E-vangie Tales #59B The Stereo Types Respond


The following is a response from Jason, a member of the band, “The Stereo Types. He is answering my E-vangie Tale #59: “Lost Objects” -Steve Sanchez

[From Jason Boyer of “The Stereo Types]:
i feel as if my character, as well as my band was portayed in a position we neither support, nor exercise, i went line by line and attempted to present our position, or at least some how exude the point we intend to pass on to others:
i actually told you i am NOT a christian, i said that i dont believe that the Jesus i read about in the bible or the other holy texts wouldnt want me to focus on his name, only on his message. jesus was not a self-declared leader or king, he was a man, and my point was this:if jesus is the son of god, he was sent as a messenger, not as the message. even if it is all a lie, a hoax, if jesus wasnt real at all, still the overall message jesus spread is appliccable, the message is right, so why do we care about how magical or not jesus was?
the way jesus taught does point to something greater, but the “righteousness” of this path was not decided by jesus or even God. example:running makes you lose weight, just because my uncle told me, or my teacher,or my mom, or i stumbled upon it myself, doesn’t change the “fact” that running makes you lose weight.
religious liberal doesnt mean anything, your labels only cage your mind.
i did not challenge you at any time, and keep in mind you brought up religion as a third party entity to be discussed, i live my religion at all times, i do not want/need to bring it into the light, as every single actionand thought i have is my religion.
we both agreed that jesus wasnt white, but we both agreed that some sects believe he was blond and blue-eyed, and furthermore i pointed out that it didnt matter either,
i dont think i can speak for jesus, if i ever have or do, please discard it and forgive my arrogance, i cannot speak for any man (or god)

Acts 4:12: “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under Heaven given to men by which we must be saved.” what does saved mean? what is salvation? for this salvation to be found IN no one else, doesntthat mean that no rescritions exist? that nothing more or less than jesusness(peace-making) will save???? please answer the first two, you never really did that many times i “grilled” you about it face-to-face
i appreciate the clause at the end, but my point was that you can be both christian and gay, and that no one on this earth can tell you differently.
i never grilled you on being either a creationist or an evolutionist,because my point all along is that you can be both. that i am both. i asked to see if you could realize the ideal of compromise.

if you can understand that people are pro-choice and pro-life. it is the same for any and allwalks of life, existence is too multi-facetted to take any single stance.
you didnt know what i believed, and regardless of endless swapping of english words, you never will, the same goes for me, regardless, itsludacris to think you knew what position i held, and for you to assume I knew yours, furthermore you continued to miss my point of compromise and tried to focus it into an argument, and you choose to take some parts of the bible literally, and yet not others. this doesnt “make sense.” God is beyond our comprehension, and thusly God does not exist within the structures of our world. what is a God-day? what is light to God? what is a son to god? or a child of god? what is “un-godly”? or the image of God is what, of man, of humanity, of earth, of all nature???

jesus = son of god……peacemakers = children of god “blessed are the peacemakers for they are the children of god”

the bible doesnt mention xtacy at any time, and it doesnt mention reading glasses either. so if the bible never said not to, then i can/should be on xtacy all the time right? or wait science is bad, so i shouldnt wear glasses or take medicines to feel better. or wait, maybe the bible mentioned intoxication, and i have to INTERPRET the ill-natures of all intoxications.

you said you used to do meth, i never read anywhere in the bible that you shouldnt do meth, so why do you think its more godly of you not to be on meth? (maybe because drug use is often selfish, and selflessness over selfishness is the same as jesus/god/ “righteousness”) polygamy was an act of kindness, a man taking in many widows, who have no way to take care of themselves otherwise, so marriage as just one man and one woman isnt in the bible either. you are the one upon a slippery slope, because you consider the bible to be literal. well, not all of it, but some of it. if you can “ground” yourself in the interpretory nature of Jesus’ word, and the bible, and other religious texts, and all expressions, you might might be grounded in using the many blessings God has given you, not focusing on the many things we all lack.
(i can follow up on the many slippery slopes of taking the bible literally, and of course the many virtues of interpretting the work, but that is a whole other email)
i did not say heaven and hell seem selfish, heaven and hell ARE selfish, it is simple, the goal and motivation are for your personal place after life on this earth, i will leave that sort of concern to God, selfishness is a negative trait, if you for some reason consider selfishness a virture, feel free to do so, but there is no “seems” about it, life after death is SELFISH.

well i said you should read other holy books, i never asked if they are right or wrong, i am trying stray away from thinking there must be a right and a wrong, there does not have to be a loser for you to be a winner, the world is too multifacetted. your faith will be strengthened and you will be more well equipped to strengthen others faith, regardless of one book being more right than another, i can assure you there are many matching points in all of the religious texts, and each contains insight of their own.
you dont know anything about other religions, so dont say anything about them. in the quran (a book you never read) a man named hussain is actually killed, and he is raised from the dead, his beating of death also results in him transcending into heaven. sounds a lot like jesus doesnt it?

you know that in buddism they believe that they can be reincarnated, so budha isnt dead either, he is just in a different form. i mean you can think that’s wrong, but either way, the point is, that jesus beating death doesnt make his message more valid than it already is, and many other religions also express the idea of life after death and the power to beat it.

why must jesus be superior? why must you be superior?
“How can you say there are absolutes? How can you know if things are true? Beliefs are based on individual perceptions about the truth.” you didn’t answer this question….
the next part is truly saddening, you asked “What are yours based on?” and I replied, kindly with what MY beliefs are based on. i used jesus to be funny, because jesus doesnt make being nice a good thing. being nice and compromising were good long before and long after jesus said to.

i never at any time said that ALL people should live according to those values, i dont think i am any more right, i simply can see how compromise can transcend all situations and all arguments.

furthermore, i did back-peddle a lot, and i am in fact quite proud to admit it. i am glad to acknowledge when i am mistaken and look very forward to addressing or correcting it, and most importantly apologizing for it.
what i actually said is that i believe that love, peace, unity, and equality are the four elements that transcend all faiths, and my back-peddling was deserving because not all faiths work that way. many faiths strive on superiority, converting, and inequality, and love and peace often seem hard to come by, if existent at all, and i will try to fall back on the singular “position” of compromise, of peacemaking.
oooooo, heres my favorite, because i am from new york so we say soda, and the rest of the midwest boys still say pop. but you chose coke. you know whats funny? you know what is really really funny? coke is a leaf. it is, not even from a relativist point of view. in english, in america, incalifornia, probably in your rhetoric, coke=cocaine=a leaf. if you think youcan tell me coke is not a leaf, that is fine, but it doesnt change the fact that coke is a leaf. i mean coke is soda too, its carbonated water and sugar…or splenda…well, or nutrasweet… get my point?

if you want to get specific enough, nothing is the same. a tangerine and an orange are different. they are different sizes, grow in different ways, in different places. if you want to get really specific you can find a lot of differences, a tangerine is not an orange. but you can find a lot of differences between two different oranges, some grow sweet, some sour, some in california, others in florida, some organic and small, some grow as big as grapefruits, but we still label them all oranges. try to think of it this way, a tangerine and an orange are both fruit.they both contain the same nutrients and vitamins, they both serve the same purpose. we can label them very specifically and find differences, but as not two oranges are the same orange, grapefruits, tangerines, mangoes and oranges all contain the same nutrition, the same purpose, do you understand how that translates into faith?

ADDENDUM: not only did we not find the camera, we also lost a bag of luggage.

please do write back, and i sincerely apologize for the length of these emails, i hope you dont find them tiresome or overly repetitive,
peace and love,
jason b

thanks to steve for posting this on his site, and i hope you guys enjoy our music, there is a link for myspace to listen to some free tracks on there as well, we have lyrics and a lot of other stuff on the site, thanks again to everyone for reading this, and i look forward to any replies, peace and love,

How would you reply to Jason? Let me know and I will forward it to him. Be gracious, please. -Steve

Leave a Reply

Required fields are marked *.