Pritha : blog entry 1, 3, 4
Peter: blog entry 3, 4
Jin Hong: blog entry: 3
Ji Hyun: blog entry 4, 5
Friday, 26 December 2008
Blog post no.9: Question no.7. What do traders and NGO’S do for these cultures?
At first I wanted to answer the question “How different is your modern culture from the Sawi tenants?” but the answer is blog post 8 as I referred to the similarities in there. I did not want the entries to be reoccurring. Hence I choose “What do traders and NGO’s do for there cultures?” I think that they destroy the cultures by enforcing their way of living. However, I was not really sure so I thought I would check it out on so the internet. I looked up parts of the question on google.com and then I formed the answer below.
Traders may force the people to risk their lives working and farming. In earlier times the tribe’s people worked and farmed for their well being and they took what they needed. They had most likely organized how they would farm and who would farm where. Which land they wanted as farm land and which had to be left to lie fallow. When the traders come in they are made to work for the profit of the traders. This destroys indigenous farming communities depriving small farmers of their livelihood. Their normal daily activities are changed thus their culture is drastically modified. In the case of the Sawi I think they would have fought even though they were technologically way behind, I think they would have just killed the intruders and eaten them. Then again I could be wrong, they could be killed or made into slaves and threatened to work for their livelihood. The traders start being authoritative in the land that was never theirs to begin with. Even if the farmers do earn anything it would not be enough for them to live as they once did. This destroys their culture and their livelihood. “If you take away someone’s livelihood, and stack the deck heavily against them, take their land and erode their culture, what choices do they have?”
Non-governmental organizations have become a 
permanent figure in the extermination of the violation of human rights. They exist to act against violations of the human rights and help people in times of need. They are mostly non profitable organizations that function on donations. They bring in new policies and lifestyles. Both traders and NGOs form an imperialistic society and they force their beliefs on the unwilling populace. NGOs force western based rights on diverse cultures in many parts of the world ignoring their culture. This of course spoils their culture: “Cultural Relativist theory upholders believe that every culture has its own unique perception of what constitutes human rights and that since human rights are a by-product of western liberal intellectual thought it is seen as forcing ideals on unwilling and uneducated populaces. Since human rights are western based, it is only logical that the definition of human rights as propagated by non-governmental organizations will have an imperialistic feel in the countries they are being implemented in.”
They tend to emphasize the right to development and ignore the culture present only focusing on the goals.
Both traders and NGO’s would destroy the culture. Traders would have been the worst to enter a tribal community. NGO’s do destroy the culture but they do bring about positive change and help the people.
Citations:
Google.com
http://smallfarmersbigchange.coop/2008/02/07/part-2-how-free-trade-destroys-local-economies-hurts-small-farmers-and-causes-massive-waves-of-migration/
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/impact-of-ngos-on-international-stage.html
pictures from:http://www.gambianow.com/news/index.php?category=2&pg=65
http://www.firstpeople.us/pictures/art/1024x768/Fur-Traders-1024x768.html
Sunday, 21 December 2008
Blog post no.8: question no.4: What does God expect us to do for other cultures and faiths?
There are many things that God could possibly say and they could oppose each other for example God could say “Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your eye?” from LUKE 6:42 on love and judgment. Why must we go to correct their beliefs? How can we say that what they are doing is wrong when we are not perfect examples ourselves? How can you change the world and change others when you cannot change yourself?
As the other question had called them uncivilized cultures Romans chapter 12:3 states: “not to think of himself more highly that he ought to think, but to think soberly, as God has dealt to each one a measure of faith”. Then must we not leave them along as we are not superior because of
our faith and they have their own faith given to them in a different measure by God Himself hence, we should not convert. God would agree that everyone should be treated the same and hence, we should not view other people as targets to convert. Life is based no passion, if there is no passion then there is no relationships. If there is no relationship then how can we have one with God? : As we see God in people and their actions. In life whatever it is religion or love, actions are worth a lot more than words. After all, words are made up of alphabets and sure words are needed to convey a message but action is the most important. We must approach people to make a friend that is; to truly make a friend not just to convert them. 
We must make ourselves an example and if people want to follow they shall. As after all Mark chapter 4 verse 9 says “He who has ears to hear, let him hear!” and I assume that goes the same way for the eyes as well.
In Matthew 28:19 it says “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,” but he does not say to force it upon them. Just as I quoted earlier Mark chapter 4:9 He says “He who has ears to hear, let him hear!” and Rev 3:22 (NIV) "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches."God most likely wants to tell us to go and tell the people about him so that they are given a chance to save themselves: As if they accept they be saved.
This question is rather weird and who am I to answer it. It says “What does God expect us to do for other cultures and faiths?” well I am not God and I will never be. I just gave my thought on what I think God would say it may not be right and it may not be wrong.
Citations:
biblegateway.com
The Holy Bible – Collins
pictures from:
http://deepchurch.org.uk/2007/09/
http://current.com/items/89571199/god_told_him_to_hit_woman_s_car_at_100_mph.htm
http://encefalus.com/sociopolitical/psychiatry-antipsychiatry-history-mental-disease/
As the other question had called them uncivilized cultures Romans chapter 12:3 states: “not to think of himself more highly that he ought to think, but to think soberly, as God has dealt to each one a measure of faith”. Then must we not leave them along as we are not superior because of
our faith and they have their own faith given to them in a different measure by God Himself hence, we should not convert. God would agree that everyone should be treated the same and hence, we should not view other people as targets to convert. Life is based no passion, if there is no passion then there is no relationships. If there is no relationship then how can we have one with God? : As we see God in people and their actions. In life whatever it is religion or love, actions are worth a lot more than words. After all, words are made up of alphabets and sure words are needed to convey a message but action is the most important. We must approach people to make a friend that is; to truly make a friend not just to convert them. We must make ourselves an example and if people want to follow they shall. As after all Mark chapter 4 verse 9 says “He who has ears to hear, let him hear!” and I assume that goes the same way for the eyes as well.In Matthew 28:19 it says “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,” but he does not say to force it upon them. Just as I quoted earlier Mark chapter 4:9 He says “He who has ears to hear, let him hear!” and Rev 3:22 (NIV) "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches."God most likely wants to tell us to go and tell the people about him so that they are given a chance to save themselves: As if they accept they be saved.This question is rather weird and who am I to answer it. It says “What does God expect us to do for other cultures and faiths?” well I am not God and I will never be. I just gave my thought on what I think God would say it may not be right and it may not be wrong.
Citations:
biblegateway.com
The Holy Bible – Collins
pictures from:
http://deepchurch.org.uk/2007/09/
http://current.com/items/89571199/god_told_him_to_hit_woman_s_car_at_100_mph.htm
http://encefalus.com/sociopolitical/psychiatry-antipsychiatry-history-mental-disease/
blog post no: 7 : Can traditions be broken completely? Support/provide answers.
Traditions are part of a culture and if the culture changes then the traditions changes as well as for whether they are destroyed that depends on what happens in time due to the change of the culture and the effect it has on the people. I think that tradition always crumbles away into nothingness due to the invasion by other cultures and world views that are not of the same culture. The Sawi were initially not cannibals but they took that view and added it to their culture and made it part of their culture.
If culture is not fixed and it is forever changing and merging is it still 
considered the culture because it is continuing on among people? 
I started reading the book that we were assigned to read over the Winter break 'Silence by Endo Shusaku' and I was reading the Translators preface in the middle on page xv he put in a translation of the speech made by Endo Shusaku and a part of that stood out and reminded me of this question that I was going to answer.
“Japan is a swamp because it sucks up all sorts of ideologies, transforming them into itself and distorting them in the process” is culture not that same. Taking parts from here and there are making it part of itself always changing (even though it should not) and somehow still remaining the same. For example: look at Christmas it was never celebrated all over the world now however it is celebrated almost all over the world in different ways and in some places it has become part of the culture and some people consider it a tradition to do certain things during that time. (http://members.tripod.com/~artworkinparis/ChristmasWorld.html)
I think that tradition is destroyed as when it spreads and changes its meaning changes along with it. Since it is the winter holidays here is another example: Christmas is all about the birth of the Christ the way, the truth and the life but somewhere along the way it merged in with the celebrating of Saint Nicholas and its true meaning has changed. Now wherever you go you will see Santa Clause along with a Christmas celebration but was he ever the main reason Christmas was celebrated in the first place? Obviously, the answer is no. I refer to the same interview with Endo Shusaku again and here is an extract that explains what I think “It is the spider’s web that destroys the butterfly, leaving only the ugly skeleton.”
Traditions are destroyed at least the original tradition is destroyed. As the tradition changes and the meaning changes along with that and that is the tradition being destroyed.
Just before I was planning to post this I decided I would go and get myself chocolate milk and as I was on the way back I saw this thing that my father was watching on the television. It was CNN and they were showing how the erosion in Alaska would affect the natives. One man said that he felt really bad as they would loose their village and it would be a loss of culture. They would be away from the snow and the place they used to live in dues to global warming. “These once-nomadic people can no longer pack up and go.”They loose their culture and after a while they will loose their traditions as well.
considered the culture because it is continuing on among people? 
I started reading the book that we were assigned to read over the Winter break 'Silence by Endo Shusaku' and I was reading the Translators preface in the middle on page xv he put in a translation of the speech made by Endo Shusaku and a part of that stood out and reminded me of this question that I was going to answer.
“Japan is a swamp because it sucks up all sorts of ideologies, transforming them into itself and distorting them in the process” is culture not that same. Taking parts from here and there are making it part of itself always changing (even though it should not) and somehow still remaining the same. For example: look at Christmas it was never celebrated all over the world now however it is celebrated almost all over the world in different ways and in some places it has become part of the culture and some people consider it a tradition to do certain things during that time. (http://members.tripod.com/~artworkinparis/ChristmasWorld.html)
I think that tradition is destroyed as when it spreads and changes its meaning changes along with it. Since it is the winter holidays here is another example: Christmas is all about the birth of the Christ the way, the truth and the life but somewhere along the way it merged in with the celebrating of Saint Nicholas and its true meaning has changed. Now wherever you go you will see Santa Clause along with a Christmas celebration but was he ever the main reason Christmas was celebrated in the first place? Obviously, the answer is no. I refer to the same interview with Endo Shusaku again and here is an extract that explains what I think “It is the spider’s web that destroys the butterfly, leaving only the ugly skeleton.”
Traditions are destroyed at least the original tradition is destroyed. As the tradition changes and the meaning changes along with that and that is the tradition being destroyed.
Just before I was planning to post this I decided I would go and get myself chocolate milk and as I was on the way back I saw this thing that my father was watching on the television. It was CNN and they were showing how the erosion in Alaska would affect the natives. One man said that he felt really bad as they would loose their village and it would be a loss of culture. They would be away from the snow and the place they used to live in dues to global warming. “These once-nomadic people can no longer pack up and go.”They loose their culture and after a while they will loose their traditions as well.
Another example:
“The Last Jews of Libya documents the final decades of a centuries-old Sephardic Jewish community through the lives of one remarkable family. At the end of WWII, 36,000 Jews lived in Libya, but not a single one remains today.”
“The Last Jews of Libya documents the final decades of a centuries-old Sephardic Jewish community through the lives of one remarkable family. At the end of WWII, 36,000 Jews lived in Libya, but not a single one remains today.”
Citations:
Last example :http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16658165
Alaska erosion : http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/29/AR2006122901904.html
pictures from:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Road_sign_merging.svghttp://www.temple-emanuel.com/community/sisterhood/
Blog post no. 6: What concepts in the Sawi culture intrigued / reviled / saddened / angered / surprised you?
The Sawi culture is based on treachery, betrayal and ‘fattening with friendship’. Pride is taken in killing and hurting a person. A person’s standing in society is based on the amount of living beings he has killed and how much he made them suffer. Parts of the human body are kept as trophies to remember how one killed them. How to betray and murder are tales told to the children. It did not sadden me as in this world as well there are things that have taken place, might be taking place and might take place in the future almost just like this. 
I thought that it was weird how they were so open about it and it was considered normal and a basis on which respect was shown. I have heard of tribes that practiced cannibalism and people that were like that. I have read of serial killers who take parts of their victims bodies and that is just scary. Just for this post I thought that I would put some examples of them but then I went to get the name of one and I found more than one that in itself is just scary.
Jeffery Dahmer - killed and dismembered Sinthasomphone(his victim), keeping his skull as a souvenir.
Richard Chase - He was nicknamed "The Vampire of Sacramento" because he drank his victims' blood and cannibalized their remains.
Lam Kor-wan - "The Jars Murderer", was coined when the police revealed that he had hoarded sexual organs in tupperware containers in his Tsim Sha Tsui bedroom on Kwei Chau
Dennis Nilsen – kept bin bags full of human organs stored in his wardrobe
Alfred G. "Alferd" Packer - an American prospector who was convicted of cannibalism
That is just because in the world I have been brought up and heard about betrayal, treachery, murder, making people suffer and those kinds of things do happen but it is not see as something to respect it is despised along with the people that did/do it.
Example: William Patrick Hitler the nephew of Hitler. His sons are childless and they have taken a pact to bring their part of Adolf Hitler's bloodline to an end.
They shows that they disliked their own fore father.
Ones thoughts about things change from the perspective it is seen from.
I have seen people making ‘friends’ with people just to insult and let them down them in front of others. People who claim to be friends but behind your back they let you down. Girls who start flirting with the boy you like only because they know that you like them. People who aim for something that they do not care about, the only reasons they are aiming for it being the fact that you really want it. People who claim to have an open mind to the world saying that they accept you as you are but then they make fun of things that you consider important and they try to turn you into themselves. People who claim to be your good friends but they take ever opportunity to insult and they make themselves feel better by insulting you. There are other worse examples but these are ones that tend to happen quite often in normal daily life. Is that not betrayal and getting pleasure out of someone else’s sadness? The Sawi take that to a whole other level. That was not saddening but disgusting and a bit scary. I find it very difficult to make friends with people as I am not good with socializing and I would rather not have any friends than go out of my way to get friends who might just turn around and hurt me. After feeling comfortable around someone and trusting them to have your trust broken is something really bad. Hence, I was disgusted when I read about the ‘fatten with friendship’ concept. In cases like that it is better not to have any friends and be a loner. The best friend on this earth that you can have is yourself.
I thought that it was weird how they were so open about it and it was considered normal and a basis on which respect was shown. I have heard of tribes that practiced cannibalism and people that were like that. I have read of serial killers who take parts of their victims bodies and that is just scary. Just for this post I thought that I would put some examples of them but then I went to get the name of one and I found more than one that in itself is just scary.Jeffery Dahmer - killed and dismembered Sinthasomphone(his victim), keeping his skull as a souvenir.
Richard Chase - He was nicknamed "The Vampire of Sacramento" because he drank his victims' blood and cannibalized their remains.
Lam Kor-wan - "The Jars Murderer", was coined when the police revealed that he had hoarded sexual organs in tupperware containers in his Tsim Sha Tsui bedroom on Kwei Chau
Dennis Nilsen – kept bin bags full of human organs stored in his wardrobe
Alfred G. "Alferd" Packer - an American prospector who was convicted of cannibalism
That is just because in the world I have been brought up and heard about betrayal, treachery, murder, making people suffer and those kinds of things do happen but it is not see as something to respect it is despised along with the people that did/do it.
Example: William Patrick Hitler the nephew of Hitler. His sons are childless and they have taken a pact to bring their part of Adolf Hitler's bloodline to an end.
They shows that they disliked their own fore father.
Ones thoughts about things change from the perspective it is seen from.
I have seen people making ‘friends’ with people just to insult and let them down them in front of others. People who claim to be friends but behind your back they let you down. Girls who start flirting with the boy you like only because they know that you like them. People who aim for something that they do not care about, the only reasons they are aiming for it being the fact that you really want it. People who claim to have an open mind to the world saying that they accept you as you are but then they make fun of things that you consider important and they try to turn you into themselves. People who claim to be your good friends but they take ever opportunity to insult and they make themselves feel better by insulting you. There are other worse examples but these are ones that tend to happen quite often in normal daily life. Is that not betrayal and getting pleasure out of someone else’s sadness? The Sawi take that to a whole other level. That was not saddening but disgusting and a bit scary. I find it very difficult to make friends with people as I am not good with socializing and I would rather not have any friends than go out of my way to get friends who might just turn around and hurt me. After feeling comfortable around someone and trusting them to have your trust broken is something really bad. Hence, I was disgusted when I read about the ‘fatten with friendship’ concept. In cases like that it is better not to have any friends and be a loner. The best friend on this earth that you can have is yourself.
Citations:
wikipedia.com http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/275756/adolf_hitlers_american_relatives_the.html?cat=37
wikipedia.com http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/275756/adolf_hitlers_american_relatives_the.html?cat=37
blogspot.com
Wednesday, 3 December 2008
Blog post no. 5. Question5. What should society do for “uncivilized cultures” like the Sawi?
I think that culture should be left as it is as culture is delicate and can change easily. Even though I think that culture should be left just as it is and not interfered with. People do need help once in a while as that is a normal human need. However, they should be helped only when they ask for it.
Mr. Rader mentioned a tribe that was dying out and was provided with an apartment and a school: an area to live so that they did not die out. However, their culture was totally changed. I did not like that as whether their culture was worth keeping or not according to the majority, it should have been kept. If I was in the place of the NGO’s (and I had as much money) I would have given them an area of land for themselves and made sure that no one interfered with them. Seen to it that they are helped out with basic needs so that they did not have to suffer to get them anymore and see that no one interfered with them. The tribe had to have had a strong view and culture to last so long and the only reason they were dying out is not because of their culture: but because the outside world was encroaching on their culture and their way of living and affected them in a negative way. For example, we live as we are living what if outside alien beings attacked us and we were an endangered suffering species. Would it be considered that the way we were living was wrong because it was coming to an end we were not prepared for an attack from the outside world? No, as we had survived for so long and the reason we were in danger was not our fault. In the same way I think that they should have been given a chance and been left alone to live their life the way they wanted to live it.
As for the Sawi, I think that it was good that they were found out and even though cannibalism was a great part of their culture and removing that aspect would get rid or a lot of their culture it was worth it. Cannibalism is wrong not only religiously but morally and goes against all normal human ethics. Other than that they should have been left alone. So what if they were not informed on the world outside slowly they would have been. I think that missionaries getting there was like how oil diggers go to get as much as much oil they can get so that they can get money, just instead of the oil the missionaries were taking away the tribal peoples view, their way of thinking and their faith and belief in the things they believed in. Sure! The word of God needs to be spread around and needs to live on but the Sawi knew no other religion and no other different way, besides their own and the newly introduced one. So it was sort of like the ‘first come first serve’ technique. However, they can change their view if they do find something that they prefer as the world has been shown to them. Everyone considers their way the right one and even though I do believe in Jesus Christ I hate it when people try to make me change my belief of modify it according to theirs.
In the Bible we are told not to judge others. Hence, what right do we have to judge who is uncivilized and who is uncivilized? None what so ever! People do not have the right do decide if other people are civilized or not hence we just have to leave it up to them to figure it out. Cultures vary in one you might is civilized in another you may not. There is nothing that can be done to change that unless you keep changing your ways, like a chameleon changes its colour. Since, that is not easy and it is not natural you just live as you are. Hence, you must give others the basic human right to have their own views and do the same: live as they want to, though that is how it should be as long as it is not harmful and it respects the human rights of others.
Since everyone has different view and ideas it is not possible to even ask what society should do for “uncivilized cultures” as we cannot really be one society with totally different views. We also cannot judge which way would be the right one. I conclude that ‘society’ should just help out when asked to and otherwise they should just stay away.
Mr. Rader mentioned a tribe that was dying out and was provided with an apartment and a school: an area to live so that they did not die out. However, their culture was totally changed. I did not like that as whether their culture was worth keeping or not according to the majority, it should have been kept. If I was in the place of the NGO’s (and I had as much money) I would have given them an area of land for themselves and made sure that no one interfered with them. Seen to it that they are helped out with basic needs so that they did not have to suffer to get them anymore and see that no one interfered with them. The tribe had to have had a strong view and culture to last so long and the only reason they were dying out is not because of their culture: but because the outside world was encroaching on their culture and their way of living and affected them in a negative way. For example, we live as we are living what if outside alien beings attacked us and we were an endangered suffering species. Would it be considered that the way we were living was wrong because it was coming to an end we were not prepared for an attack from the outside world? No, as we had survived for so long and the reason we were in danger was not our fault. In the same way I think that they should have been given a chance and been left alone to live their life the way they wanted to live it.
As for the Sawi, I think that it was good that they were found out and even though cannibalism was a great part of their culture and removing that aspect would get rid or a lot of their culture it was worth it. Cannibalism is wrong not only religiously but morally and goes against all normal human ethics. Other than that they should have been left alone. So what if they were not informed on the world outside slowly they would have been. I think that missionaries getting there was like how oil diggers go to get as much as much oil they can get so that they can get money, just instead of the oil the missionaries were taking away the tribal peoples view, their way of thinking and their faith and belief in the things they believed in. Sure! The word of God needs to be spread around and needs to live on but the Sawi knew no other religion and no other different way, besides their own and the newly introduced one. So it was sort of like the ‘first come first serve’ technique. However, they can change their view if they do find something that they prefer as the world has been shown to them. Everyone considers their way the right one and even though I do believe in Jesus Christ I hate it when people try to make me change my belief of modify it according to theirs.
In the Bible we are told not to judge others. Hence, what right do we have to judge who is uncivilized and who is uncivilized? None what so ever! People do not have the right do decide if other people are civilized or not hence we just have to leave it up to them to figure it out. Cultures vary in one you might is civilized in another you may not. There is nothing that can be done to change that unless you keep changing your ways, like a chameleon changes its colour. Since, that is not easy and it is not natural you just live as you are. Hence, you must give others the basic human right to have their own views and do the same: live as they want to, though that is how it should be as long as it is not harmful and it respects the human rights of others.
Since everyone has different view and ideas it is not possible to even ask what society should do for “uncivilized cultures” as we cannot really be one society with totally different views. We also cannot judge which way would be the right one. I conclude that ‘society’ should just help out when asked to and otherwise they should just stay away.
citations : picture from http://www.umanitoba.ca/campus/physical_plant/sustainability/inaction/index.html
Blog post no. 4: Question no.2:How does Faith relate to the world in which we live?
Faith is at the center of our life's but ...What is faith? Webster’s online dictionary defines faith as “Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel. Faith is in general the persuasion of the mind that a certain statement is true (Phil. 1:27; 2 Thess. 2:13). “The primary thing is that faith is trust or a belief. The belief in something that is considered true and therefore; it is worthy of trust.
“Optimism is the foundation of courage” and without being sure and optimistic that you can trust someone you cannot have faith. When you believe that you can do something or when you are sure you can trust someone it shows a deep relationship. Life is built on relationships. What if some do not believe will their unbelief make the belief that others have in them without effect? Certainly not! God sent his son down to heaven with the faith that he would forgive us for all our sins.
I questioned Mrs. Lindeman about faith as I really like how she speaks. She said it is: “knowing without tangible evidence”. A synonym she used to explain this was when the wind blows you know there is wind, you see the leaves rustling but you cannot catch the wind and say ‘here it’s the wind’. However, faith is not real and you do not really believe if you do not act upon it. Faith comes before action as you must have the trust before you can act on it. Faith is not passive, it is active: when you have the faith you do not just act on it once but you know that you can trust the outcome to be the very same as it was the last time. The effect it has in the relation to the world is the way we live. Faith can be seen a person’s actions.
My room-mate Cha-Cha said “This world goes around because of faith, everything depends on faith. Well, we are speaking all these words because we have faith on the form of making a sound with our lips that can help up communicate. And money pieces of paper with dead presidents on it but we can trust that we can get something with it. The most important thing in the world such as God, religion, love, friendship and everything it just depends on your belief of what really exists.” What she believes is the most important things in the world are the things you cannot see like faith and love. "This world evolves because faith still exists somehow, somewhere in some form." When she said that it just proved what my math teacher told me. You can see faith only when it is acted upon. You can only see love when a person acts upon their feeling. Otherwise you cannot take it and show it without actions as words can only last for a while.
So, when people do portray their faith and beliefs. They must consider that everyone has faith in different things and this can lead to conflict. As they would act differently there would be friction which would cause discontent. There are times when our trust is betrayed and we are left looking foolish at times like that we have to just get the courage to get up again. However, we cannot always live thinking about how we are going to be let down. We must live in an optimistic manner and believe that if we do good then good will come out of it: what goes around comes around. That is what I have faith in. God will bless you with what you have but only if you do good will good happen to you eventually. All we have to do is be still and believe: have faith! in yourself. Believe that you can always make it through.
Like the Japanese proverb “fall sever times, stand up eight”.
Or the song by Smash Mouth
“I get knocked down.
“Optimism is the foundation of courage” and without being sure and optimistic that you can trust someone you cannot have faith. When you believe that you can do something or when you are sure you can trust someone it shows a deep relationship. Life is built on relationships. What if some do not believe will their unbelief make the belief that others have in them without effect? Certainly not! God sent his son down to heaven with the faith that he would forgive us for all our sins.
I questioned Mrs. Lindeman about faith as I really like how she speaks. She said it is: “knowing without tangible evidence”. A synonym she used to explain this was when the wind blows you know there is wind, you see the leaves rustling but you cannot catch the wind and say ‘here it’s the wind’. However, faith is not real and you do not really believe if you do not act upon it. Faith comes before action as you must have the trust before you can act on it. Faith is not passive, it is active: when you have the faith you do not just act on it once but you know that you can trust the outcome to be the very same as it was the last time. The effect it has in the relation to the world is the way we live. Faith can be seen a person’s actions.
My room-mate Cha-Cha said “This world goes around because of faith, everything depends on faith. Well, we are speaking all these words because we have faith on the form of making a sound with our lips that can help up communicate. And money pieces of paper with dead presidents on it but we can trust that we can get something with it. The most important thing in the world such as God, religion, love, friendship and everything it just depends on your belief of what really exists.” What she believes is the most important things in the world are the things you cannot see like faith and love. "This world evolves because faith still exists somehow, somewhere in some form." When she said that it just proved what my math teacher told me. You can see faith only when it is acted upon. You can only see love when a person acts upon their feeling. Otherwise you cannot take it and show it without actions as words can only last for a while.
So, when people do portray their faith and beliefs. They must consider that everyone has faith in different things and this can lead to conflict. As they would act differently there would be friction which would cause discontent. There are times when our trust is betrayed and we are left looking foolish at times like that we have to just get the courage to get up again. However, we cannot always live thinking about how we are going to be let down. We must live in an optimistic manner and believe that if we do good then good will come out of it: what goes around comes around. That is what I have faith in. God will bless you with what you have but only if you do good will good happen to you eventually. All we have to do is be still and believe: have faith! in yourself. Believe that you can always make it through.
Like the Japanese proverb “fall sever times, stand up eight”.
Or the song by Smash Mouth
“I get knocked down.
But I get up again.
You're never going to keep me down.”
citations : picture from http://faith.propadeutic.com/authors/authors.html
japanese quote from the T.C.I.S. journal.
Sunday, 30 November 2008
Blog post no 3: Do missionaries destroy culture?
At first I was not really sure if missionaries did spoil culture though I was leaning a bit towards the idea that they do. When you see countries and their historical buildings, songs, prayers, whatever; culture is based around the religion and the religion around the culture. I think that religion and culture go hand in hand. You wouldn’t find ancient Buddhist temples in England or paintings or carvings of Christ in the caves of Ajanta and Ellora in India. As Buddhism did not come about in England neither was Christianity a religion in the culture of India. In India Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam were the religions that existed for the longest time and hence there are the relics and historical cultural views that you can see. When missionaries come they changed the religion thus modifying the culture and changing the view of the people.
Even though cannibalism is ridiculous it was a part of the Sawi culture and their religion did not have anything against that. After they become Christians they cannot kill and hence they will not follow that part of their culture and that will also stop them from having the ceremonies related to that event as there is no significance in having them anymore. That’s a good thing as there is nothing good that comes out of being a cannibal. Still, I was thinking maybe missionaries do not change the culture as long as the main art and culture remain however when I started reading the writings by Don Richardson I was thinking I would start afresh and build my views. I was waiting for some biased view however, he starts his writing giving examples of the missionaries that destroyed culture and this just made me decide, missionaries DO destroy the culture. He should have give examples of missionaries that do no. I thought he would give one example and then stop and saying “but, unfortunately, “Abne Hale” came to be synonymous with ‘missionary’.” Instead he goes on giving more examples, Fray Diego de Landa and the destroyers of the totem poles. He says that it is better if missionaries go there before others as missionaries are sympathetic. That is being biased and what does he really mean by “agents”?
Does he mean people from other religions? Or people who want to take capture animals and lumber men; they only destroy the nature and not the people. I really hate people who destroy nature. I am not an animal activist or anything but I would rather live in a world filled with trees than with sky scrapers. Back to the topic: In the case of the Sawi even if others came would they not have just eaten them? After all they were cannibals! Whether culture change is arbitrary, forced or for the change to live according to the New Testament. It is change all the same. Culture change will always occur some how of the other if it is not missionaries then it will be other people or just modernization however, what is important is the amount of culture loss. What I liked from reading the book peace child was that he learnt the language and using their own language he taught them God’s word. However, isn’t a time going to come when they are going to be forced to learn English? Even if people speak their own language there is culture loss sometimes. For example: in Hindi and in Korean there are English words being put in. After a while these seem part of the language. Aren’t the missionaries and other people coming into the tribe’s own little Garden of Eden. It is said that when God had not revealed everything to Adam and Eve they did not realize they were naked and hence they did not cover up all that much. That is something the tribal people and they had in common. In some cases when the tribal people refuse to convert Dan Richardson mentions how the missionaries do not give up and they keep forcing them to convert. Sure perseverance is good but only for some things. In this case it would be considered forcing religion on them and even if they finally accept it most likely would be just to keep the missionaries away. “Unity is strength” and all Christians irrespective of their denomination, worship Christ and hence whether Roman Catholic or Presbyterian missionaries it does not make a difference. If people always show the difference and keep saying that there are different denominations that only shows that there must be something wrong if there have to be so many dimensions for worshiping the same God as we all have one thing in common; the belief that Jesus is the way, the truth and the life.
Do missionaries destroy culture when they evangelize people? I conclude that they do and the amount that is destroyed changes from missionary group to missionary group. I do not think that this is bad as long as the main cultural view or most of it remains. Cultures should remain as they are, unless they are harmful.
Even though cannibalism is ridiculous it was a part of the Sawi culture and their religion did not have anything against that. After they become Christians they cannot kill and hence they will not follow that part of their culture and that will also stop them from having the ceremonies related to that event as there is no significance in having them anymore. That’s a good thing as there is nothing good that comes out of being a cannibal. Still, I was thinking maybe missionaries do not change the culture as long as the main art and culture remain however when I started reading the writings by Don Richardson I was thinking I would start afresh and build my views. I was waiting for some biased view however, he starts his writing giving examples of the missionaries that destroyed culture and this just made me decide, missionaries DO destroy the culture. He should have give examples of missionaries that do no. I thought he would give one example and then stop and saying “but, unfortunately, “Abne Hale” came to be synonymous with ‘missionary’.” Instead he goes on giving more examples, Fray Diego de Landa and the destroyers of the totem poles. He says that it is better if missionaries go there before others as missionaries are sympathetic. That is being biased and what does he really mean by “agents”?
Does he mean people from other religions? Or people who want to take capture animals and lumber men; they only destroy the nature and not the people. I really hate people who destroy nature. I am not an animal activist or anything but I would rather live in a world filled with trees than with sky scrapers. Back to the topic: In the case of the Sawi even if others came would they not have just eaten them? After all they were cannibals! Whether culture change is arbitrary, forced or for the change to live according to the New Testament. It is change all the same. Culture change will always occur some how of the other if it is not missionaries then it will be other people or just modernization however, what is important is the amount of culture loss. What I liked from reading the book peace child was that he learnt the language and using their own language he taught them God’s word. However, isn’t a time going to come when they are going to be forced to learn English? Even if people speak their own language there is culture loss sometimes. For example: in Hindi and in Korean there are English words being put in. After a while these seem part of the language. Aren’t the missionaries and other people coming into the tribe’s own little Garden of Eden. It is said that when God had not revealed everything to Adam and Eve they did not realize they were naked and hence they did not cover up all that much. That is something the tribal people and they had in common. In some cases when the tribal people refuse to convert Dan Richardson mentions how the missionaries do not give up and they keep forcing them to convert. Sure perseverance is good but only for some things. In this case it would be considered forcing religion on them and even if they finally accept it most likely would be just to keep the missionaries away. “Unity is strength” and all Christians irrespective of their denomination, worship Christ and hence whether Roman Catholic or Presbyterian missionaries it does not make a difference. If people always show the difference and keep saying that there are different denominations that only shows that there must be something wrong if there have to be so many dimensions for worshiping the same God as we all have one thing in common; the belief that Jesus is the way, the truth and the life.
Do missionaries destroy culture when they evangelize people? I conclude that they do and the amount that is destroyed changes from missionary group to missionary group. I do not think that this is bad as long as the main cultural view or most of it remains. Cultures should remain as they are, unless they are harmful.
Wednesday, 26 November 2008
Blog post no.2: question no.3:What should we do when we are confronted with other cultures?
There are many countries, states, cultures, religions and languages. If there was only one of each the world would be an extremely boring place to live in. Culture should be respected and kept. Without culture, there would be no variety and colour in the world. Now days with uniformity taking over the world and English the auxiliary language there are languages, cultures, world views and priceless interesting historical facts being lost.
When confronted with a new culture. One must respect it as they are new and different to that culture and hence they have no right to judge. If they want to fit in they should learn the foreign language instead of trying to educate the people about their own. Culture consists of traditions, ceremonies, legends, art, music, folklore, supernatural beliefs and many other things. Obviously, people cannot be left to suffer if their culture is harmful (for example cannibalism,) instead they need to be corrected. However, all the culture must be recorded with detail and a whole new view must not be forced on them. I dislike the way all countries are becoming westernized as I think that would make the world a really boring place to live in. For example; when people get married many no longer wear their traditional attire instead they would rather have their bride in a white dress dream come true. Even though I was born and brought up in India I can hardly speak my own languages. I feel really ashamed and sad because that makes me one more person who helped in the loss of culture. However, I came to South Korea and since I love the culture and the language I would love to fit in. I am trying to learn some Korean even though I am going at ‘snail pace’ I am at least trying. I do not like it when people visit countries and then complain about how the people are illiterate because they cannot speak English. I do not like it when people move into areas that were left untouched by their culture and try to take over and change aspects of that culture. For example: how the English tortured the Red Indians and destroyed a lot of their culture to try and impose their beliefs; whether right or wrong. Overall we cannot always have the world as we would like it to be "We must have strong minds ready to accept facts as they are; rather than how we would like them to be.”. However, if we do not accept them we must not insult them. We must respect people as they are human just like you and they have their own view just like you do, they think their view is right just as you would think about your own. From my own experience it is not nice being left out just because you are not from the same cultural background. Hence when others are new to your culture it is basic manners to accept them and make them feel ‘at home’ instead of treating them as if they are unwanted.
When confronted with a new culture. One must respect it as they are new and different to that culture and hence they have no right to judge. If they want to fit in they should learn the foreign language instead of trying to educate the people about their own. Culture consists of traditions, ceremonies, legends, art, music, folklore, supernatural beliefs and many other things. Obviously, people cannot be left to suffer if their culture is harmful (for example cannibalism,) instead they need to be corrected. However, all the culture must be recorded with detail and a whole new view must not be forced on them. I dislike the way all countries are becoming westernized as I think that would make the world a really boring place to live in. For example; when people get married many no longer wear their traditional attire instead they would rather have their bride in a white dress dream come true. Even though I was born and brought up in India I can hardly speak my own languages. I feel really ashamed and sad because that makes me one more person who helped in the loss of culture. However, I came to South Korea and since I love the culture and the language I would love to fit in. I am trying to learn some Korean even though I am going at ‘snail pace’ I am at least trying. I do not like it when people visit countries and then complain about how the people are illiterate because they cannot speak English. I do not like it when people move into areas that were left untouched by their culture and try to take over and change aspects of that culture. For example: how the English tortured the Red Indians and destroyed a lot of their culture to try and impose their beliefs; whether right or wrong. Overall we cannot always have the world as we would like it to be "We must have strong minds ready to accept facts as they are; rather than how we would like them to be.”. However, if we do not accept them we must not insult them. We must respect people as they are human just like you and they have their own view just like you do, they think their view is right just as you would think about your own. From my own experience it is not nice being left out just because you are not from the same cultural background. Hence when others are new to your culture it is basic manners to accept them and make them feel ‘at home’ instead of treating them as if they are unwanted.
The Sawi culture was rare and one of its own. However it had some major aspects that needed to be changed. ‘Do not kill’ is not only one of the Ten Commandments but it must be one of your basic morals as well. They did not only kill people, they ate them as well. This goes against everything. It shows no respect what so ever for people, relationships or life. Passion comes from relationship and without that there is no way to live a proper live or gain a connection with God. The word of God must spread but it must not be forced upon them. God created each of us in his image does that not mean that they were eating God’s image every time they ate someone? The fact that they ate humans does not disgust me as I have heard about it many a time before, it’s just that I cannot comprehend how they would find eating a human normal and how they were comfortable with killing and viewed each death with pride and boasted about it as if it were a trophy. Instead of mourning at the death of a fellow human being, they celebrated their victory with song and dance. I think that people need to live their life with satisfaction. God is surely a part of my life; hence, I think that they do need God to be introduced to them. However, they must not be forced or tortured into believing. “Each time a language or culture is lost, we loose an irreplaceable and exquisite way of being. Each time a well-loved building is torn down without a trace, or a gathering place paved over, a strand of culture is frayed.”
Citations
Quote from: http://www.earthministry.org/3e/pmap/culture.htm
"We must have strong minds ready to accept facts as they are; rather than how we would like them to be." Harry S. Truman
Quote from: http://www.earthministry.org/3e/pmap/culture.htm
"We must have strong minds ready to accept facts as they are; rather than how we would like them to be." Harry S. Truman
picture from : http://www.visitmaui.com/MauiHwnCulture.jpg
Sunday, 23 November 2008
Blog post no. 1: What factors of your native culture have informed your religious world view? Explain the impact of these factors
I was born and brought up in Mumbai, India. India is a country with various religions; Hinduism, Islam, Jainism, Sikhism, Catholicism, Judaism, Buddhism and many others. Living in a ‘Hindu Colony’ most of the people around us were Hindus. There were a few others that weren’t but they were a minority as the whole area was a Hindu area. Most Hindu people are rather friendly but there are exceptions. When we were children, my sister and I were told to go back home and play as we were different. After a while they accepted us but my sister refused to play with them and so did I. We went to ‘St. Agnes High School’, an English medium Catholic school about a half an hour bus ride away from where I lived. There we had weekly chapel time, daily pray time and religious education. The school was run by the sisterhood of Jesus and Mary. I went for Sunday school Bible study every Sunday. I was introverted and except for school, church and rare outings with my parents, I never went out. I did not have any friends and so there were no real cultural factors that affected me. At home I prayed with my parents whenever they did. After a while, I decided I did not want to anymore but they forced me to join in anyway. That made me dislike religion and the way it is often forced upon others. I assumed that all religion was just a way to view the world and make sense of it and focus the blame for events on other things. I looked up different religions online and read about them in the library. I liked the way Buddhism viewed Gautama Buddha as a preacher who was telling them the right thing and not a God and how they liked preserving nature: however I did not want to become a vegetarian, I like the Hindu belief of karma and the Muslim belief of ‘an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth’. I believed there was a God but I just was not sure what the true view was. Obviously every religion views their path as the right one and so there was no use asking believers. I viewed Humanism and what explanations it offered for life, evolution, and science. I was an Agnostic and separated myself from everyone. Looking at everything, I came up with conclusions slowly day by day. I moved to Ireland and whatever little belief I had built up was broken down and I did not know if I believed in God anymore. I prayed daily on my own hoping that my prayers would be answered but I did not have enough faith. I prayed telling God that if my prayers were answered then I would believe in him even though that is not what one must do. However, I realized that my prayers were coming true slowly and then I came to South Korea that was a turning point and I decided that I wanted to be a Christian. Once I made that decision I did not feel lonely or unhappy as often as I used to. My native culture made me stop and wonder what my real beliefs were. I appreciate that as I would not have liked become Christian just because my parents and family were. I made the decision by myself. I still dislike when people try to preach to me or convert me because they find my view incorrect. My native culture taught me to accept people whatever religion or view that they follow as t.hat is their view and everyone by their human right can choose. By forcing people to believe what you believe one only makes them dislike the religion but it also does not give them their human rights. I do not think that other religions are wrong I just accept the fact that there are other views out there. After all if one is meant to be open-minded and explore, they must accept that people have other beliefs whether they agree or disagree with it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
