Goldilocks as Christian Metaphor

[amethyst73]

I kid you not! Read the diatribe against 'lukewarm' Christianity here.

How did I stumble upon this site? Well, I was looking for an image of Goldilocks to use in my upcoming lab presentation. See, one particular cell culture format is kind of an inverse of Goldilocks because even though it's sort of the middle of the road in terms of size, it shows considerably less gene expression than any of the others. That's why I was procrastinating looking for a Goldilocks image.

Comments

[apintrix.livejournal.com]

Railing against lukewarm Christianity was a favorite passtime of 17th century Puritan ministers. They were just as likely, though, to translate what is here "spit" as "vomit".

Their Christianity was much less lukewarm about religious rhetoric! Pssht, modern fundamentalism's got nuthin'.

[amethyst73.livejournal.com]

Heh. I'm particularly amused by the idea that if you trust in a Jesus 'down in your heart' that's 'a false Christ,' while if you trust in Jesus 'floating around in the air,' that's Satan. Whuuuuh?

[shoutingboy.livejournal.com]

I'm not defending that page, as such (or even commenting on it--I barely looked at it), but the "Goldilocks" metaphor doesn't surprise me much--it seems like a natural English-language take on Rev. 3:16.

C.S. Lewis said something similar about what he called "Christianity-and-water"--but then, he was a drinkin' man.

[amethyst73.livejournal.com]

Yup, I bet you're right. The linked page even mentions 'this Laodicean age.'

[shoutingboy.livejournal.com]

John did like to put a punchy verse in there at 3:16, whatever book he was writing.

(And, yes, I know the chapter/verse numbering came later...)

Lukewarm strawmen?

[haamel.livejournal.com]

What gets me about that link is that it asserts a definition of what "hot" Christianity should be without critical consideration. I don't suppose most self-describing Christians would equate "religious right" with "devout". The most dynamic, most relevant pastor I've ever heard preach was also one of the most progressive I've heard. Sure, avoid luke-warmism, but first come to a sound definition of "temperature". ^_-

Re: Lukewarm strawmen?

[amethyst73.livejournal.com]

I don't suppose most self-describing Christians would equate "religious right" with "devout".

Interesting thought... though I know several people whom I would place in the 'religious right' who are extremely devout.

As for dynamicism of faith, one can find that in a whole lotta places - not all of them Christian. I went to a cool Jewish service this past weekend which had a lot of singing and clapping, some dancing, and a five-piece band - plus a pretty good, relevant preacher; it was a lot more lively than the services I generally go to. A cousin of ours at the same service felt that it was really pretty traditional in feel, in comparison to her synagogue, which she described as 'electric'.