! Hope I do it correctly. I’m searching for either or both of the above. For trade I have a whole heap of horror/dystopian/apocalypse novels. I do live in Australia though so shipping may be a bit pricey!
For those who are not familiar, Chicago PD is a tv show created by Dick Wolf, the same guy who made Law and Order (and set in the same universe), and a spin off from the Firefighter oriented procedural-soap opera Chicago Fire, it centers around a controversial middle aged detective with a Batman voice named Hank Voight, who bends the rules and takes the law into his own hands, he started off as a minor villain on Chicago Fire but was basically given his own show as the main hero, The Rape of Richard Beck is about an arrogant middle aged homicide detective who does vigilantism when not on duty who gets transferred to sex crimes, and lacks respect for rape victims because he believes they bring it on themselves for going out alone at night and not having the flashy unarmed combat skills he used to escape countless breathtaking situations, that is until he was investigating an abandoned building and got ambushed by two Bikers, after they took his gun from him he tried to escape but his martial arts didn't work, then he was raped and beaten, leading him to developing PTSD and changing his approach to policing.
What does this have to do with Voight? well I think its fair to argue that Voight and Beck have a lot of similarities, first and foremost they are around the same age and played by similar looking actors, both are modest and polite, but are arrogant and come across as bullies from time to time, and do unnecessarily risky approaches to apprehending suspects, and work hard at keeping their dignity and tough guy image when under torture, Voight from the get go has a compassionate side, this isn't obvious in Beck initially, but after he gets raped he becomes more empathetic like Voight does, and also resorts to torturing suspects in a way that could land him in prison.
As far as appearance goes, here is a picture of of Beck compared to Voight , the similarities in my opinion are close enough for me to suspect that Jason Beghe could've been picked for the role because his appearance gives off a Richard Crenna vibe.
Of course I doubt everyone will agree with my opinion, and it makes a lot of sense not to, because Voight was not inspired entirely by Beck (assuming that he was), he also has shades of Vick Mackey from The Shiel
... keep reading on reddit ➡>One of the struggles in subscribing to universal reconciliation are the constant misunderstandings. Perhaps the biggest misunderstanding involves the distinctions between soteriology and theodicy.... Soteriology has to do with salvation. Theodicy has to do with the problem of horrific suffering (sometimes called "the problem of evil" or "the problem of pain").
>
>When I say I believe in universalism 99% of the time people think I'm attracted to the position because I have soft heart, soteriologically speaking. I want a happy ending where "everyone gets to go to heaven." For some reason, it is believed, probably because I'm a theological flower child, I just can't stomach the Judgment and Sovereignty of God. ...
>
>To be clear, those issues are of interest to me. But what most people fail to understand is that my universalism, and most of the universalism I encounter within Christianity, isn't motivated by soteriological issues. The doctrine isn't attractive because it solves the problem of hell. The doctrine is attractive because it solves (or at least addresses) the problem of pain.
>
>In short, universalism, for me and many others, is about theodicy. Not soteriology. The issue isn't about salvation (traditionally understood). It's about suffering. Universalism, as best I can tell, is the only Christian doctrine that takes the problem of suffering seriously. As evidence for this, just note that when a theologian starts taking suffering seriously he or she starts moving toward universalism. Examples include Jürgen Moltmann, Marilyn McCord Adams, and John Hick. Take suffering seriously and the doctrine soon follows.
>
>...
>
>Innocent suffering is the open wound of life and the real task of faith and theology is "to make it possible for us to survive, to go on living, with this open wound."
>
>Now here's the deal. You either get that, or you don't.
>
>And if you don't, well, I'm sure you're a very nice and devout person.
>
>But you'll never understand why I believe in universalism.
~ Richard Beck, "Universalism and the Open Wound of Life"
I’m a freshman engineering student and just got my schedule. I have a class in Beck hall, twenty minutes after that a class in Richard Weeks Hall, and twenty minutes after that a class in Beck Hall again. Will this be a problem?
Richard Beck wrote a great series of articles some years ago entitled The Voice of the Scapegoat Series.
For those who haven't read any books on Rene Girard's mimetic theory, this is a good introduction. For those who have, it's good to get another perspective on it.
"Dear Reader, Have you ever struggled with the violence of the Old Testament? With the story of Abraham and Isaac? With how God treats Job? And with the whole idea that God demands the death of sinners, ultimatly calling for the death of Jesus to "take our place"? I have. All these things were stumbling blocks to my faith.
That is until I discovered the work of Rene Girard. Reading Rene Girard has transfomed my spiritual journy. However, reading Girard can be difficult. But recently S. Mark Heim's book Saved from Sacrifice: A Theology of the Cross has appeared which gives the church an accessible Girardian reading of the bible.
This series is a summary of both Girard and Heim's work."
This series from Richard Beck looks at "Original Sin".
He looks at it from a Malthusian perspective ie. that the world is finite and we feel vulnerable because of it. He looks at greed in times of plenty, expands from looking at the individual to considering society, followed by a look at what Paul has to say. He then uses game theory to consider sin in a Malthusian world before considering mimetic rivalry and mirror neurons. Next he looks at the work of Thomas Hobbes, Worm Theology and William Stringfellow.
It's an interesting read and impressive how he blends all these ideas together.
>So it makes no sense to ask, "Well, if everyone is getting to heaven eventually why proclaim the Kingdom?" Seriously? Imagine a slave who has been liberated but who refuses to leave the slave master our of fear, or comfort or a "slave mentality." Imagine a prisoner sitting in his cell when the door has been unlocked. True, the slave and the prisoner will eventually come out of their bondage and fear, but that doesn't stop me from taking them by the hand today and leading them out into the freedom of God. Wake up! Join in the party! I bring good news of great joy.
>Christian mission is about proclaiming what God has done. It's not a prediction or ultimatum about you and your future.
>And this vision of things also helps address another common question asked of universalists: "If everyone is getting to heaven why not just live it up in this life?" Again, seriously? If you have to ask this question I have to wonder if you're even a Christian. Because you are basically claiming that the life of sin is "better" than the abundant life found in Jesus, that people would prefer sin, today, over the Kingdom of God. You are insinuating that the Christian proclamation isn't good news.
...
>Maybe this is why people who believe in eternal torment are so grumpy, mean-spirited, and miserable. If hell is the only motive for coming to God, if sinners are the one's having the most fun, well, of course these "turn or burn" Christians are unhappy. They've been called out of a fun and joyous life into the Kingdom of God where all is proper, boring, structured, grey and lame. But hey, at least they aren't going to hell! So there they sit in their churches, jealous and grumpy that the world is throwing a party that they can't attend because they had to dress up and go to church on Sunday. No wonder these sorts of Christians want the world to go to hell.
~Richard Beck, Musings on Universalism pt 9 (I recommend reading the whole post; it's not that long).
