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.

12 of 474 comments (clear)

  1. Fight the false prophet by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In Halo3 you are fighting against what could easily be called a 'False Prophet'. Sounds like good justification for a Christian church.

    --
    Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
  2. Thou shalt not kill? by Aladrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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
    1. Re:Thou shalt not kill? by speaker+of+the+truth · · Score: 5, Interesting

      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. Modern Christians say its actually thou shalt not murder with legally sanction killing being permissible. So yes, even humans can be killed.
      --
      Using openSUSE instead of Windows since 9th of October, 2007 and liking it.
  3. Killing != Murder by tbcpp · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  4. Re:WWJF? by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's a trick question, since God hates frags.

  5. Spending priorities? by kjkeefe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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!
  6. Re:Playing against Jesus would be boring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The three-day respawn interval would be annoying, though.

  7. Re:WWJF? by kyriosdelis · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's a trick question, since God hates frags. True...It took his son 3 days to respawn.
    --
    I don't mind dating a girl that has been with everybody, as long as she had a good shower afterwards.
  8. Re:Wrong translation by Lemming+Mark · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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. I'd argue there's a case for judging whether something is a "superior" translation strictly on the basis of the quality of source materials available for the translator to work with (more direct translation vs a translation of a translation of a ...) and better understanding of the nuances of ancient language that are made possible by more recent academic research. I'd say this is fairly independent of how the book was received as a religious text. It doesn't necessarily mean that the people who used that translation were inferior Christians but it may mean the texts they were using corresponded less closely to the older versions in ancient languages.

    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.
  9. Re:Wrong translation by alan_dershowitz · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Why would one assert that the NIV is a "superiour" translation?

    Consider KJV:

    1. We know more about Biblical culture now than anyone did in 1611, which affects translation.
    2. We know more about Biblical language now than anyone did in 1611, which obviously affects translation.
    3. Modern translations take into account hundreds of additional material sources that were not available in 1611, not the least of which are the Dead Sea Scrolls which account for very increased understanding of both 1 and 2.
    4. The KJV New Testament was based in large part on the Latin Textus Receptus which meant a) it's a translation of a translation and b) the TR itself was rushed to beat other Greek texts and had hundreds of errors (many of which were corrected by the 3rd edition used for the KJV, but still, consider the source.)
    5.. The KJV translation was extremely controversial at the time by the Roman Catholic Church, who would make the very same arguments about the KJV that you are making about the NIV right now. By the standards for controversy it was judged against, the KJV could still be argued to be a bad translation.
    6. English has changed since 1611.

    I'm not saying NIV it IS better, I'm saying why anyone would assert it's status as a superior translation, as you asked. No one was saying that Christians using the KJV were inferior Christians, but I think a case could be made for Bible translation affecting that. Consider if the (mis)translation said something like "Thou SHALL kill."

    Note: I am not an expert on ANY of this.

  10. Sci Fi not in conflict with Christianity by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 5, Informative

    the futuristic setting flies in the face of predictions that the second coming will be any day now

    I am no biblical scholar, but I am pretty sure that the bible is pretty clear that no one will know when the second coming will occur. Hard science fiction is perfectly compatible with religion. As is hard science, heck, the Vatican operates a major observatory. Research highlights include:
    Dark Matter and Energy in the Cosmos
    The Acceleration of the Universe
    Quasars
    Globular Clusters
    http://clavius.as.arizona.edu/vo/R1024/Research.html

  11. Thou shalt not kill? except.... by gnuman99 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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".