Monday, May 05, 2008
Marvel-ous: Bishop
Peace and blessings,
In this piece, I wanted to share a few thoughts on
"Bishop's mutant ability enables him to absorb all forms of radiant or conductive energy that are directed towards him and to release that energy from his hands. This power is passive, allowing Bishop to absorb energy at all times.
When he releases the energy, he can release it as many different types of forms, usually in concussive blasts or in the same form as he had absorbed the energy although he can emit microwaves as well. He can also store energy in his personal reserves for increasing his strength, endurance, and (to an extent) his healing. He also has enhanced durability, resistance to poison and injury and is a skilled marksman and hand-to-hand fighter.
His powers make it difficult to harm him with energy-based attacks; however, he can become overloaded from absorbing too much energy, though his upper limits are unknown, even to himself. He is however vulnerable to non-energy weapon attacks. If he were to be shot by a projectile weapon or hit with a crowbar, it could harm him. He carries guns that fire laser beams and plasma charges through which he can channel his personal energies."
While my thoughts are only speculative, I think that there are some interesting parallels between Bishop's superhuman abilities and the experience of people of African Descent in the United States. For one, the fact that he can rechannel energy that is projected at him and use it for his benefit reminds me of how despite all of the hate, violence, and denigration my ancestors and previous generations of Affrican Americans have faced in this country, we have been able to thrive (and will continue t strive) in ways unimaginable. We have rechanneled many of the things that were originally used to keep us down in ways that enable us to stand taller. It is important to note that I am not including the use of the "N" word in this discussion, because I think that the word should be done with completely.
On a less positive note, I think that the fact that Bishop channels his personal energies through his guns has implications for the prevalence of black-on-black violence that exists amongst black males. This male-on-male violence is by no means specific to blacks (American culture in itself is a violent culture), but I am focusing on black make youth in this piece because I think it is this demographic that Bishop's abilities most closely speaks to. It seems Bishop's use of his stored energy through his guns draws similarities to how some young black males engage in violent behaviors as a way to deal with many of the built-up anger, frustrations, and issues they face in a country where they are often devalued.
Overall, it seems like Bishop's abilities have implications for the complex nature of the past and present experiences of people of African descent in the United States. One possible way for us to deal with the obstacles we may face as a marginalized people in the U.S. is to rechannel the negativity energies within these obstacles into positive energies that motivate us to succeed beyond measure. Now I'm not saying that we must be passive and "accept" things that happen to us; what I'm saying is that we should look at all situations, especially the negative ones, as opportunities to grow, better ourselves, and better our situation. Another possible, yet destructive way to
deal these negative obstacles is to let them consume us to where we respond in ways that are detrimental to ourselves and to others. Unlike Bishop, we don't have the luxury of looking into the future to see how certain choices will play out, so it's important that we choose wisely.
Labels: African American, Bishop, comic book, Superheroes, U.S., X-men
Sunday, May 04, 2008
Marvel-ous: Civil War (2006)
Peace and blessings,
Given my interests in superheroes and comic books, it seems only natural that I share some thoughts on some of the comic book series' that I think are worth checking out, regardless if you're a comic book fan or not. Many of the issues addressed in these comic books that I will highlight address a host of issues that are central to our lived experience. The comic book I am highlighting in this post is Marvel Comics'
Although the human/superhero beef (similar to the human-mutant beef in the X-Men comics) has existed for a while, the Civil War begins with a culmination of this beef that is marked by a tragic event. During a fight between superheroes, hundreds of children are killed during an explosion, which took place near a school. As a result, the government proposes that this is the last straw, and that humans with superhuman abilities (e.g., via genetics or technological assistance) must register with the government under the Superhero Registration Act. What makes this series interesting is that the superhero community are split between whether or not those with superhero abilities should have to register.
The over-arching themes throughout the comic relate to issues of identity, rights, civil liberties, and freedom. While some, like Garrett (2008) suggest that the comic symbolizes the country's sentiment post 9-11, I would take it a step further and argue that it also relates to the national debate on immigration policy. Actually, when I first read it about a year ago, Immediately thought of the immigration debate, not post 9-11. Below are a few sources where you can learn more about the comic book:
If you've read it, what are your thoughts on it? If not, would you consider it? Why or why not? Do you think comics have a place for addressing "real-world" issues? Stay blessed, encouraged, and speekonit...
* Garrett, G. (2008) Holy Superheroes!: Exploring the sacred in comics, graphic novels, and film (revised and expanded edition). KY: Westminister John Knox
Labels: 9-11, Civil War, comic book, freedom, immigration, Superheroes
Media With a Meaning (Throwback): X-Men Animated Series (1992-1997)
Peace and blessings,
I've talked about movies and TV shows, but now it's time to pay respect to cartoons. Although Voltron is my all-time favorite cartoon, the runner-up is definitely the X-Men animated series that aired from 1992-1997. I remember as I child I used to have satellite cable so I could watch certain X-men episodes before they aired nationally. I'll never forget how shocked I was to find out that Morph wasn't dead, and that Mr. Sinister had manipulated him into seeking revenge on the X-Men! I also remember the only time I "man-handled" my older brother, which was when he turned the TV channel while I was watching X-Men, and it was the episode when Wolverine fights Sabertooth! Sorry about the flashbacks, but I couldn't help it. Anyhow, below are couple of Animated Music Videos folks have made that contains a compilation of clips from certain episodes. In terms of dealing with issues of prejudice, discrimination, belonging, fear, diversity/difference, and tolerance, I don't know of any other animated series that has "held it down" like the X-Men.
What do you think? Take care, God bless, and speekonit...
Labels: prejudice, Superheroes, TV, X-men
Media With A Meaning: Heroes
Peace and blessings,
This piece is in regards to an idea I had about 6 months ago, but for various reasons I'm just now writing it. One obvious reason for the delay is because I've been pretty busy these past six months with wedding planning, school, and life, and thus haven't had the time to put update the site like I want to you. Another reason may have to do with the strike that took place with TV show writers, and the resulting cease in the production and airing of new episodes of major television shows. Anyhow, I'm finally sharing a few thoughts on the television show
Debate #1: Evolution "versus" Divine Creation/Ordinance
The major premise of the show is that there are individuals in the world who are genetic anomalies in the sense that they have superhuman abilities. What I found interesting while watching the show (so far I've watched the first season twice, making me a certified, hardcore fan, lol) was not just the type of powers people had, but their beliefs about where these abilities came from. Relatedly, this debate reflects the larger debate regarding the origins of life itself. Some characters believe that these genetic anomalies are definite proof that science (esp. Darwinism) was right in that species are capable of large, qualitative evolutionary leaps. For these characters, superhuman abilities are primarily a product of gene transformation via evolution. Other characters, however, march to a different tune. They believe that their abilities are a gift from God, and therefore they must be used for a purpose. Although this debate may not be an explicit within the show, I would be interested to see if in the next season or upcoming seasons they identify characters who believe their abilities are products of both evolution and divine creation/ordinance.
Debate #2: Freewill "versus" Pre-destination
I think this debate is more evident throughout the show that the previously mentioned debate because in both seasons thus far, there has been the threat of a major disaster, and an intimately complex relationship between the past, present, and the future (e.g., a couple of characters can travel through time and see the consequences of past and present action and inaction). At the same time, however, there seems to bee a bit of ambiguity in that while some things can be changed through making different decisions, other things cannot. For these other things, simply making different decisions justs changes how a particular how an outcome manifests, not what outcome manifests. In this sense, there seems to be "discussion" throughout the show as to whether we as humans have freewill and are able to change life's course, or are we merely playing our parts in bringing about an inevitable outcome. Unlike the first debate, I think that the show does a good job of highlighting both sides, as well the middle ground position (e.g., we have freewill over some things, but not others).
So there you have it. Two reasons that I really like the show (aside from its superhero/X-Men/comic storyline steez) is that in many ways, it addresses some deep questions that we as humans have wrestled with throughout history and continue to wrestle with today:
1) How did life originate?
2) What is the meaning of life? My purpose for being here?
What do you think? Stay blessed, take care, and speekonit...
Season 1 Trailer
Season 2 Trailer
Season 3 Trailer (visual and sound quality is suspect)
Labels: divine creation, evolution, Superheroes, TV
Hip-Hop and the "Gospel"
“Most of your songs/are just as foul as it gets/and as wild as it gets/
People/they follow your steps/and how low is this?/
Talking model chicks and bottles of Crys?/speakin’ out of your lips/
The same lips you try to convince/
That although your music is fowl/God’s behind your success/
But nope!/that’s a misnomer/God hates your music He’s not a schizo/
For real it makes no/difference/how you try to explain/
That your heart ain’t same as the stuff that you’re sayin’/
You see your heart’s the problem and your mouth’s the problem/
You can’t appease the wrath of God with a gospel album/nope!/”
- Da Truth
“Whose Team?”
The Faith
"With young men and women looking up to me, I have to let them know that I’m a man of God.”
- Young Joc
Peace and blessings,
Let me start off by saying that as I am writing this, I am praying that it is received in a way that gives God glory, and if for whatever reason it is interpreted otherwise, then I apologize. As I was reading a recent article about
Before I get into what disturbed me about this piece, let me preface this discussion by making a few points. First, I am not saying that all Christian hip-hop is of God, nor am I saying that all secular hip-hop is of the devil. Although now I primarily listen to Christian hip-hop, one of the secular artists I still listen to is Joe Buddens. Although I disagree with some of his content and his conceptions of God and Jesus, I think that many of the issues he addresses needs to be heard, and I praying that he truly turns his life over to Christ(I got a feeling that he will in a matter of time, but that's another topic). Second, I am in no way trying to put myself or the Christian artists I listen to as being "above" secular artists in anyway. We all fall short, therefore this response is not about who is "without sin," but a call for us to examine the directionality of our thoughts, words, actions, and intentions. Lastly, although this piece may come off a little "bullish," I am making a clear distinction between being judgmental and taking a stand. I am in no position to engage in the former, yet I also realize that I cannot sit back and forego engaging in the latter. Therefore, this response is also a call for us to take a stand. With that said, let's get into business...
The thing that bothers me the most about this article is that it seems to equate mentioning God with sharing the gospel. While I believe that God is working on them and will continue to work on them, I think we have a place these situations within context. I have no problem with secular rappers mentioning God in their songs if they feel led to do so; what I do have a problem with is the conceptions of God they are potentially expressing when they talk about God. In my opinion, sharing the gospel goes far beyond just mentioning God. It is having God be reflected and glorified through our lives. In other words, we have be transformed into a new person (2 Corinthians 5:17). Again, not to say that we have to be perfect, but the directionality of our thoughts, words, actions, and intentions have to be geared towards God.
Another part of the context that is important to consider is the large amounts of star-power that these artists have. I'm concerned that people who look up to these artists as role models may view them as reflecting the God they are talking about. For instance, having one song that talks about God at the end of an album whose previous 15 tracks were about anything but, may potentially give off the impression that God is "cool" enough to know, but not "cool" enough to compel us to do away with things that are not pleasing to Him. Then again, can you really have the former without the latter? To me, it seems like the hoopla of this article has more to do with WHO was talking about God than WHAT they were actually saying about God. If it really was about the WHAT, then artists such as Cross Movement, 116 Click, Da Truth, Japhia Life, Flame, and countless others who have been talking about God and sharing the gospel for the past decade would have the same platform to reach masses as secular artists tend to have. I liken the situation to high school where the popular students say the same thing that was previously stated by unpopular students, but the other students give the popular students' words more weight than the unpopular students.
In conclusion, I want to say that I am not saying that secular artists who talk about God are not sincere, or that they are "faking it." I'm just urging us to not be so quick to catapult them to the position of being THEE medium for reaching people (esp. youth) who may otherwise not know about God and/or listen to their music. I do think that secular artists can have a positive impact through mentioning God in their music or during their performances, but that doesn't mean they must be the end-all-be-all when it comes to who God is and what He requires of us. Just a few thoughts...
What do you think? Take care, God bless, and speekonit...
Labels: Christian hip hop, gospel
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Best Time of Year (For Basketball Fans)
Peace and blessings,
I'm currently on a serious grind in terms of my graduate studies and planning for my wedding, which is why I haven't been posting as regularly. For those who consistently check on the page thank you and bare with me.
The focus of this (very brief) post is sports, basketball in particular. Given that we just had March Madness and we are now in the NBA playoffs, I would argue that this is best time of the year for basketball fans. Before I throw out my NBA finals prediction, I want to preface this by saying that I am typing this as I just watch Tim Duncan hit the three to tie the game at 104 to send the game into double overtime. I know a lot of people are talking about a potential Lakers-Celtics final. However, I'm going to mix things up and assuming that these teams remain healthy, I pick a Suns-Pistons finals with the Pistons taking home the crown in 6 games, maybe 7.
How about those pics? Bogus? Legitimate? Take care, God bless, and speekonit...
Monday, March 31, 2008
Extreme Measures
"Jesus was driving out a demon that was mute. When the demon left, the man who had been mute spoke, and the crowd was amazed. But some of them said, 'By Beelzebub, the prince of demons, he is driving out demons.' Others tested him by asking for a sign from heaven.
Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them: 'Any kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and a house divided against itself will fall. If Satan is divided against himself, how can his kingdom stand? I say this because you claim that I drive out demons by Beelzebub. Now if I drive out demons by Beelzebub, by whom do your followers drive them out? So then, they will be your judges. But if I drive out demons by the finger of God, then the kingdom of God has come to you.'
'When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are safe. But when someone stronger attacks and overpowers him, he takes away the armor in which the man trusted and divides up the spoils. He who is not with me is against me, and he who does not gather with me, scatters.'"
- Luke 11: 14 - 23
Peace and blessings,
Last month I watched an episode of "Wife Swap" that was extremely hilarious and entertaining. I've watched episodes before and for the most part they too have been hilariously entertaining. This one, however, was particularly interesting because both of the families were Christian. Keeping true to the show's tradition, these families differed greatly in terms of some of their views on managing a household and raising children. One family was very liberal with the husband being a seminary graduate and being an at-home dad while his wife worked. They didn't appear to really instill Christian values to their children, but instead encouraged them to be individual thinkers. The other family was more "traditional" in that the husband was the provider and their children had to follow strict behavioral rules.
I don't really need to recap the rest of the show or explain the outcome to illustrate my point, which is that in my opinion, these two households represented (in one form or another) two major types of Christian thought prevalent throughout America. One type is the traditional Christian thought and the other is the more liberal/contemporary Christian thought. Once these types of thought are "hijacked" by the media, they take on an over-exaggerated form of their own. As a result, these ways of thought are put forth as extreme opposites of one another. What this episode of "Wife Swap" and the above scripture has showed me is that we must be careful to not be so quick to a) become so polarized in our own views that we neglect some of the essentials of the gospel (Matthew 28:18-19) and b) be so "open" with everything that we dilute some of the essentials of the gospel.
The question is not how do we choose between the traditional and the liberal, but how do we use elements of both to maximize the effectiveness and relevance of the gospel to a constantly changing, yet remarkably stable world. For instance, we are constantly evolving with regards to medical, technological, and scientific developments, and with regards to our understanding of how and why humans think, feel, and acts in the ways we do. At the same time, however, sins and vices such as murder, lust, greed, envy, jealousy, betrayal, pride and so forth has been around since the beginning of time, and is just as prevalent today. We must seek God for discernment regarding which aspects of our Christian faith and thought that could potentially be rethought and which aspects cannot. Reflecting on my personal experiences, I have been blessed to have great pastors who have given me tools to discern some of these differences. The deity and tri-unity of The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is an accepted fact of the Christian faith and cannot be changed. How Christians should interact with others is something that has and continues to be revisited and changed when appropriate (e.g. slavery, anti-semitism, racial/gender discrimination, homophobia, economic exploitation). However, I would argue that anyone who practiced or practice hate with regards to any of these groups and claim to be doing so in the name of Christianity is not really following Christ in the first place.
What do you think? Do you think that certain areas of Christian thought or too polarized? God bless, take care and speekonit...
Labels: Christianity, family, unity
Friday, March 21, 2008
Holding it Down: Samuel Rodriguez and the NHCLC
"The Latino, African- American, Anglo and other ethnic segments of the church must go beyond the myspace.com mindset. Pastor Nick Garza, an Assemblies of God Pastor in Sacramento, Ca. sees the functional structure of this web site as the anti-thesis to successful biblical outreach. "MySpace.com is a world wide internet phenomenon because it enables the subscriber to determine who has access to his/her profile, pictures, stories and information. In other words, unless you have been given access, you can't come in. Only my friends, who share my interests are granted access. All granted of course if you initially become a Friend of Tom (Tom being one of the co-founders of this virtual social networking site). Accordingly, the Church has operated under a Myspace.com model. As long as Christ is our default friend, we are somehow allowed to build our own space with limited access to include only those who we know or permit."
-Samuel Rodgiguez, "Latino Friends"
Peace and blessings,
I came across an interview with Rev. Samuel Rodriguez of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference (NHCLC) a while back, and was really feeling what he had to say. He talked a lot about the social justice aspect of Christianity as well as the political trends of Hispanics throughout the country. Check out the links below to learn more about Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, the NHCLC and their position regarding immigration reform, which according to him is just as much (if not more so) a spiritual issue as it is an economic and political one.
Share your thoughts and let me know what you think. Stay blessed and encouraged, and speekonit...
1)
2)
3)
He's the First Speaker at the revival:
Thursday, February 28, 2008
A Very Thought-Provoking Movie
Peace and blessings,
Given the recent post on Phillip Johnson's "Darwin on Trial," I am really looking forward to the movie
Thursday, February 14, 2008
A Few Thoughtz: Darwin on Trial, pt. 2
Peace and blessings,
I just wanted to briefly clarify my position on Darwin's theory of evolution (as well as the idea of evolution in general), because I realize that it was not clear in the previous post. As someone who is training to be a social scientist, I have the upmost respect and appreciation for science, theories of evolution included. After all, our ability to hypothesize about the world and search out to test those hypotheses is one of the characteristics that make us human.
Before proceeding, I must preface this discussion by acknowledging the fact that my take on this issue is heavily influenced by my Christian beliefs. The issue I have with some scientific theories, however, is that some theories try to replace God's ever-important role in the creation of the earth and in humanity. I feel that because we as humans could never possible understand the complete nature of God's creations, then the best that we can do as thinkers and scientists is to identity and analyze to the best of our ability, observable phenomena. In doing so, we must realize two things:
1) we will never get it "fully" right because there is way too much variation in human actions and observable phenomena for our human (limited) faculties to catch everything, let alone accurate describe it.
2) regardless of how accurate we get at identifying and analyzing the things we are able to observe and grasp, we cannot deny the fact that there are many things that we will simply never be able to observe, but yet are nevertheless "real" in every sense of the word.
By realizing these two things, I feel that it is perfectly normal for the "things of God" and science and intellectual inquiry to co-exist, insofar as it is understood that the former always precedes and takes priority over the latter. Therefore, I do not deny that evolution does not occur in certain instances, such that for example, over time dogs who live in regions where they have to constantly run from predators will probably develop stronger legs than dogs who live in regions where they are not threatened by predators (I know that wasn't the best example but bear with me, lol). What I do deny is the claim that evolution is so encompassing that it can explain the origin of life itself, and that it can account for all types (or at least most types) of purpose-driven developments, structures, and behaviors.
What do you think? Take care, God bless, and speekonit...
Labels: Darwin, Darwin On Trial, divine creation, evolution, science
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
