Slashdot Mirror
Churches Use Halo To Spread the Word, Raise Eyebrows
The New York Times has a lengthy look at an unorthodox way to spread the religious word: Halo 3 multiplayer matches. Churches across the country have adopted 'Halo Nights' as a way to get kids together in religious centers and church basements. "The alliance of popular culture and evangelism is challenging churches much as bingo games did in the 1960s. And the question fits into a rich debate about how far churches should go to reach young people. Far from being defensive, church leaders who support Halo -- despite its "thou shalt kill" credo -- celebrate it as a modern and sometimes singularly effective tool. It is crucial, they say, to reach the elusive audience of boys and young men." Just the same, the use of the game is raising concerns among some onlookers. GamePolitics reports that many faith communities are heavily debating the issue.
I don't think 'thou shalt not kill' ever refered to anything except humans. Otherwise, all the Christians that are eating meat will have some serious explaining to do.
I think this is a good idea for the church... Get the kids used to being at the church, and interacting with their friends there, possibly even friends that they never get to see otherwise. It establishes it as a friendly place that they want to be, the kids have some supervision while they play, and everyone involved is happy.
"If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
At my church (church of about 100 in a town of 2000) we happily use video games and things like that to bring teens in. While we have never used M rated games, we do have Wii tournaments from time to time. It is a great way to give the kids something safe to do (in a town of 2000 there isn't much) and gets them comfortable with the Church and the Youth Leaders we have.
;)
In regards to Halo 3 though, I do know our Senior High Sunday School teacher used it as the basis for his lesson last week. He actually had me come up and give a brief overview of the story from Halo 1 and 2 to start things off
Churches do need to be careful to be "in the world, but not of it", but at the same time don't be afraid of using main stream culture and entertainment in new ways to both teach and to simply get people interested.
Unstable Apps: Our Android Apps Don't Suck
Does Zonk have access to a grammar reference, or an editor's guide? Yeah, I'm sacrificing karma for this.
Life, the Universe, and Everything... in my image.
It's actually a common misconception that the Bible condemns killing. The misquoted verse from the 10 commandments was mis-translated in the KJV as "thou shalt not kill". Instead it should have been translated as "thou shalt not murder". The Bible (and God it's author) does not condemn killing in defence, punishment for a crime, or in wartime. What it does condemn is murder. So with this in mind Halo doesn't violate the 10 commandments at all.
Yes, I'm a Christian, and yes I love playing Halo.
Man is the lowest-cost, 150-pound, nonlinear, all-purpose computer system which can be mass-produced by unskilled labor.
Halo is just a game. You can only kill people in the real world.
Halo is no different than playing cops and robbers or cowboys and indians.
Most of the indignation is from people who would bristle at Jack Thompson calling a video game a murder simulator, but since this is about a church, they are more than willing to join his side intellectually if it lets them scream hypocrisy
I've always wondered how churches like that can rationalize spending money on a 20 foot screen with a nice projector and 18" subwoofer when that money could be applied to more useful pursuits such as helping the poor. Every time I drive past a church that is building a new multi-million dollar extension with fine architecture on expensive land I wonder the same thing. Why not give that money to single mothers trying to keep their families above water or drug rehabilitation programs or education programs for ex-convicts?
If you sit back and think of the dollars tied up in religious infrastructure, it is absolutely astounding. Ask yourself, if you combine the equity of all religious property within a 2 mile radius of your house, how much do you get? I know for me, I would estimate it at around 2 million...
I guess my first mistake was wondering how churches can _rationalize_ anything...
1, 2, 3, 4, 5... That's the combination on my luggage!
This isn't anything new, really. When I was in high school in the late 90s, a church near my school tried to lure in new youth group members through stuff like this every Friday night. In the church basement there was a big sound system, ping pong, foosball, and some TVs with game consoles (playstation and n64). People could come hang out and play the stuff for free. Free domino's pizza and soda too.
It is not "thou shalt not kill," it is "you shall not murder." Read the NIV, which is a superior translation to the KJV.
Hmmm.... I would be cautious about making such value statements.
Why would one assert that the NIV is a "superiour" translation? The King James Version was the dominant guide to Christian thought for English speaking people for more than 300 years. It would be curious to argue that the people who adhered to the guidance in the King James version were not (and are not) "inferiour" Christians to those who now use the New International Version which has only existed for (almost) the past 30 years. Given the short history of this new translation, its value, for better of for worse, is yet to be proven.
Whether the quality of the translation in terms of closeness to the original actually matters to the KJV as a holy book will doubtless be debated. I have friends who are convinced that the KJV is the one correct translation and I imagine they believe this on the basis of the content and on the basis of how they've been taught to interpret it - independently of what translators may describe as being technically the best. I'd say that it rather depends whether you believe you should follow the original texts as best understood academically, or whether you believe in a specific interpretation of the texts which you may feel to be superior spiritually somehow.
Personally I think it's very important to realise that all translations are likely imperfect, but that alternative translations could offer valuable insights into the subject matter and the process of how modern versions were arrived at.
There are plenty of examples of God showing himself to be love in the Old Testament and at least one example of God being a decisive judge on the wickedness of a man (and his wife)... Not to mention all that goes down in the book of Revelation.
The more you study the whole Bible, the more you recognize its unity.
Why not, Both are based on Fiction. One is far in the future and one is far in the past.
Science is the Real TRUTH!
Modern Christians say its actually thou shalt not murder with legally sanction killing being permissible. So yes, even humans can be killed.
While there's no question that God asked the Israelites to kill in His name repeatedly in the Old Testament and to punish certain crimes with death, it's an open question whether or not Jesus tightened the prohibition against killing with his commandments to "turn the other cheek" when one is wronged and to "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" when it comes to punishment of crimes.
It is quite reasonably arguable that even killing in self-defense is no longer allowed given the New Testaments focus on forgiveness and self-sacrifice, though few religious scholars would go that far. Gandhi, who was not a Christian, was one of the very few who did argue this -- even going so far as to say that England should not try to defend itself against the Nazis.
It's doubtful, though, that Christianity could've survived to be what it has become today if Constantine hadn't co-opted it into a warrior's creed.
If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
I don't see where it says rape the women, it says keep. Please show me a passage that says that, where it tells the men to actually force the women into sex.
-Ed
So you see what had happened was....
Some of the best evidence is coming from DNA analysis, some truly mind-breaking stuff.
Science cannot speak of the existence or nonexistence of your god or gods but your religion cannot speak to the veracity of evolutionary science. If you want to get into that debate, you're going to have to debate it from a scientific, not religious, point of view.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
What kind of God approves of murder, rape, and slavery?
What kind of idiot thinks they could understand the mind of an omnipotent, omnipresent being?
Not saying I condone those actions, just saying you are retarded for thinking you understand the reasoning of God--in much the same way my 1-year-old doesn't understand *why* I don't want him to stick his finger in the light socket--just that I don't want him to do it.
There's no place like
but when i'm playing a game i don't want the "person" dead.. just the on screen representation of their actions in the game world. their "avatar" or whatever.
Except for cheaters.
In other news, some people raise their children to believe that liquor (is|is not) good to drink, that meat (is|is not) OK to eat, that (conservatives|liberals) are smarter, and that (European|Asian|African) lineage is something to be proud of. None of those are objectively true but may have long-term ramifications on the child's social behavior. None of those are remotely considered child abuse, except possibly by people who are strongly in favor of the opposite position.
Don't cheapen real problems by equating random personal decisions with them. Punching your daughter in the mouth or burning your son with cigarette butts is child abuse. Raising them in the religious tradition you believe is necessary for them to enjoy a happy life (and afterward) is not.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
I keep seeing people in this debate arguing that this is a chance for churches to be "relevant". In fact, that seems to be the entire argument for those who say that Halo 3 should be in churches. They argue that it is needed to be "relevant".
Really, though, doesn't following this course of action make churches irrelevant? It seems to me that it does. I mean, what exactly are they providing here? Kids aren't showing up for the sermons, they are showing up for Halo 3 and the entertainment. Halo 3 parties, entertainment, and socializing are something you can get just about anywhere else. You can easilly find halo tournaments, free pizza, etc in a college dorm, for example. This raises the question: if you can get this sort of entertainment with or without the church, then why is the church needed? What is it bringing to the table? Since we can get the entertainment and social time with or without the church, then having the church is irrelevant . It's existence no longer matters, because things will stay the same with or without it.
Now don't misunderstand me, I'm not trying to make the claim that all churches are irrelevant. If a church can make the case to a person that they are a sinner, and that the Jesus that they serve can forgive sins, then they have become relevant to that person's life. Once a person believes they are a sinner, finding forgiveness of sins will be very relevant to them. The church can then bring things to the table that you can't find anywhere else. That makes the church relevant , because without them things will be different.
And this is why I find the argument that churches "need" to bring Halo in to stay "relevant" ridiculous. If your main focus is trying to provide entertainment and a social club just to lure more people in and boost attendance (and that is what many churches these days are about and how they measure success), you will become unecessary, irrelevant, and discarded. Those teens you can lure to a Halo tournament will come today, but just as soon as they can graduate, get jobs and buy their own big screen TV they will be gone. You won't ever make yourself relevant by providing Halo. Only churches that focus on their core message rather than socializing are going to be able to bring something to the table that no one else can. Only that will make them relevant to people. I'm not saying a church can't have social groups or even play video games. Those things can be great. But giving up some of the core beliefs, such as the belief that taking pleasure in violence is bad, is not going to make a church more relevent. It will in fact do the opposite, and make that church disposable.
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it.
kurzweil_freak
5th Kyu Genbukan Ninpo/KJJR student
Be the darkness that allows the light to shine.
And how about explaining the Crusades? Oh, I guess they were not humans at the time.
The support for military? The support for the death penalty? The support for these two comes directly from the so called religious crowd. Oh, but as long as they protest the abortion thing, I guess that makes it all better. They are not much different from the jihadists or other religious fanatics.
"Thou shalt not kill except for enemies of God and you can choose who is my enemy" - that seems to be how things are these days in both "devout christian" and "devout muslim" crowds while both proclaiming "peaceful religion". More people died in religious wars as percentage of population than any other wars in the history of this planet.
I guess the mod points here will depend who gets to read the message. I hope they don't declare some holy war or send a sniper my way. Sorry about the rant, but churches and religions are as much about "Thou shalt not kill" as much as it suits their goals. If their goals have any conflict with it, they have a very easy way around the so called "god's rules".
"Converting Children" to a certain worldview happens anyway. Turn on a children's TV show and you'll typically see a good 'moral lesson' at the end (be honest, don't cheat, family is important, etc). We're usually are ok with these things because most of us agree with them.
However, these 'moral lessons' aren't in a vacuum somewhere, they come from a philosophical belief system that you may or may not agree with (and the 'moral lessons' become less and less cut and dry as the target audience becomes older and older). So "conversion" comes not only from TV, but also from other kids, from teachers, religious institutions, and on, and on. What does all of that mean? It means that as a parent you will have to teach your children to deal with these ideas and not try to block out one source or another. Such a method will not work in reality.
Heh, but I guess that means that *you* will have to be able to explain what you believe and why you believe it so that a little child could understand you. Up to the task? Welcome to parenthood.