This is of course an impossible question, like 'If the sun were to rise in the west, would it be green or blue?' In other words, by agreeing to the terms of the question you make it impossible to give an answer based on anything other than highly distorted speculation.

Jesus didn't run for anything. He acted as if he were a different kind of ruler altogether, with a 'kingdom' that didn't originate from the present world (otherwise, he said, his servants would fight to rescue him) but instead was meant FOR this present world, to transform and heal it. The present way we do politics and government is, alas, part of the problem, and he would have challenged it (its huge cost, its pretense of participation which is shamelessly manipulated by the media, its cult of personality, its ignoring, all too often, of the actual needs of the poor, etc. etc.) just as he challenged the power structures of his day.

The real question is, what sort of a cross would today's system be intent on using to kill him?

Like every other human invention in principle (OK, some smart guy/gal will think up exceptions) E-mail is both a blessing and a curse. Used wisely, it's a great blessing, enabling people to do small tasks swiftly and efficiently and complex ones much more simply. Used foolishly, it's a drug, a time-waster, an encouragement to rudeness or hasty unthought-out messages.

I bet people have asked this question about everything since they discovered pigeons could carry messages.

The Question: What does the Eliot Spitzer scandal say about our public and private morality? Should he have resigned?

Public life, no less than private, is a matter of trust. If someone deceives their spouse, chances are they won't have much compunction about deceiving the public.

a. Literal and metaphorical. The word 'literal' is misused if we try to make it mean 'it actually happened'. The word 'literal' refers to the way words refer to things -- that they refer to something 'literally'. If we intend to refer to an event that happens in the space/time/matter world, the way to do so is to say it is a 'concrete' event as opposed to an 'abstract' one. We should note that 'metaphorical' is in that respect like 'literal' -- it refers to the way words refer to things, rather than to the things themselves.

Now we've got that out of the way:

Continue »

The Question: Which "ism" is more entrenched in America, sexism or racism? Which should religion address?

All 'isms' are shorthands which can obscure the issues they label. 'Religion' ought to be about (among other things!) careful, wise, humble, reasoned discourse about actual questions, unmasking the labels which function only as convenient ways of not really thinking things through. Perhaps that means that 'religion' should address 'labelism' -- especially in the run-up to an election...

Easter greetings to one and all.