Early 20th century charts of biblical teachings
In the early 1900s, Baptist pastor Clarence Larkin (1850-1924) created large wall charts to help teach the Bible. He called these charts "Prophetic Truth." The topics range from "The Seven Thousand Years of Human History" to "The Failure of Man" to "The (Spiritual) Underworld," seen above. Link (Thanks, Mike Love!)
the latest
latest episodes
There are people on our local Cable-Access station who still use such things. It's funny as Hell.
I see Christianity can't arise until a civilization develops central heating
I used one of these as a web page I built.
The dogmatic reasoning behind it is astounding.
I think it only fair that we give equal time to an alternate theory from the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster:
http://www.venganza.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/heaven_brochure.gif
Not quite as well drawn, but now Sunday school only takes 30 seconds!
Hey, this is actually helpful. Finally, I know what I'm doing wrong!!
/and yes, I'm still loving it.
PaulBalls must be going crazy right now...
Could you imagine what would have happened if he had access to Visio?
Flowcharts of Hell?
Hey! I can see my house from here!
It's worth mentioning that the theology in Larkin's charts is by no means widespread among Christian denominations. The charts summarize the theology of dispensationalism, popular in conservative Protestant congregations in the United States, but little known in other countries.
If only someone could render them as easy-to-understand subway maps!
#8: 'What if he had Visio' - LOL good one.
Actually, that diagram looks like laboratory piping...you know how much Xtians love science
;-)
GDR is a bit off base up there. Dispensationalism is a widespread belief among Evangelical Christians worldwide. Korean Baptists and English Evangelicals believe in the dispensations as much as their American brothers and sisters do. The Catholic Church and mainstream protestant denominations do not subscribe to it, however, no matter where on Earth they may be located.
Given all the politics that have unfortunately infused American religion in the past couple of decades, and mobilized so many of the scary evalengelicals, it's easy to forget the time not so long ago where this stuff was actually harmless.
Some of my theology colleagues still study diagrams not unlike these for the sake of comparison. It's an elegant way of expressing this particular perspective's beliefs, and once you can manage to put the bigotry aside, it's an interesting glimpse into another decidedly more primitive take at the universe.
I'm a big fan of the maps in front of fantasy novels. I quite enjoyed looking at these.
Rainbow.
I like how this image looks like a piping diagram. Nonetheless, when I want a detailed schematic of Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory I'll turn to Dante. A cosmology that doesn't have angels pushing crystal spheres and demons navigating the rivers of hell seems so amateurish. Dante made Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory look interesting. This image just makes it look like the schematic for my water heater (except that my water heater only occasionally taps into the Lake of Fire).
Jackm wrote: "Given all the politics that have unfortunately infused American religion in the past couple of decades, and mobilized so many of the scary evalengelicals, it's easy to forget the time not so long ago where this stuff was actually harmless."
True. But, the religious right has been unsettlingly thorough in setting the religious and political agenda in America, with virtually no rebuttal from Christians not falling victim to this far right psychosis (Jim Wallis is one of the rare exceptions).
This means the overwhelming majority non-nutty, non-far right Christians have failed to publicly rebuff the religious right. They have zero right to complain about the stigma Christianity now has by non-followers as being a religion of hate.
Hey, if a mangy dog plops on top of you and you don't push him away, don't act all surprised when you realize the dog's stink and fleas have rubbed off on you too!
What a terrible thing to say. If a mangy dog plops himself on you, you soothe his hurts,give him a medicated bath and a good meal and a place to sleep by the fire.
I agree with the rest about Christians.
Leave it to Takuan to care more about the mangy dog than the christians (refuse to capitalize).
Those diagrams, though: Did anyone at the time realize how childish they were? Good Lord!
People, people, the mangy dog is a metaphor; a variation on the saying: "Sleep with dogs, wake up with fleas."
Oh, BTW Takuan, I have a dog, who is very well taken care of and loved beyond belief.
:-)
I couldn't help but note the "Seven Thousand Years of Human History" showed 2000 years, then 7 years of tribulation, then the second coming.
Does that make the Bush/Cheney years the tribulation, and the election of Obama the second coming?
I've always said religious people had a cartoon-view of the universe, this pretty much supports that idea.
Although I agree that the politicization of Christianity is a relatively recent phenomenon, this stuff was never harmless.
There is no such thing as "harmless brain damage," and faith (n. "firm belief without, or contrary to, evidence") has exactly the same epistemological role as brain damage: it diminishes the capacity of the individual to draw certain kinds of conclusion, to make certain kinds of argument, to perform certain kinds of mental function.
#7 - One of my favourite bits of ecclesiastical Visio is the flowchart for sex as per the medieval Church.
It starts off with "Feeling randy?" and then proceeds to step through a series of decision boxes about places and times one might have sex. (e.g. "Are you in church?" "Is it a feast day?" "Are you on top of holy relics?") If the answer to any is "yes", you are directed to a huge terminator box in the centre that says "Stop! Sin!"
jesus didn't use metaphors.
If any think this a thing of the past, just turn on the television (if you have the stomach. Just yesterday I saw two supposed grown-ups advising the world not to give a damn about trying to fix things because the Rapture was coming.
These people are actively dangerous. They should not be given air-time under the guise of religious freedom any more than some Taleban lunatic calling for the stoning of women. Speaking of which, two young women in Iran have recently been condemned to death for being accused of being in the company of an unrelated man. They have already been flogged 99 times and I imagine if the sentence is carried out it will be by a dump truck full of rubble.
Consider that a preview of what your life will be like if the "christian" fundamentalists ever get the upper hand.
People, people, the mangy dog is a metaphor...
So was the answer. Both literal and metaphorical. Things can be both. In fact, they're probably always both.
Just yesterday I saw two supposed grown-ups advising the world not to give a damn about trying to fix things because the Rapture was coming.
You do know that the Rapturoids are praying for the Middle East to go up in flames, because Armageddon is foreplay to the Rapture. Then Jesus can make all the radiation go away and the saved can pray for all eternity. At least Muslim views of paradise involve lots of tasty side-dishes and the ministrations of gazelle-eyed youths.
and another thing, why is that they take so much joy, so much satisfaction, in looking forward to watching the infidels suffer agonies for all eternity while they lounge around sipping their non-alcoholic wine coolers? What kind of mind does it take to really, really enjoy the torment of others for what they themselves label a mistake?
Mind?
I have a nice 1920 edition of Larkin's Dispensational Truth, where a lot of these charts are from (or very similar). Just looking at the charts does not do it justice.
well what are you waiting for? Get going on that videogame design based on going to/escaping hell.
"These people are actively dangerous. They should not be given air-time under the guise of religious freedom any more than some Taleban lunatic calling for the stoning of women."
Hmmmm. Someone who must not live under the benefit of the US Constitution. Because if they did, they would realize that the degeneration of the freedom of speech leads to all sorts of ills, all of which are far more worse than a fundy's view of dipensalationism.
It is indeed a sad state of affairs when you have so called rational people blinded by so much bigotry that they can not see straight enough to appreciate freedom.
Regardless of how ridiculous the claims of religious people may be on some TV channel (that you may switch off at anytime), it sure beats living in a place like China where none of it is allowed. Even with a crappy administration like what we currently have.
Really, I do not see the rationality of this statement, and I must assume that it's being made by some ego-obsessed 13 year old posting to boing boing.
Takuan, you just got own3d!
We already live in a world that censors. We do not give the Taleban or pro al-quaeda types air time because of their extremist and dangerous views. To refuse an extremist from another mind set is not to limit freedom of speech, but to refuse to give any credence to that belief, one that is dangerous to our culture. It does of course start a worrying precedent in the shape of limiting freedom of speech, but that has already been done by banning the taleban etc.
#30 and 31: Takuan may have gone just a little overboard when he said the ultra-right religious nutties should not have air time, but he is spot on when he said these people are actively dangerous.
Educate yourselves a little on the subject before firing off half-assed flame posts.
Look in to how the religious right relentlessly stalked Michael Schaivo. Go to Amazon and look at the book he wrote on the subject. These people are certifiably insane. And they had politicians lining up alongside them in denigrating Michael Schaivo.
Look in to how born again kook (an US Presidential candidate) Mike Huckabee personally intervened on behalf of serial rapist Wayne Dumond, presumably because he became a born again christian, ignoring letters from Dumond's past victims begging Huckabee to keep Dumond in jail. Far right backers of Huckabee took up Dumond's cause because one of his victims was a relative of Clinton. Dumond was paroled and he raped again. Even now religious righties ignore the facts in this horrendous case.
Do look into those who believe in the rapture and the bizarre alliance between born agains and conservative Jews. Go to huffingtonpost.com and search for "Max Blumenthal" and "rapture" and see Max's articles and videos shedding light on these cockroaches.
Very real. Very dangerous. Very deserving of the label "christian taliban."
Oh, and as for the word: "own3d"? Do people over the age of 13 (chronologically or emotionally speaking) still use that "word"?
@ #32
"Oh, and as for the word: "own3d"? Do people over the age of 13 (chronologically or emotionally speaking) still use that "word"?"
yeah, but in a kind of geeky self parody way more than anything.
'I take my religous extremism with a pinch of fun! how do you take yours?'
;-)
Takuan stated, I see Christianity can't arise until a civilization develops central heating. Takuan, central heating has been around since creation, it's called the Lake of Fire, sometimes referred to as Hell.
To people that say they're concerned with bigotry, you sure are quick to lump all Christians in with those that are acting on their own agendas.
As a Christian, I'm concerned with trying to spread love and compassion . . . the real message of Jesus. I find time spent doing this to be much more important than futilely trying to silence those whose actions I don't agree with.
It's sad that those who look to spread hate have given Christians such a bad name, but when has responding to hate with more hate ever worked? Whether it means anything to you or not, I apologize for the extremists that call themselves Christians. They do not speak for all of us. Shouting will always get more attention than lending a helping hand or offering encouragement. All you have to do is watch your local news to know that's true.
Oh, and my old water heater looked just like that, but the bottom rusted out and I had to get a new one.
#34- so, do you have knowledge beyond Scripture of the nature of Hell, or do you just really hate radiatiors?
RAJ77,
To whom are you addressing your question?
I believe you posted #34? Apologies if it was tongue-in-cheek!
RAJ77,
No apologies necessary. I didn't want you to think I was ignoring your question if it was directed toward me. I see that you were probably asking Mad Madmartigan about the radiator but since I (and others) mentioned Hell I wasn't sure if you were asking me if I had knowledge beyond Scripture of the nature of Hell. However, the answer to that question would be no. Any extra-Biblical knowledge concerning a Biblical concept must be met with great scrutiny. The concept of Hell is not given to us by private revelation (personal opinion) or in Nature, although man's conscience is endowed with limited and certain knowledge of the existence of God proven by the existence of Nature and all things created.
like kicking a termite mound
#35: Few non-nutty, non-far right Christians have actively stood up and made it clear that the Falwells, Dobsons and Huckabees do NOT speak for them. Jim Wallis, as I mentioned, is one exception.
Hence my use of the expression "Sleep with dogs, wake up with fleas"; that is, if you as a Christian don't actively speak up for yourself and your values, rest assured some other fire-breathing Christian ideologue will gladly do all the talkin' for you.
#41: You're absolutely right, Mikey. The point I was trying to make (which didn't totally come across) is that standing up for ourselves, no matter how much or how loudly we do it, will always be overshadowed by the sensationalism that surrounds the Falwells, Dobsons and Huckabees. Maybe I'm blaming the media, and I know I'm not offering any solutions here, just trying to set the record straight. It seems like you're pretty on top of things already, though.
Christianity: The Dinosaurs didn't exist, don't exist, and certainly didn't fit on Noah's Ark. Oh, and by the way, you SUCK for being born, as in suck so badly that if you don't coweringly repent for being alive, you will be tortured with red-hot knives, for, uh...ever. And don't eat psychedelic fruits, er I mean red ones that grow on dung, or I mean that's what your ancient grandfather did when his underage girlfriend suggested it, but he's dead now, along with his brother that he murdered, so you gotta pay up now, to the church and pope and priests (who are mentioned not exactly in the Bible as appointed leaders of men, but be have our own unprinted scripture in secret code that the translators and printing press guy's can't seem to offer but one or two copies of, max, so we have to keep it in the lockbox). And though our Vatican resolutions are on indefinite hold the last one we let slip out being in 1996 about "Catholics may believe in evolution." Believe that, since the resolution of a hundred years earlier said the Pope's word was the word of god (infallible), but that was when pope's were pope's and had many wives and many soldiers to back their words up. Oh, and you'll also be tortured too if you worship other gods, or no god, like 85% of the rest of world does, but there are no other gods left, since Zeus and his friends died with the Sack of Rome.
non-nutty, non-far right Christians!!!
I'm not sure what a 'far-right' Christian is since the term 'far-right' has been defined in many different ways. Usually it's whatever someone who is not a Christian doesn't like about someone who is a Christian or, in this case, what an unbeliever has determined is nutty, coming from a non-Christian perspective that is, or is it a non-Christian far-right unbeliever's perspective? In the 60s we used the term 'far-out' to describe anything we thought was nutty, only to discover later in life it really wasn't so nutty, just disagreeable at the moment.
One of the most common myths a non-Christian believes is that whomever claims to be a Christian must really be one. Now, I'm not saying that person isn't but if it is so easy to believe one is a Christian simply because one says he/she is, why then does the same person NOT believe what the Christian states concerning sin and repentance?
I've no doubt many who are Christians (and some who just claim to be) are more willing to believe what another Christian says merely because of the notoriety of that Christian, that is to their shame, no one else's. However, that does not mean all who are Christians do this and it is wrong to paint all Christians guilty with such a large stroke of the brush. Also, the phrase about dogs and fleas works in both directions. I haven't always been a Christian and I've had more than my share of fleas.
Christians such as the Falwells, Dobsons and Huckabees never claim to speak for others but others allow Christians such as the Falwells, Dobsons and Huckabees to do so and that is to the shame of the individual who allows another to think for them (this also works in both directions). Christians are not immune to being affected by sensationalism, and then again, neither are those who are not Christians.
all I ask is you don't burn me or bore me
#44:
"Christians such as the Falwells, Dobsons and Huckabees never claim to speak for others ... "
Really? Wow. That's why one of them isn't running for PotUSA, one of them didn't run for PotUSA, and two of them aren't ministers who've abused or broken electioneering laws - right?
Takuan,
I promise neither to burn nor bore you, however, you are the one who must decide if something is of little or no importance which might bore you.
#44,
Where have Christians such as the Falwells, Dobsons and Huckabees stated they speak for other Christians and what electioneering laws were broken and by whom? Does the claim that one isn't running for PotUSA or that one isn't prove they speak for other Christians? I'm not running for PotUSA and that hardly proves I speak for other Christians. I know a great many Christians who aren't running for PotUSA and they don't speak for other Christians? I fail to see how one equates with the other, perhaps you can explain, please?
Hasidic heaven - studying Talmud with Moses for eternity. The righteous love it.
Hasidic hell - studying Talmud with Moses for all eternity. The unrighteous hate it.
It's all about perspective.
I loved this stuff when I was ten or twelve. It's the same kind of brain candy as one of Tolkein's maps or genealogies.
Airway: Actually it is a rare belief, limited mostly to those few fundamentalists who use the Dake's Study Bible or similar. (Among Anglophones anyway.) Most Southern Baptists, for example, will be unfamiliar with it. And among those who are, most will only have a vague sense of what it is. Preachers who are obsessed with and who teach it actively, like John Hagee, are the exception, not the rule. You'll never hear a Billy Graham or a Jim Wallis endorse it.