"Napa Valley" Brocken InaGlory. Licensed. Creative Commons CC BY-SA 3.0
"Napa Valley" Brocken InaGlory. Licensed. Creative Commons CC BY-SA 3.0
Welcome to LAST SUPPER RED!!
What if laughter and hilarity are sacred? Might prayer be less about words and more about how we position ourselves before Mystery? What if God is less like Santa Claus and more like air? What if we are defined more by "Original Blessing" than "Original Sin?" Would Christianity flourish if we followed Jesus instead of worshipping him? What if "the Kingdom of God" has much less to do with the hereafter and is instead a here-and-now countercultural idea and reality with political and economic consequences?
What if laughter and hilarity are sacred? Might prayer be less about words and more about how we position ourselves before Mystery? What if God is less like Santa Claus and more like air? What if we are defined more by "Original Blessing" than "Original Sin?" Would Christianity flourish if we followed Jesus instead of worshipping him? What if "the Kingdom of God" has much less to do with the hereafter and is instead a here-and-now countercultural idea and reality with political and economic consequences?
Q returns to the theme of identity and having the courage to be who we are.
Snark says nowhere do we pretend more than in the church. What is your experience with this? Do others pretend? Do you? More in a faith community . . . about the same . . . or less than in other groups? Why might people pretend more in a faith community?
Q again plunges his main characters into an extensive theological discussion. At least they don't end up alienating each other this time.
What do you make of Phyllis Tickle's idea about the church having a rummage sale on its doctrines every 500 years or so? (see Footnote 9 on Page 45.) If it's true, should it happen at all? Should it happen more often? Are we living in such a time today? If so, what do you think the church needs to get rid of?
What do you make of how Snark articulates the gospel . . . the good news? Sounds like it has a lot to do with human identity. Is this on target, or has he missed the point?
A large fish pulled Advocatus into the canal where he lost the paraphernalia of his office he was otherwise reluctant to part with. Snark maintained that, though it was probably a large channel catfish on the end of his line, Higgs Boson was probably at work. Do you think Q is using the fish as a deliberate symbol here? Are you acquainted with the fish as an early Christian symbol or marking? If so, what was it about? And, given that, what would it mean for a fish to pull Advocatus into the canal where he lost what he actually didn't need?