On Pop Theology Podcast: Episode 21 - Doctor Who, The Hunger Games and God w/ Julie Clawson

by Ben Howard

Ben and co-host Mark Smith talk with Julie Clawson, author of The Hunger Games and the Gospel, about Doctor Who, the Hunger Games trilogy, and how they relate to the the Christian life. Join in as they discuss the relational nature of both the Doctor and the Hunger Games as well as the way both narratives deal with violence and pacifism.

Be sure to check out Julie's blog One Hand Clapping, her books on Amazon, and follow her on Twitter @julieclawson.

You can download the podcast by clicking here. Or you can subscribe to the podcast by searching "On Pop Theology" in the iTunes music store. If you download the show through iTunes, please be so kind as to rate and review us. We want your feedback and it helps the show to grow. 
  Also, remember to "Like" On Pop Theology on Facebook and follow us on Twitter @OnPopTheology for all the updates, posts, and links throughout the week.

Finally, if you'd like to stream the podcast, you can do that here:

Peace,
Ben

If you have any questions, comments, or if you just want to say hi, you can contact us at onpoptheology [at] gmail.com.

You might also like:   

• On Pop Theology Podcast: Episode 20 - Sex, Violence, and the Gods of Westeros
• On Pop Theology Podcast: Episode 19 - God and Doctor Who w/ James McGrath
• On Pop Theology Podcast: Episode 18 - On Understanding Judaism w/ Krista Dalton 

Desperation is a Stinky Cologne

by Mark Smith

Microsoft really, really wants me to try Internet Explorer. They’ve been pushing it on me for a while now. They made this really nice commercial and they’ve been putting it all over the parts of the internet I frequent. This is the one I mean:

Doesn’t that look great? All that shinyness and lens flare pulls you right in, there’s a catchy song, and it’s full of bright colors and animations. It takes you all across the board--Facebook, Hulu, even Deviantart. Iron Man was there! He’s so cool. And if all the sensationalism doesn’t pull you in, they’ve got all these quotes from respectable sources talking about how awesome Internet Explorer is. The New York Times? It doesn’t get classier than that.

It’s too bad Internet Explorer is garbage. It’s the cesspit of browsers. The laughingstock of the world wide web. Firefox is much better. Chrome is much, much better. Opera is probably better, but only weirdos and Europeans use Opera. Still, it’s not Internet Explorer.

Have I tried IE9? I mean, really given it a fair shot? Of course not; it’s Internet Explorer. I already know that it’s terrible. I know that in the same way that I know that water is wet and that you should never tell a woman she has gained weight. These are inherent truths that I have such a firm belief in that I have absolutely no need to go back and re-investigate them. I know this so well that I’ve never opened Explorer...or did I? When did version 9 come out? How long have I had this computer? Anyway, I had to open it to download a different browser, but that hardly counts.

I think that many of my atheist and agnostic friends view the church in the same way that I view Internet Explorer. Most of them went to churches when they were younger--some of them tried several different faiths as they grew up. But in the end, they found the experience so profoundly negative that most wouldn’t come back to a church if they were paid to.

It probably isn’t hard for most of us to understand that. Those of us who grew up in the church have had our share of negative experiences--some minor, some life-shatteringly huge. The church body is not flawless, and we certainly recognize its flaws.

You see, not only have I had bad church experiences, but I’ve been bad church experiences. I grew up in a deeply evangelical church. “All you have to do is get them in the door,” they told me, “and we’ll convert them.” I spent my teenage years either fruitlessly inviting my friends to church or feeling guilty that I wasn’t doing it more often. If someone did come, they didn’t stay, and I couldn’t understand this. I was doing my part, why wasn’t God?

I was Internet Explorering them. I realize now what a waste of time and effort that was.
There is a part of me that remains evangelical. And Jesus did say to go forth and make disciples, right? Even so, I find it hard to imagine that his intention was for me to coerce my friends into being miserable on Sunday mornings. I would love for all my friends to have the peace of mind, sense of community, and support that comes from a strong church family. I don’t think I will get them that by “just telling them about Jesus” as I was told to in my youth. They know about Jesus, and me telling them that church and Jesus are better than they remember won’t change their minds.

So now I’m in a place where I focus on my own walk, not others. I do my best to love my neighbor and help my fellow man. I think I’m doing okay, but I have a long way to go. And I’m doing my best to respect the views and beliefs of everyone I meet because that seems to be a big part of loving them. Is that enough? I sure hope so.

As always, feel free to leave comments. You can subscribe to our RSS Feed or via email on the right side of the homepage and if you are interested in writing for On Pop Theology, feel free to contact me at benjamin.howard87 [at] gmail.com or on Twitter @BenHoward87.

What Would Dumbledore Do?

by Mark Smith

Ever since I stole a battered copy of The Hobbit out of my older brother’s bedroom, I’ve been enamored with fantasy literature. There is a stigma attached to the genre, and while much of it is probably deserved, it has not stopped me from lapping up page after page of swords, dragons, wizards, thieves, and knights.

When it comes to fantasy literature, one of the most common staples is the clear definition of good and evil. The hero is righteous, possibly flawed, but equipped with a sackload of virtues that set him up against a clearly defined villain.

The Harry Potter books follow this exactly. Very early, the reader is told explicitly which wizards are good and which wizards are bad. However, one of the things I love about the Harry Potter series in this regard is that over time this simplicity fades.

While the staple of Harry Good/Voldemort Bad remains intact throughout, there is a smaller ,but much more tangible, battle of good and evil at play within the walls of Hogwarts school. Even if you have not read the books, you are probably aware that the students are sorted into one of four houses by way of a magic hat that magically knows which characteristic best defines the student using...magic psychology or something.

Anyway, the brave go to Gryffindor, the wise go to Ravenclaw, the loyal and hard-working go to Hufflepuff, and the ambitious and cunning go to Slytherin. More importantly, the reader is told, even before all the houses are introduced, that ALL bad wizards come from Slytherin.

Even as a child this bothered me. Why would they teach these students magic? Sitting on one side of the great hall is a table full of future Hitlers and we’re going to train them to blow things up for 7 years? Why not have a magic hat that sorts out the brave, wise, and loyal and tells the devil children to see themselves to the door?

In reality (okay, not reality, but you know what I mean), the idea that all bad wizards are Slytherins is just an over simplification told to a child in a story aimed at children. Over the course of the books as Harry grows older, we learn that the world isn’t quite so black and white. Harry learns that Sirius Black, a wizard wanted for the murder of 13 people, was a Gryffindor. Sure, it turns out that he is actually innocent, but the fact that a hat told everyone he is brave did nothing to stop them from locking him up without trial. Spoiler alert there, sorry.

Later, Harry’s dad, a Gryffindor lauded as a paragon of virtue for the first four books, is revealed to have been a snob and a particularly cruel bully in his younger years. Godric Gryffindor, for whom the house is named, is revealed to have been an oppressor of non-human magical creatures. Some Slytherins are revealed to be good people, like Slughorn and Snape. Oh, spoiler alert on that one, too. I should be more careful.

In church, I fear we often oversimplify the good and evil. Those of us who grew up in church were probably told bedtime stories about God and the Devil, and it all seemed so straightforward in Sunday School. If you do what is right, you are on God’s side. If you do what is wrong, you were on the Satan’s side. However, like Harry, we learn as we get older that things are not always that simple. You can’t tell if a person is good or evil by what colors the stripes on their tie are.

In moments of moral confusion, Harry follows the example of Dumbledore. Dumbledore taught him, in words and actions, that when right and wrong are complicated, love is simple.

As Christians, we follow the example of Jesus. Jesus came to this world at a time when right and wrong were unclear. God’s word had been misinterpreted, and the Pharisees had lost the message behind it. Jesus delivered that message, and the message from Rabbi to Pharisee was similar to the one from Harry’s wise headmaster. When the law is complicated, the most important thing is to love God. The second most important thing is to love each other.

I don’t need to tell anyone what the topics of moral ambiguity are in the world today, and I’m certainly not going to tell you what you should believe about any particular one. I will say that the more I try to see both sides of any issue and the more I see the motivations of the people behind them, I, like Harry, start to lose my sense of what right and wrong really mean. 
 
Those who followed Dumbledore often disagreed about what his intentions would have been, just like those who follow Christ disagree. The best advice I can offer is this: When life is at its peak of frustrating moral ambiguity, the best thing to do is follow Harry’s lead and make the decision that shows love.