Religions
by Jeff
Image text: But to us there is but one God, plus or minus one. --1 Corinthians 8:6±2.
This comic is a reference to the increasing coverage of the prediction by Harold Camping that the Rapture will be on May 21, 2011. The Rapture is the event prophesied in the Bible in which Christians believe that Christ will return to Earth and take all true believers up to Heaven.
The first frame is a reference to raptors in Jurassic Park, if you haven't seen it, the raptor dinosaurs get much more dangerous once they learn how to open doors. Cueball mishears Megan, which is why he thinks she said "Raptors" instead of "Rapture".
In the 2nd frame, Cueball references three major religions. Christian and church for Christianity, Mosque for Islam and Rabbi for Judaism.
The 3rd frame is a math joke in which Megan references error bars which are used on graphs to indicate the uncertainty. So, Megan believes in one God (monotheism), as she says in the comic. But if she is still trying to find the error bars, she is uncertain if there could be many more Gods as well.
The image text is a supposed excerpt from the holy text of experimental monotheism. Corinthians is a real chapter book of the Christian Bible.
May 18th, 2011
First! (plus or minus one)
experimental monotheism may also believe in 0 or a negative number of gods as well…
May 18th, 2011
Yeah, I also read it as an agnostic. They don’t really claim knowledge of whether there is a god a not but will let the experiment determine. Since almost all religions includes a claim that God will never explicitly reveal himself (because that would be too easy), it is also something that can not be determined.
May 20th, 2011
Shouldn’t the number of gods in the set of actual gods be a cardinal (rather than ordinal) number? After all, what would it mean to have Sqrt(-1) gods?
May 18th, 2011
Specifically the 1 Corinthians text reads “yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.” The +/- 2 part refers to the Holy Trinity, where God comprises The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit, three-in-one.
May 18th, 2011
…you’re amazing for coming up with that explanation.
May 18th, 2011
I’m not seeing the Trinity in 1 Corinthians 8:6+/-2. Can you explain that connection better? At best, I see 1 Corinthians 8 as saying that others may worship other so-called gods, but for Christians, there’s just one.
May 19th, 2011
Tom down below really described it more technically accurate, but I find the description of God as +/-2 to be a fun way of mathematizing the Trinity.
May 18th, 2011
Only two (now three) comments? Nope, religion isn’t nearly as controversial as math…
May 18th, 2011
I think the 1 Cor 8:6 +/- 2 also points to ambiguities over how many gods there are in the biblical text:
1 cor 8:4 there is either zero or one God
1 cor 8:5 there could be many but only one for us
1 cor 8:6 we could have one or two
May 18th, 2011
– “The Rapture is the event prophesied in the Bible in which Christians believe that Christ will return to Earth and take all true believers up to Heaven.”
Technically, the rapture is an event possibly mentioned in the bible, and only a percentage of Christians (generally more conservative protestants) interpret those passages to mean a Rapture will happen.
May 19th, 2011
The rapture is one of America’s contributions to theology. Its a very new idea on how to interpret some of the bible passages about the future.
The Christians who trace their roots from prior to the formation of the United States tend to look at the idea of the Rapture as a family treats that weird uncle who shows up at the family reunion. He’s family, but no one is proud of them.
May 18th, 2011
I hope that raptors will be present during the Rapture!
May 18th, 2011
And Rap music. That would be cool
May 18th, 2011
Make that Conservative _American_ Protestants.
Christians following the teaching of Martin Luther (aka protestants) does not read the bible literally (because the Bible includes corrections of itself, and the Paulus letters contains discussions of how some early parts does not apply). For some reason though the bible-literal Christians in America call themselves protestants while completely ignoring protestant teaching (and the bible), I assume it is just a way of saying they are not catholic, but it is still nonsense.
May 18th, 2011
1. Protestant is an umbrella term encompassing any denomination that is not Orthodox Christian or Roman Catholic. It refers to ANY denomination that holds beliefs and practices contrary to the Roman Catholic church and does not ally itself with the Orthodox Christian church.
2. Only Lutherans follow the teachings of Martin Luther. Episcopalians follow the book of common prayer put forth by Edward VI and his group of priests. Methodists and Presbyterians base their teachings on John Calvin. In fact, though Luther was a major player in the Reformation, most protestant denominations that stemmed directly from the Reformation used Calvin’s teachings. Except the Anabaptists, who evolved into Quakers/Mennonites.
3. The Lutheran denomination is comprised of several various church structures, and each varies on how literal the Bible is taken, some being quite strict in their interpretations. You’re thinking of Luther’s teaching that some parts of the Bible are more important than others, and certain passages should be held in higher regard.
4. I’m assuming the “bible-literal Christians” you’re referring to are what are commonly referred to as evangelicals as opposed to the mainline protestants. Because there is no singular protestant teaching (the beauty of the Reformation is that it produced so many brilliant theologians on both the protestant and and Roman Catholic sides), they cannot ignore protestant teaching. They are protestant teaching as well. Nor do they ignore the bible; they just have a different interpretation other denominations. But that’s why there are so many denominations – each one interprets the bible differently.
May 20th, 2011
Sorry, some of this was getting nonsense. So let us drop all the bible talk.
What I am referring to is that:
No Christians outside the U.S., protestant or otherwise interprets the bible literally. Not even Lutheran Evangelists. Many places outside the US the definition of churches is also very clear because each country has an official or majority church with a particular theology, and reading the bible literally was historically considered a heresy (hence many fled to the US). Though in the US the heresy spread from the heretic branches to the mainstream branches that in their non-US versions otherwise does not have this trait.
May 21st, 2011
Excuse me, I realize now that I was speaking from a U.S.-centric perspective, because that’s usually the church politics with which I deal.
I’m afraid I don’t understand your second paragraph. To make sure, what I think I’m reading is that you’re saying that a major trait of many settlers who fled to the Americas was religious persecution. Therefore, because this trait was over-represented amongst the settlers, it became mainstream in the U.S. to adopt the beliefs of the religiously persecuted among all of the denominations, including those that were accepted in various European countries.
What evidence do you have supporting your argument that a literal interpretation of the bible was heresy? The big religion that immigrated to America because of persecution was Anabaptism, which like I said, morphed into Quakers and Mennonites. The Puritans were part of this transformation. The two characteristics that defined Anabaptism was the strict adherence to a Christian lifestyle that is chosen as an adult, and the belief that the world would be ending soon, based on the persecution they experienced in Europe. Many other groups that immigrated were facing political persecution, or were seeking financial wealth.
To get back to topic: I am afraid you are overgeneralizing the amount of Christians who believe that the rapture will be tomorrow. There is an outspoken fringe sect, and their evidence for the rapture, they say is biblically based, but is really numerology nonsense.
What was “getting nonsense”? I’d be happy to clarify.
May 21st, 2011
I believe he was stating that those were the only groups which believe that there will ever be a rapture. The rapture is a very American Protestant teaching stemming from what most other Christian groups consider to be a misreading of Revelation.
May 23rd, 2011
But not all American Protestants believe this. It’s a gross overgeneralization of the term. It’s a very small fringe group. There are those who agreed with Harold Camping, and a GREAT majority who didn’t. Not to mention, there are reports from fringe groups across the world who believed this apocalyptic prophesy, especially Vietnam.
May 21st, 2011
I don’t believe Quakers and Mennonites evolved from Anabaptists. Mennonism started in Switzerland, no? Similar to the Bruderhof and Church of the Brethren? And Quakerism sprang fully-formed from the minds of George Fox and his friends, well before the Mayflower came to North America with the Puritans. The French Quaker tradition formed simultaneously and independently out of the Cathar and mystical Christian traditions in the caves in the south of France; as such, French Quakers consider themselves neither Catholic nor Protestant. The French and British Quaker traditions joined up in the 1700s out of a shared commitment to pacifism and to abolition of slavery. Then Quakerism later spread all over the world via evangelism.
…that’s at least what I get from oral tradition among Mennonite and Brethren and Bruderhof and Quaker friends…
May 23rd, 2011
Forgive me, I meant to say Quaker and Amish. Mennonism did start in Switzerland, but it is still a form of Anabaptism. Anabaptism was defined by a strict adherence to Christian law (as defined by their leaders’ interpretation of the Bible), most prominently complete nonviolence, the observation that children are innocent of sin, and that baptism is a choice that an adult must make to complete turn from sin and live in the proscribed Christian way. Due to the persecution that the great majority of Anabaptists received, they believed that it was a sign of the apocalypse – because nearly all apocryphal literature is a message of hope to the oppressed faithful. Mennonites, Quakers, Hussites, Amish, and the Brethren are all forms of Anabaptism in addition to Mennonites.
May 18th, 2011
A negative number of God? I suppose that would a finite number of devils. Perhaps N=G-D. So in some interpreatations of Christianity the number of Gods is zero as well as in atheism!
May 18th, 2011
Or a negative number of God could be that God is like a void, a vacuum calling to us to fill it with the love in our hearts, the meditations of our thoughts, and the works of our hands, every day. Just as Jesus said shortly before he died on the cross: “I thirst.” Perhaps the negative presence of God could be that thirst, drawing us forward toward wholeness.
May 19th, 2011
That sounded pretty cool.
May 18th, 2011
Actually, I Corinthians 8:6 +/- 2 would be I Corinthians 8:4-8. The full text for that passage (KJV) is as follows:
4As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one.
5For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,)
6But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.
7Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled.
8But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse.
Mmm… all that talk of sacrificing and eating meat reminds me of raptors… ;-9
May 18th, 2011
Corinthians is a book in the Christian Bible, not a chapter. The Bible is a collection of books.
May 18th, 2011
Yes, you are right… I couldn’t find the word book for some reason when writing it. I’ll correct.
May 18th, 2011
Actually, technically Corinthians is *two* books – 1 Corinthians and 2 Corinthians.
May 19th, 2011
More technically, they were letters to a church in Corinth. You can call them what you want.
May 18th, 2011
Hmm. I thought it was just a really long letter…
May 18th, 2011
Nope, two separate letters. Think of the Corinthians like naughty children who wouldn’t follow the rules, and all Paul can do is scold them from another city. In all actuality, he actually visited and preached in Corinth, but his spoken “sermons” weren’t recorded.
May 19th, 2011
Actually, 2 Cor. might even be several shorter letters. Fun fact of the day.
May 18th, 2011
fun game: guessing people’s beliefs based on how often the capitalize the first letter of religious words
May 19th, 2011
Might instead denote their age and state of origin, as I was taught in English class to capitalize names and titles of deities and still feel the urge to whip out the red pencil when I see them in lowercase.
May 19th, 2011
Yes
I keep flip flopping back and forth between capitalizing “bible.” Though I do have a strict rule on the world “gospel.” If you’re referring to a specific gospel text, i.e. the Gospel of John, then capitalize. If you’re just talking about the gospel as in “the good news,” it’s lowercase.
May 19th, 2011
‘Unitarianism: the belief that there is (at most) one god.’