HEY!! This site has SHUT DOWN. I've moved to The New and Improved View From the Pew. Head over there for the new stuff.

I'm shutting this site down!!

The template is coming together over at the new place, so I'm going to stop posting here. You want the new stuff, head over there.

I'll keep this site up, just because I may keep the archives up here rather than move everything over to the other site. Some posts will move: anything that is part of a series will be over there. Not sure if the dates will be the same or not -- have to mess with the MT interface and see hwat happens.

The new template is better -- you won't (or shouldn't) have problems with font colors there like some people did here. Right now, the blogrolls are pretty much the same as they are here, but I'm looking at making the font smaller and some other options to give the new site a cleaner look. The Feedburner feed should stay the same -- I think I can change the feed that it syndicates. If not, I'll let everyone know about the new feed address.

The "NASCAR panel" over there on the left will not be making the move. Once I get my copy of GIMP working again, I'll make some blog buttons (including the highly-anticipated SBC Bloggers button) that will match the color scheme of the new blog. Amy from Prochein Amy has done all the graphic work so far on the new template -- and I must say, the new title graphic looks great. Go tell her how much you like hwat she did!! I could have never done anything like she has done.

Well, that's about it from here. I got started on Blogger just about a year ago, and now I'm making the step up to the next level. Moveable Type is a lot more flexible, and nicer to work with, AND gives me more options. But I still recommend Blogger to anyone who wants to start a blog, to see how much they like doing it.

On top of everything else I have going on this week (paper, work, etc.), and everything I had going on last week (paper, work, etc.) I am preaching tomorrow morning. I appreciate everyone's prayers tomorrow as I preach on Genesis 3, and the results of the Fall.

It's been interesting -- each class I've had this week had something to contribute to the subject. Especially the discussion of penal substitutionary atonement we started in Systematic Theology yesterday. I ended up adding an extra point on my outline after that class.

BTW, I've sort of moved in at the new blog. I goofed up when I requested the URL, and right now it's http://piewview.mu.nu. I asked if I could change it, but I don't know if it's too late or not. I've got the bare bones template set up -- still have to add some color, my blogrolls, etc. But I'll be able to do a lot after May 6 -- when finals are over. I should be all moved in by mid-May. I'll let everyone know about the new URL and the RSS feed address -- though if you've subscribed to the Feedburner feed, that should stay the same.

{EDIT -- The URL has been fixed. The Future Home of View from the Pew}

I've added the ESV blog to the blogroll. Unfortunately, I did it too late to get the free Bible. :(
Oh, well. It's still a worthwhile blog, and an outstanding translation. Maybe they'll have a contest to get one of the Study Bibles when they come out.

... but I'll be pretty quiet for the next week. Major paper due, and I have a pretty good bit of work ahead of me.

Might get a post in on the whole Al Mohler "pope is not a biblical office" fiasco today, might not. Dr. Mohler's right, btw, and it's pretty bad when a US Senator has no more of a grasp on history that he didn't know that there were Christian leaders who didn't recognize the validity of the office of Pope. If you click the link above, it will take you to Dr. Mohler's site, where you can read a copy of the letter that started it all, and get the full story.

The white smoke has been sent through the chimney at the Sistine Chapel.

Cardinal Ratzinger is the new Pope. Pope Benedict XVI.

Once the archbishop of Munich and for many years prefect of the Sacred Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith, Ratzinger, 77, is one of the most powerful men in the Vatican and is widely acknowledged as a leading theologian. (from CNN.com)

And of course, fans of Saint Malachy will be thrilled at his choice of name, since the prophecy states that his motto (actually the phrase that suits him) is Gloria olivae, and the olive is the traditional symbol of the Benedictine monks. Most people figured that the new Pope would be a Benedictine. Right now, I'm not sure what order Ratzinger is, but the name choice makes it a moot point, especially as far as the prophecy fans are concerned.

I now have two awards -- the Pewie for Conspicuous Intolerant Tolerance (and I've changed the name of that one at least twice!), which I've awarded twice now, and the new VftP Get a Clue Award for conspicuous misuse of a religious term.

The very first Clewie goes to Byron Williams at workingforchange.com. Byron calls himself a fundamentalist Christian who "trusts women to make the right choices with their bodies, supports marriage equality and opposes the death penalty." He then procedes to illustrate exactly how little he know about the history of the term fundamentalist in its Christian context.

The term fundamentalist was coined in reaction to increasingly liberal theology which was infecting mainline denominations in the early 20th century. There is a very clearly stated creed (though many fundamentalists would cringe at that term) -- a statement of beliefs that everyone who is a fundamentalist Christian would agree with.

From the preface of this work:

In 1909 God moved two Christian laymen to set aside a large sum of money for issuing twelve volumes that would set forth the fundamentals of the Christian faith, and which were to be sent free to ministers of the gospel, missionaries, Sunday School superintendents, and others engaged in aggressive Christian work throughout the English speaking world. A committee of men who were known to be sound in the faith was chosen to have oversight of the publication of these volumes. Rev. Dr. A.C. Dixon was the first Executive Secretary of the Committee, and upon his departure for England Rev. Dr. Louis Meyer was appointed to take his place. Upon the death of Dr. Meyer the work of the Executive Secretary devolved upon me. We were able to bring out these twelve volumes according to the original plan. Some of the volumes were sent to 300,000 ministers and missionaries and other workers in different parts of the world.

Fundamentalism is about doctrinal purity, and consistency with "the faith once delivered to the saints." Admittedly, many modern "fundamentalists" are a far cry from the original writers of the books, and many have strayed from the fundamentals as originally stated. And, also admittedly, modern fundamentalists (and not a few evangelicals) have been a bit light in showing the love of Christ to the world. And far too many are focusing their attention on the political process to the exclusion of evangelism.

But fundamentalism, and evangelicalism for that matter, is far more than "to be living examples of a strict adherence to love, justice, hope and opportunity, thereby authentically being fundamentalist Christians in word and deed." If that is fundamentalism, then there was no difference between the original fundamentalists and the liberals that they fought against. Any student of history will tell you that that is certainly not the case.

Double Toothpicks has a MUST READ post about Eric Rudolph.

Eric Rudoplh is being billed as a "fundamentalist Christian." That is a lie, plain and simple. I cannot believe that the MSM would do such little research that they wouldn't know the difference between a fundamentalist Christian and a member of the Christian Identity movement. It seems to me that the information is readilly available, and the differences are obvious. Christian Identity denies that Christ died for "whosoever believes on Him" and is a racist organization. They may agree with conservative Christians on the abortion issue, but they have been roundly (and rather vocally) condemned by all evangelicals as a heretical sect.

I'm not usually this paranoid, but it seems to me that "the press" is intentionally downplaying the fact that CI is anathema to orthodox Christians, and emphasizing the "Christian" part of the name. Trust me -- Christian Identity has no real Christian identity.

Cruising though the pages of The Sacred Sandwich (which has been on the left-side links for a while now), I ran across this article in their archives.

It's funny, but aren't we really like that? Don over at Locusts and Wild Honey recently critiqued one of Joel Osteen's sermons. I won't rehash what he said (though I agree with him) -- go there and read if you want the straight story. Read the comments, too, and compare them with the satire at The Sacred Sandwich.

It's frightening when real life so closely mirrors satire. I think that's why satire is so important. And that's why I like satire.

{NOTE: This is the first part of my blogging review of the book Beyond the Shadowlands: C.S. Lewis on Heaven and Hell by Dr. Wayne Martindale. I received this book through Mind and Media as a gift from the publisher (Crossway), who donated the books for the reviewers.}

I am looking forward to this book, just from reading the author's Introduction. This quote will give you an idea why: "Somewhere in the back of my mind, quite unconsciously, Heaven was an extended, boring church service like those I had not yet learned to appreciate on earth -- with this exception: You never got to go home to the roast beef dinner."

Kids do tend to look at Heaven in just that way. Unfortunately, our misconceptions of Heaven often continue into adulthood. This book promises to skewer those myths, and the myths associated with Hell as well, and show how Lewis portrayed the reality of Heaven and Hell, and the myths we often have about them, in his books.

I've decided to blog about this book as I read it, and not simply do one single post on it -- mainly because I think the book deserves more than just a one-shot post. I think that it is very important for Christians to have a proper idea of what Heaven and Hell really are, and to know what the potential troubles are with incorrect assesments of both places. I plan on spending at least one post on the fist section of the book (which details seven myths people believe about Heaven), and one on the third (detailing six popular myths about Hell). The second and fourth sections, in which Dr. Martindale explores Lewis' treatment of Heaven and Hell in his fiction, may require more than one post each. When I'm finished, I'll offer one post giving my own opinion of the book, and will add links in each post to the other posts in the 'series' so that it will be easier to jump back and forth between posts.

Not for me, this time!

Mind and Media is looking for some bloggers who want to read and write about what they read.

It's really a great gig -- closest thing many of us will ever come to getting paid to blog. You volunteer to read a book, and blog about it. In exchange, you get a free book -- and rumor has it there may be other incentives down the road.

Crossway is using M&M, as is Baker, so you won't be getting self-published books from people you've never heard of. Check out the Mind and Media site to see what books are available.

If you're interested, head here and take the survey -- and tell them I sent you!

I got my first book today (as you can see over on the left side of the page), and I'll be doing a blog entry after each chapter, and one when I'm finished giving my overall impression of the book. I'm looking forward to this one!

Ok, I was looking through my referals and found that someone got here through a search for Chili Beef Ramen. Intrigued, I checked it out to see what other Ramen goodness I could find.

I struck Ramen gold. The Official Ramen Homepage has recipes and everything -- even dessert Ramen!! Go there and check it out -- you'll be glad you did.

Now I have to pick something out for lunch ...

I'm working on relocating to my mu.nu site. Total redesign of the blog -- and not the one I was showing everyone. I think I'm going for a little cleaner look.

I have no idea how long it will take -- I'm still working on papers for school, and I'm preaching April 24th in the morning service, so I kinda need to have something prepared for that. Then I have finals.

But my goal is to have it done soon -- hopefully by the 15th of April. I've looked into having someone do the design for me, but my finances are too tight right now to get someone who really knows what they're doing -- maybe next time.

What a pleasant topic, huh? But with recent events, it has been on my mind a bit lately.

Contrast the two recent deaths for a moment. Terri Shiavo, for years on death's door. She's suffered, she's been through therapy and been withdrawn from therapy. What did she want? Who really knows -- from what I saw, it didn't really matter. It was about what everyone else wanted, simply because she didn't really make her wishes known to enough people, and in an official way.

John Paul II, the Pope. Leader of millions (billions?) of Catholics around the world. His health has been fading for the past few years, and some people had expected him to step down and retire. He wouldn't. He wanted to spend his last years doing what God called him to do -- what his heart's desire was.

That's all any of us really want, isn't it? In the words of a Steve Taylor song, it's better off to burn out than to melt away. I think ultimately people were upset about Terri's death because she, like so many of us, didn't get to burn out. She lived her last years in agony, and never had the opportunity to do things that she probably wanted to do. We cling to hope.

Christians don't fear death. We aren't all that eager for it, either, but we don't fear it. Death not the end; it's the end of the beginning. But this life is sacred. It is a gift from God to us, and we need to make the most of it. We need to be busy.

We cling to life because we see how much more we need to do. We cling to life because we want to accomplish more -- whether it's for God, in the case of Christians, or for ourselves. We celebrate the life of the Pope because he burned out -- he was active until he absolutely couldn't be active any more, and then he died. He are angered at the death of Terri Shiavo because we feel that she was robbed of something -- we want her life to have been more, because we want that for ourselves. We want our lives to have mattered.

And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment, so Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him.
(Heb 9:27-28 ESV)

We all die. In the end, it's not how we die that matters, but how we lived -- and Who we lived for.

Ok, maybe not news. Maybe more like shameless self promotion, but titling a post "Shameless Self Promotion from the Pew" just doesn't have the same ring to it, you know?

I've set up a "bookstore" at Lulu.com, where you will be able to get PDF copies of whatever papers I've written for school for free. Why would you want them? I don't know, but they're free, so you won't be throwing any money away.

The only thing I have up there right now is my last Systematic II paper, covering creatio ex nihilo, or creation out of nothing. I got an A on it, so the grader thought it was a good paper -- I wasn't too sure when I finished it, but the grader is a doctoral student, so I assume he's a better judge than I am. You can get it in PDF format for free, or if you REALLY want to spend money, you can buy it in booklet form for $4.85. I don't make any money off it at all, and neither does Lulu -- they only make a profit off books that the author makes a profit on.

The main reason I'm doing this is that I had told some people before that I'd post some of my papers, and this is an easy way of doing it -- especially since I really don't have server space right now. Lulu's free, and it's a pretty good way of getting your writing out to people. AND it's easy to get started.

So go download the thing, and let me know what you think.

Unless you think it stinks -- then I'd rather not know (lol).

{Tip o' the hat to Adrian Warnock}

This article/essay/message from John Piper sums up my feelings pretty well. I still often use the King James or New King James when preaching, simply because that is what most, if not all, of the people I am speaking to are using. In my personal study, I use the ESV almost exclusively -- I also will use the NASB and my MacArthur NKJV Study Bible, but the ESV is my main resource when I'm studying. If I was the pastor of a church, the pew Bibles would be ESV.

I'm not anti-NIV. I'm not anti-KJV (though I've been accused of hating the KJV by some on the Fundamentalist Forums. I understand enough of the history of the English translations of the Bible to know that the ESV is simply part of the entire process -- a process that the KJV actually started. It's a process of discovery -- of learning new things about the ancient languages, finding texts and evaluating their reliability, and then using this new knowledge to make the Scriptures clearer to Christians.

As I said, I'm not anti-NIV, but it's never been my favorite translation. It's not a totally dynamic equivalence translation -- I'd put it at about a 5 on a 10-point scale (1 is total dynamic equivalence, 10 is total literal translation). {Incidentally, it's hard to find a site that gives a decent definition of DE. A LOT of what I found when trying to find that link were places that think Gail Ripplinger is a good Bible scholar!} A 1 would be translations like The Message, while a 10 would be an intralinear Bible.

My Bible preferences would fall between an 8 and 9. I want something readable, but something that is faithful to the original wording and intent. Takes more study effort with that kind of Bible, since they often don't interpret idioms for you -- you have to do that yourself. But it's worth it.

I also agree with Piper that some paraphrasing or interpreting will always be necessary in translating the Bible. My goal is to find the translation that does this as little as possible, and I think the ESV does that well.

First of all, slow posting this week, and probably slow posting for the month of April. I have a 10-13 page sermon due for systematic theology on the 22nd, and a 20-page paper on Andrew Fuller and Assurance of Salvation due on the 28th. Of course, I've actually started writing neither of them, so I have a bit of work to do. At least I've done the research on these already.

Second, there is a move coming. I mentioned before that I was hoping to get a mu.nu blog -- I got it! So I will be moving there in the near future. I'll let everyone know the details when it happens -- including the new address AND RSS feed URI.

AND sometime this weekend, or maybe next week, my wife will be blogging for me. She said she had something, and was going to post on Friday, but she didn't, so I'm hoping she'll do it this week sometime. From what she told me, it sounds like a pretty good post.

Hate to say this, but Kristof has nailed it this time.

I especially like this quote -- I think it's particularly relevant.

Yet conservative Christians in the U.S. should take heed. Christianity is thriving where it faces obstacles, like repression in China or suspicion of evangelicals in parts of Latin America and Africa. In those countries where religion enjoys privileges - Britain, Italy, Ireland, Spain or Iran - that establishment support seems to have stifled faith.
That's worth remembering in the debates about school prayers or public displays of the Ten Commandments: faith doesn't need any special leg up. Look at where religion is most vibrant today, talk to those who walk five hours to services, and the obvious conclusion is that what nurtures faith is not special privileges but rather adversity.

Sanguis martyrum—semen christianorum-- the blood of the martyrs is the seed of Christians. Thank you, Tertullian. Maybe one of these days, the Church will listen to you.

I don't like PETA much at all. That should come as no great shock to anyone, given my carnivorous tendencies -- I won't be eating any veggie Ramen any time soon. I ate meat on March 15 (International Eat an Animal for PETA Day), but that wasn't much of a special event for me; I regularly consume copious quantities of cooked animal. If God hadn't meant for us to eat animals, He wouldn't have made them so darn tasty, after all.

PETA is known for it's poor taste (pardon the expression), and it's decidedly antagonistic attitude toward Christians (the What Would Jesus Eat campaign comes to mind here, with its vegetarian Jesus -- PETA is ignorant of Passover tradition and the associated consumption of lamb, I suppose). But their stunt this Easter takes the cake, and has earned them my neverending scorn.

This picture really does say a thousand words. Jesus Christ with the head of a pig. My contempt cannot be expressed at this type of sacrilege. I'd say that we should write to PETA, but they really don't care what we think. This is just another illustration of the contempt in which the loony left holds Christians of all stripes and persuasions.

{Edit: My wife has officially dubbed me Iron Chef Ramen. Food Network, here I come!}

Figured I'd post this one while everyone else was napping. TWO Ramen recipes for your culinary pleasure.


Chili Pepper Ramen -- Same as the Jerk Ramen, but substitute chili powder for the jerk seasoning, and add about a half-tablespoon of crushed red pepper close to the end, right before you take the noodles off the stove. NOT as spicy as you might think -- I may put in more chili powder next time.

Lemon Pepper Ramen -- I mentioned this in the comments to the Jerk Ramen recipe, but some of you may have missed it. Substitute lemon pepper seasoning (I used Kroger brand, but I'm sure McCormicks makes it as well) for the jerk seasoning. It tastes great!

Stay tuned -- who knows what Ramen madness I will experiment with next!!!

Now on the first day of the week Mary Magdalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb. So she ran and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, "They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him."
So Peter went out with the other disciple, and they were going toward the tomb. Both of them were running together, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. And stooping to look in, he saw the linen cloths lying there, but he did not go in. Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb. He saw the linen cloths lying there, and the face cloth, which had been on Jesus' head, not lying with the linen cloths but folded up in a place by itself. Then the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went in, and he saw and believed; for as yet they did not understand the Scripture, that he must rise from the dead. Then the disciples went back to their homes. But Mary stood weeping outside the tomb, and as she wept she stooped to look into the tomb. And she saw two angels in white, sitting where the body of Jesus had lain, one at the head and one at the feet. They said to her, "Woman, why are you weeping?" She said to them, "They have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid him." Having said this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing, but she did not know that it was Jesus. Jesus said to her, "Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you seeking?" Supposing him to be the gardener, she said to him, "Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away." Jesus said to her, "Mary." She turned and said to him in Aramaic, "Rabboni!" (which means Teacher).
Jesus said to her, "Do not cling to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brothers and say to them, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.' "Mary Magdalene went and announced to the disciples, "I have seen the Lord" -- and that he had said these things to her.

On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being locked where the disciples were for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you."When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord.
Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you."And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.If you forgive the sins of anyone, they are forgiven; if you withhold forgiveness from anyone, it is withheld."

Now Thomas, one of the Twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will never believe."
Eight days later, his disciples were inside again, and Thomas was with them. Although the doors were locked, Jesus came and stood among them and said, "Peace be with you."Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side. Do not disbelieve, but believe."Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."

Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
(Joh 20:1-31 ESV)

Thursday, March 31, 2005 marks my one-year blogiversary.

Wow. One year of inflicting my rantings, opinions, and insights-of-dubious-value on unsuspecting readers all over the world. And I do mean all over the world. I think the one thing that has shocked me the most is how many different countries have been represented by visitors to my blog. Obviously, the US and Canada are the most represented, but I've had visitors from as far away as Australia (82) and the UK (162). Kazakhstan, Taiwan, Iran(!), Cote D'Ivoire (Ivory Coast) -- 77 different countries all together.

I've been King of the Blogs. I've been in Carnivals and Symphonies. I've been in heated discussions with people I'll never meet. And I've made some friends -- even though I've never seen most of them in real life.

I've noticed that I write more now than I used to. I say more now in one day than I said in a week back in the "old days." I think that isn't going to continue as a trend -- otherwise, my blog will be huge, and nobody will read it anymore.

So, if you want to wish me a Happy Blogoversary, leave me a comment. Better still, buy me something off my Amazon wish list! (hehehe)

There ARE some cheap things on there. Really.

LSU 90
LU 48

LU is still winless against Southeastern Conference teams, but they are still riding high on the heels of a school-first Sweet Sixteen appearance.

Nobody expected them to get this far. In fact, I sometimes wonder if anyone realized that Liberty's women's basketball team had been so dominant in the Big South for the past nine years. And other people question whether any conservative Christian could support women's sports.

Does that sound stupid? It did to me, too. And after I read this article by Mechelle Voepel at ESPN.com, it still sounds stupid.

Apparantly, you have to be in favor of extreme feminism and gay rights to really be in favor of women's sports. And the people who are involved in women's sports apparantly are far more tolerant than Jerry Falwell -- unless, of course, you ask them to tolerate Jerry Falwell. That's just crossing the line, and Voepel won't go there.

And I am FAR from thinking that the majority of fans agree with her. I think the achievements of the LU women's team shows that there are very talented women out there who want to go to a Christian school. Maybe the reason that LU was as big a success as they have been for thepast several years is that there are women who want ot play somewhere where those political opinions aren't an issue -- where people aren't constantly insulting their Christian beliefs. I find it interesting that the Baylor team, which is seeded #2 this year in the Tempe region, is not held to this same criticism. They are still a Southern Baptist school, and the SBC is as notorious in it's "intolerance" as Jerry Falwell is.

I guess all the weight that Jerry has put on has made him an even bigger target than he was before. And I guess that no matter what the women at Liberty achieve, on and off the court, they will always have to deal with the type of intolerance that Voepel displays, that suggests that anyone who doesn't accept "gay people and lesbians (both of whom are a significant part of women's basketball)" is less than acceptable in NCAA womens sports.

So Mechelle Voepel, you are the second person to win the coveted Pewie Award for Conspicuous Intolerant Tolerance. Congratulations.

Today is the day that Christians remember the day that Christ died. It seems that, especially in recent years, Good Friday has stayed a religious holiday while Easter Sunday has been completely commercialized.

Even so, it's easy to miss the importance of the event. In the rush to Easter,and the preparations for cantatas and Passion plays, not to mention the Easter Bunny pereperations, it's very easy to lose focus.

One thing I have tried to do consistently each year for the past five or so is to read and contemplate this. It's a medical account of the crucifixion of Christ that first appeared in the Journal of the American Medical Association. I have seen this in several places on the internet, but this site is probably the most complete -- includes illustrations and everything. It has certainly helped keep me focused on the meaning of this season.

This year, more people are focusing on Christ's death because of the movie The Passion of the Christ. I am hoping that those people will discover the good news -- Christ's resurrection on Sunday.

I've been revisiting my undergraduate days lately, and eating Ramen noodles for lunch. Problem is, Ramen noodles are boring. I'm not a boring person.

So I kick my Ramen up a notch or two. Here's a great recipe for Ramen that I just might send to the Carnival of Recipes this week.


Kicked Up Jerky Ramen

Ingredients:
1 package Chicken-flavored Ramen noodles
2 tblspn Carribean Jerk Seasoning (I sometimes use more, it all depends)

Boil 2 cups of water. Add noodle mix. Slowly add seasoning as noodles boil -- only add 1 tblspn before you add the chicken seasoning.

After three minutes (may vary, depending on how al dente you like your Ramen), turn off the heat. Add chicken seasoning packet and the rest of the jerk seasoning. Stir and eat.
----------------

There. You can now say you learned something useful here. Tomorrow, maybe I'll share my recipe for Chili Pepper Beef Ramen.

March 23, 322.

This is the anniversary of the death of Gregory the Illuminator. Gregory is credited with helping in the creation of the first Christian nation in the world. And it wasn't the United States.

There were certainly Christians in Armenia when Gregory was born -- tradition says that Bartholomew and Thaddeus both visited the country and preached Christ to them in the first century AD. There were churches in existence in 257 when Gregory was born, so there could be some truth to the legends.

Unfortunately, Christianity was not a popular faith. The Persian rulers of the land had all but extinguished it by the time of Gregory's birth. Gregory's nurse had to flee the country with him when his entire family was killed in retaliation for his father assassinating the Armenian king. Gregory was raised in Cappadocia, and learned the Gospel there. He soon returned to Armenia, where he preached the gospel.

He wasn't popular. The king persecuted him. His life was in danger. But his faithfulness won converts -- ultimately including the king himself, who declared Armenia a Christian nation.

The church in Armenia was incredibly strong -- lasting until the Turks massacred Christians there in the 20th Century. It was the first to have a Bible in it's own national language. And it was a strong voice for Christ in Europe.

I learned a lot from this study. I tend to consider state churches as a bad thing -- it isn't necessarily that way. Armenia is a perfect example of a state church done right. Unfortunately, men of Gregory's caliber are rare in this day. Few men today would be capable of balancing the power and responsibility that Gregory had.

What can we learn from this? We can learn a lot from Gregory's faithfulness, and his commitment to spreading the gospel. He had little hope of success, and could expect to be killed for his faith. He didn't stop.

We can also see the value in Christians united in their faith. While I still have a problem with the idea of a national church, a body of Christians united in purpose and faith can achieve amazing things. While there are some things that should divide Christians (issues concerning the deity of Christ, the value and role of Scripture, salvation by grace through faith, etc.), we often let insignificant things separate us. We need to determine what we must agree on, and what we can agree to disagree on. If we can do that, we can show the world the kind of church that the apostles saw, and that was present for thousands of years in Armenia.

For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, "This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me." In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me."For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes.
(1Co 11:23-26 ESV)

Maundy Thursday is the traditional celebration of the day that Jesus shared His final Passover with His disciples. We actually get the name from the Latin phrase mandatum novum, which means "new commandment," in recognition of Christ instituting the New Testament of His blood.

In the Middle Ages, Maundy Thursday services included the washing of feet, in commemoration of Christ washing His disciples' feet at the Last Supper.

Unfortunately, most Protestant churches have lost the celebration of Maundy Thursday. We've tried so hard to distinguish ourselves from the Roman Catholic church that we've done away with the good as well as the bad. I think that a Maundy or Holy Thursday service, focused on partaking of the Lord's Supper, would be an outstanding way to focus people on what exactly this season is all about. Especially in our consumeristic age, it would do us good to remember exactly what these holidays (which are holy days, after all) are celebrated for, and to remember that Christians celebrated the resurrection of Christ long before there was an Easter Bunny or Paas egg coloring kits.

... I decided to cruise through my blogroll, looking at some blogs that I normally read through my RSS reader, and some I hadn't been to in a while.

This post touched me. Especially this quote:

So what is a Christian to do? One answer seems to be that we eschew the entire mess and crawl into an enclave somewhere. We only buy from companies that have a fish symbol on their logos. We homeschool our kids. We get rid of the television. We only listen to Christian radio and Christian music. We isolate. This is the Protestant form of monasticism.

Another answer is to try to blend in. Dress, shop, talk, act like them but all the while we have a secret joy in our hearts. We can make our churches compete with whatever they have going on a Sunday AM or Saturday night or whatever. Worship as concert, preacher as entertainer.

The most common way is neither of those, as surprising as that seems. The most common way amongst American Christians is to just live in the midst of it as if it is all normal. Oh sure, we'll avoid Abercrombie and Fitch because they're immoral. We don't listen to rap or heavy metal but K-LITE radio is fine, nothing there is too offensive. We shop just like everyone else: we shop as if owning stuff defines us. Jesus is a option in the American lifestyle. A little Blockbuster, some Claire's, a touch of Pier One, gotta have some Gap then sprinkle it with Jesus when we get home.

This, I think, sums up the problem with American Christianity. It's an option, not a lifestyle. We live in the buffet line -- a little of this, a little of that, a side order of Jesus and some fries. There is no committment at all. There's no walk, and if you're paying any price for your faith you're probably one of those "fanatics" that the talk shows make fun of so much.

The disciples understood what following Jesus meant. They were in this for the long haul, even though they had their "down moments" when they lost sight of what Christ was teaching them. But when they were powered by the Holy Spirit, there was nothing they couldn't do -- or weren't willing to do. They all paid the ultimate price -- they died. Even John, who simply died of old age by most accounts, spent his last years in prison. But it was worth it to them.

What are we willing to sacrifice for our faith? Many of us aren't even willing to miss the Super Bowl for a church service. Can you imagine what would happen if the Christians in the United States got serious about their faith?

Lightning has struck twice. The Lady Flames are going to the Sweet Sixteen.

My favorite stat -- 21/21 from the line vs. 13/18 for DePaul. That could have made the difference. One or two misses from Liberty, and more made for DePaul, and it's a different ballgame. But the Lady Flames won it.

And now they have to face #1 LSU. The nice thing is, there's no pressure on LU. They're not supposed to be there. LSU isn't supposed to lose.

Nick has nominated me for a spot at mu.nu. So far, I have two yes votes -- I need three. If you have a mu.nu blog, go vote for me. I'd really like to get to a community with a little more to offer as far as customizablilty goes.

And he called the people to him again and said to them, "Hear me, all of you, and understand:There is nothing outside a person that by going into him can defile him, but the things that come out of a person are what defile him." He who has ears to hear, let him hear. And when he had entered the house and left the people, his disciples asked him about the parable. And he said to them, "Then are you also without understanding? Do you not see that whatever goes into a person from outside cannot defile him,since it enters not his heart but his stomach, and is expelled?" (Thus he declared all foods clean.) And he said, "What comes out of a person is what defiles him.For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery,coveting, wickedness, deceit, sensuality, envy, slander, pride, foolishness.All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person."
(Mar 7:14-23 ESV)

{NOTE: Verse 16 is omitted in most modern translations. I have added it in italics so that those who use other translations can follow along more easilly.}

The Jews at the time of Christ were very concerned with appearances. What you ate especially was important to them, because of the dietary laws that God had given Moses on Sinai. Jesus points out in the first thirteen verses that the rules and regulations that had been added to the Law had become more important to the Jews than the Law itself. Jesus wants them to understand that the things they say are more important than the things they eat, and that our actions, thought, and statements are what really defile or corrupt us. And these things many times are not evident to those around us -- but God can see them. Our actions may even seem pure and good, but when they are done for the wrong reasons, they really defile us.

Verse 19 is interesting. Mark, who most scholars believe wrote his gospel based on Peter's rememberences of his time with Jesus, shows that Jesus taught them that all foods were clean -- the disciples just missed the application (especially Peter, if you remember his experience in Acts). Christ's obvious purpose in this passage is to put the emphasis on attitude, rather than blind obedience to a bunch of rules and regulations. This was taught even as far back as the days of Samuel -- And Samuel said, "Has the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to listen than the fat of rams.(1Sa 15:22 ESV). So this should have been nothing new to the Jews.

Why was it so new? Because the established priests didn't want people to thing that they could do it without them. Because there was a huge industry involved in the preparation of proper sacrifices. The people were doing all the right things, and the establishment was getting rich off of it. Unfortunately, the sacrifices were, in many cases, lip service. The people had learned nothing from their history -- Jeremiah could have told them the dangers in paying simple lip service to God.

Do people today pay lip service? Check out the stats at the Barna group website. The majority of people in the US say that they are Christians. But their beliefs don't line up with that claim. Our attitudes don't match what we claim to believe. Even when we do things that are good, and right, we tend to do them for the wrong reasons -- for our own recognition, rather than for the glory of God. Jesus reminds us that our religious ceremonies and lip service don't matter if we don't obey God, and follow His word in all things.

So we got Duke and the Great Pie War from my Mom today. Halfway through, I'm a little disappointed, and a little upset.

Story of Moses -- Miriam is an irresponsible kid who leaves her brother in the river because she has to get out to let the princess swim. TOTAL mischaracterization of Miriam, and a rather large rewrite of the story. All to make it fit with the theme -- loving your family.

Seems to me they could have done the story right, and still made it fit the theme. And it seems like they are simply tacking a Bible story on with the video anymore -- the Bible isn't the focus. Maybe that's to make the videos more "accessible" to "main stream culture," I don't know. I'm not thrilled.

That said, the "main story" is (so far) pretty good. Overall, I'd give this one a 8 out of 10. (Jonah was a 10, The Ballad of Little Joe was a 9.5, just for comparison purposes.) Once I finish watching the movie, I'll talk a little more about it -- I'll just edit this post.

{Edit} == OK, now that I've seen the whole thing, it's pretty clear that the "main story" is Ruth and Boaz. That's what I get for starting my review while Larry Sings the Blues is still on. And that segment was pretty good, but the old Silly Songs were funnier. And I still don't like the characterization of Miriam. I have edited my original rating from 7.5 to 8. I definitely recommend watching the video with the director's commentary.

The scene: Larry King Live.

The Question: Do you understand how they feel? [Concerning Terri Schiavo's parents and family]

The Answer:Yes, I do. But this is not about them, it's about Terri. And I've also said that in court. We didn't know what Terri wanted, but this is what we want...

It's all about what he wants -- not about what Terri ever wanted. One moment of truth in the midst of a sea of deception.

I wonder if the MSM will pick this one up, or if it's up to the blogosphere again.

{MAJOR Hat tip to Nick at NickQueen.com, where you can find a more complete transcript that shows you the context of the question and the answer.}

The Liberty University women's basketball team, the 13th seed in the Chattanooga region of the NCAA Women's tournament, upset the #4 seed Penn State Lady Lions last night. This is only the fourth time that a 13 seed has beaten a 4 seed in tournament history.

The Lady Flames have been Big South champions for the past 9 years running, but have normally been given a 16 seed -- a real disappointment last year after beating teams like UVa.

As an LU graduate, I just had to brag a bit about the Lady Flames basketball team. The men's team has been to the dance twice, once losing to UNC and losing last year to St. Johns. The women have become a fixture in the tournament, but this is the first year they get to advance. And according to the ESPN poll (as of 12:20 Eastern, anyway), they are favored to make it to the Sweet 16. They take on #5 DePaul on Tuesday at 7 PM in College Park, MD. GO FLAMES!!

My best efforts failed me. Well, I can't really say they were my best efforts, but in any case, I didn't get the crown back. Congrats to the new King of the Blogs, GMs Corner. I didn't even get close this time -- I came in dead last.
Voting wouldn't have saved me. Trackbacks wouldn't have saved me. The new layout would probably have saved me -- I got gigged for my site design by one of the judges.

But it's a fun competition -- I encourage everyone to try it out. If nothing else, you get blog hits from it, and maybe some new readers.

Here we go, on this whirlwind trip through my blogroll.

• The Plodding Pilgrim is talking about comfort. I like the definition that he uses -- it has less to do with feeling good, and more to do with being upheld and strangthened.
• Smart Christian is promoting the Christian Blogosphere Convention. If you can go (I wish I could, but I'll be in classes), you need to go. There is also a need for non-conservative-Protestant bloggers -- Orthodox and Roman Catholic bloggers are needed to conduct some of the sessions that are planned. This convention has potential to result in great things, but without ALL of our support, it could really fall flat.
• Christian Hillsblog is pondering division in the church. I love the very first quote -- pointing out the importance of corporate prayer in the start and spread of revival. We can market people into our churches, but we have to pray to get them into the family of God. Our churches need to be united in this effort.
• Jollyblogger is involved in the "blogging as the new Reformation" debate. I can see the point on both sides -- the Reformation was ushered in in part by the advent of a new communication media. I think it's far too early to tell exactly what the impact of blogging and the blogosphere is going to be. All we can know right now is that there IS an impact.
• Don Elbourne, Jr. (aka Webmaster at the FFF) has a great post quoting the Baptist encyclopedia about St. Patrick. While I sometimes wonder if we can call Patrick a true Baptist, what I've read from his confession leads me to believe that he was a different sort of catholic than most Roman Catholics make him out to be. He certainly would have opposed the Synod of Whitby.
  

I get a lot of grief at times about my love for history. Not even just church history -- that has only started in the past five years or so. I've always loved history. People wonder what good it could possibly be to read things written by dead men. A quote from Andrew Fuller:

It becomes Christians to bear positive good-will to their country, and to its government, considered as government, irrespective of the political party which may have the ascendency. We may have our preferences, and that without blame; but they ought never to prevent a cheerful obedience to the laws, a respectful demeanour towards those who frame and those who execute them, or a ready co-operation in every measure which the being or well-being of the nation may require.

That's from a sermon that he delivered over 200 years ago, when Britain was at war with France. It is no less true today.

Of course, Fuller was a Baptist, so that automatically disqualifies him from having anything relevent to say politically, right? Especially from the pulpit, and especially if it's motivated by Scripture, right? Isn't that what Americans United teaches us?

The Feast Day of St. Patrick. Today is known more now for drunken revelry than any celebration of the actual life of St. Patrick, so I figured I'd post something historical and devotional -- even though most scholars say that it's too late for it to be attributed to Patrick. It definitely reflects his spirituality, and so I include it today. Besides, it's an awesome example of devotional poetry, and I think more people need to know about it.

There are a number of great translations available; I've chosen the one I found here, since it seems the most complete. It also begins "I bind unto myself" rather than "I rise today" -- the more accurate translation.


I bind unto myself today

The strong name of the Trinity,

By invocation of the same,

The Three in One and One in Three.



I bind this day to me for ever,

By power of faith, Christ's Incarnation;

His baptism in the Jordan River;

His death on cross for my salvation;

His bursting from the spicèd tomb;

His riding up the heavenly way;

His coming at the day of doom;

I bind unto myself today.



I bind unto myself the power

Of the great love of the Cherubim;

The sweet 'Well done' in judgment hour;

The service of the Seraphim,

Confessors' faith, Apostles' word,

The Patriarchs' prayers, the Prophets' scrolls,

All good deeds done unto the Lord,

And purity of virgin souls.



I bind unto myself today

The virtues of the starlit heaven,

The glorious sun's life-giving ray,

The whiteness of the moon at even,

The flashing of the lightning free,

The whirling wind's tempestuous shocks,

The stable earth, the deep salt sea,

Around the old eternal rocks.



I bind unto myself today

The power of God to hold and lead,

His eye to watch, His might to stay,

His ear to hearken to my need.

The wisdom of my God to teach,

His hand to guide, his shield to ward,

The word of God to give me speech,

His heavenly host to be my guard.



Against the demon snares of sin,

The vice that gives temptation force,

The natural lusts that war within,

The hostile men that mar my course;

Or few or many, far or nigh,

In every place and in all hours

Against their fierce hostility,

I bind to me these holy powers.



Against all Satan's spells and wiles,

Against false words of heresy,

Against the knowledge that defiles,

Against the heart's idolatry,

Against the wizard's evil craft,

Against the death-wound and the burning

The choking wave and the poisoned shaft,

Protect me, Christ, till thy returning.



Christ be with me, Christ within me,

Christ behind me, Christ before me,

Christ beside me, Christ to win me,

Christ to comfort and restore me,

Christ beneath me, Christ above me,

Christ in quiet, Christ in danger,

Christ in hearts of all that love me,

Christ in mouth of friend and stranger.



I bind unto myself the name,

The strong name of the Trinity;

By invocation of the same.

The Three in One, and One in Three,

Of whom all nature hath creation,

Eternal Father, Spirit, Word:

Praise to the Lord of my salvation,

salvation is of Christ the Lord.

We need to bind to ourselves daily the power of God. Patrick is claiming the power of God on his life, to protect and sustain him through any difficulty. And Patrick had difficulty in his life and ministry. According to legend, Patrick used this prayer (or lorica) to excape druids who were trying to kill him. As he passed, all the druids saw was a deer -- for this reason, the breastplate has also been called The Deer's Cry. The dating of the prayer makes this story a bit of a problem (since it claims to have been written "in the time of Loeghaire, son of Niall," which puts it well after the time of Patrick. It is obvious, though, from a study of his life that St. Patrick was protected time and again by God.

{edit}For a great biographical sketch of Patrick, go here.

And I'm NOT talking about the Cap'n, either. I'm getting clobbered in the KotB voting, and though I didn't need those points in the past, I WANT them this time. I lost the last time by something like a half a point, so I want some cushion.

So I come to YOU, my loyal readers, with hat in hand, to ask, implore, and otherwise BEG you to go to the KotB site and vote for me. AND post something nice about me on your blog, and trackback to this post (the trackback is http://blog.mu.nu/cgi/mt-tb.cgi/70912, just to make it easy on you all).

Make me the first King to ever serve two non-consecutive terms. Just like my idol, Grover Cleveland.

He WAS the guy on Sesame Street, right?

So, I'm planning this dinner party to celebrate my return to the KotB competition (a la Teddy Roosevelt) and my subsequent victory (a la Grover Cleveland). And I'm going to invite a few people, and we're going to have a great time -- dinner, conversation, dessert, all that. Now all I have to do is figure out who to invite. . .

I'd invite Songstress, but I'll probably be serving one of her recipes, and I know it won't be nearly as good as it is when she makes it at home. Pietro is probably working late to keep us all safe, or he'd be a definite invite. Harvey isn't judging anymore, but I'd invite him just for the chicks he'd draw. And I need to kiss up to the new guy (who is a new addition to my blogroll, by the way!), so the Ogre would be at the top of the list, too. And you know, they all deserve to be there. But having them all over to my place, and feeding them the wonderful cuisine that my wife and I can prepare would be just SOOOOO unfair to the other pretenders .... Heck, I'll do it anyway. Oh. We only have place-settings for four. Sorry guys. Maybe after I win the crown, we'll go buy some more Chinet.

Let's face it; the point of this dinner is networking. I want to get attention and hits. Who should I invite? The man who wrote the book on blogging, of course -- Hugh Hewitt himself. Pointers AND probably a link -- what could be better?

Since this is clearly fiction (like Hugh Hewitt would show up at my house for dinner. He can get beanie weenies anywhere!), and since I'm really looking for some publicity, I'd probably get in touch with the guy who came up with Apple's 1984 commercial. Think about it -- the commercial says nothing, never even shows you what it's advertizing, and 20 years later is still shown every time they talk about Super Bowl commercials. This guy is a genius -- if he could con people into buying Macintosh computers, he can get people to read my blog.

I've got one more place setting left (unless you count the Dora the Explorer bowl, cup, and silverware as a place setting), so I'm going to go all out and pick someone unexpected. Someone who has never heard of a blog, but would have put them to great use if they had been available in his time -- Thomas Payne. Yea, I don't agree with his outlook on everything -- he's a deist, after all -- but can you imagine what he'd have done with the Internet and a blog? Even the Instapundit his own self would be playing second fiddle to Payne.

And of course they would all tell me how fitting it is for me to be the first King to leave the throne and then return, just like Arthur.

No, not the 70's sitcom -- I'm talking about what's happening around here!

First of all, I'm back in the Best of Me Symphony. Head over there and read all the great posts (including one from Nick Queen himself).

SPEAKING of Nick Queen -- (and I was going to make this a separate post) I am returning to the King of the Blogs competition to reclaim my throne, and become the only King to rule nonconsecutive weeks (which I guess would make me the Teddy Roosevelt of Blog Kings). Head over to the KotB page and be sure to vote for me, and make sure that you trackback to the right post!

Head over to Dignan's and read his post about the Religious Right(tm), and tell me he doesn't sound a lot like me -- just more eloquent. I haven't had some of the experiences he's had (like the Jay Sekulow episode), but I DID attend Jerry Falwell University (aka Liberty University), so I probably have a few that he hasn't had.

Laws change behavior -- sometimes. But we're not commanded to change attitudes. We're commanded to preach the Gospel, and let God change hearts. That will do more to change things than anything we can do politically. We should be aware of what is happening in Washington DC, and how it will effect us daily. We should support laws that we agree with, and oppose laws that we disagree with. But on many things, there is no distinct Christian position. Good Christians are on all sides of just about every political discussion, and we tend to question someone's salvation just because of their stand on the marriage ammendment, or whether they send their kids to a public school ("secular humanist bootcamp"), etc. Not only is that totally incorrect, it's unbiblical. And it's causing unnecessary division in the body of Christ.

There are some political decisions that a Christian worldview will influence in a specific direction. NAFTA, the WTO, speed limits on interstates, the ballanced budget ammendment, and things like that are not among those decisions.

• Espresso Roast is a written by a fellow Southern student (who REALLY should be in the SBC aggregator! Need to email him ...). He's got an interesting report of a case of Bush Rage in Florida.
• Jeri over at Blog on the Lilypad2 is linking to Phil Johnson's report on American Fundamentalism. Jeri's pretty active over at the FFF, and Phil used to be. Read Jeri's blog, then head over to the FFF -- we need some troll repellant over there.
• Nick at NickQueen.com has a T-shirt that everyone needs to buy.
• Wesley Blog reported on the National Council of Churches issuing a warning to Christian relief workers in Asia, cautioning them not to evangelize. Sure -- let's NOT tell the people the major reason we've travelled halfway around the world to help them. Don't DARE let them know about the love of God. Doesn't matter -- if the Christians are doing their jobs right, the people there will see Christ in them, and will want to know. And they will be told.
• Rooftop Blog has an interesting take on China's Most Favored Nation trade status. Seems that trade to China is an excellent "Trojan horse" for missions work. I've always ranted about China's MFN satatus -- why hadn't I thought of this angle?!
  

This has been a hectic week, with midterms coming up at school and everything, so I've been abit slack. NOT all of it is my fault, though -- had a great post done on the Ten Commandments, and Blogger ate it. I was so frustrated that I stopped and went to sleep. Maybe I'll repost it this weekend.

I plan on having something up this evening; I have two or three things rolling around in my head, and I still have to do some more on the Mark study.

(TWO in one 'week'! You'll get spoiled, I know you will ...)

March 7, 1274.

A man who is arguably the best theologian of the Middle Ages, Thomas Aquinas, died this day at 48. Aquinas adapted the writings of Aristotle to Christianity (for good or ill), in the process engaging Averroists in both Christianity and Islam in debate. His Summa Theologiae is still studied by students of all denominations all over the world. His teachings on the relationship between faith and are still studied (and are the subject of the next 'Faith and Reason' segment that I am working on).

Aquinas wasn't always this popular. His classmates thought he was stupid -- they called him a "dumb ox." His aristocratic family thought he was throwing his life away. Nobody thought he would ammount to anything.

They were wrong. The full impact of this man's theology and philosophy cannot be measured even today, but it is safe to say that the Roman Catholic Church, at the very least, would be vastly different in teaching and practice without him.

An outstanding resource on Aquinas can be found here.

The New York press seems to have attracted a cadre of top-notch Christophobes. Nicholas Kristof, of course, has taken on this issue before (and I took him to task for it as well). Now that paragon of tolerance Bill Moyers has taken another shot at the faithful, in the form of a New York Review of Books article titled "Welcome to Doomsday."

Moyers starts with the typical "I can't believe people actually believe the Bible is true" statement. Then he slams Christians for their "take dominion over the earth" philosophy before admitting that many Christians are fairly conservationistic when it comes to the environment. See, we realize that the command God gave Adam and Eve implies that we should take care of what we have, make the best use of it that we can, but not to trash the place. See, the idea of stewardship means that you manage your resources so that they will be of use to you for a longer period of time than they would be if they were left to themselves. I would hazard a guess that the majority of Christians (and not a slim majority at that -- perhaps as much as 85-90%) would say that poluting is wrong, and that we are commanded to take care of what God has given us. Of course, if you read Moyers, you'd think that this was a new idea, championed mainly by the Christian left.

Then he embarks on a quest to explain Christian eschatology to his readers. You may not have known this, so brace yourselves -- most of us agree with Lehaye and Jenkins. Those who don't really don't matter to folks like Moyers and Kristof, because they don't fit the stereotype. And, as I mentioned before, the characterizations of Christians who are pretrib dispensationalists are incredibly unfair and uninformed. Moyers has spent a lot of time reading books about people he doesn't like, written by people who agree with his assesment. Maybe he should actually talk to a few people, and find out what they actually believe, and not what the latest Newsweek poll says they believe.

Moyers DOES introduce an earth-shattering factoid in his column that may just rock the foundations of dispensational eschatology -- the word Rapture never appears in the Bible! GASP!!!! Next thing you know, he'll be critical of Christians' belief in the Trinity, since that word isn't in the Bible either. He obviously has no clue about the purpose of theology, and can't really be bothered to find out.

For about the millionth time, let me explain something to everyone. Pretrib dispensationalists do NOT think they are making Jesus come faster. They believe that Jesus is going to show up whenever HE wants to, and we'd better be about our business while we wait, so He isn't ticked at us when He gets here. Premillenialists in general believe that. I'm not as familiar with post-mil or a-mil eschatology, but it seems that one of them teaches that we bring about the millenial kingdom -- something that Reconstructionists agree with. There are no pre-mil Reconstructionists -- and Reconstructionists don't agree with LaHaye and company.

Of course, it's much easier to just rag on people, without actually finding out the facts about them. After all, Bill Moyers does it, and he's a "respected journalist." Maybe next time he wants to write about evangelicals or fundamentalists, he'll actually go out and find a few, and talk to them, rather than misrepresenting their beliefs and insulting everyone's intelligence.

Same format today. I'll probably NOT do the cruise on Thursday or Friday, because of school, but every other day, it will be here.

• CoffeeSwirls is blogging the Heidelberg Catechism -- question 27 is today's entry. This is a pretty good idea for anyone -- consider what you believe, and why you believe it.
• The Banty Rooster is up in arms about "gender-neutral restrooms". I agree that this is a really bad idea, which means it will probably be done in the next month or so.
• Lawreligionculturereview is blogging about the Socratic Method -- which is my own personal favorite method in teaching. I LOVE the story related in this post, and figure that, sooner or later, it will happen in a class I'm teaching. At this point, I'd just love to teach students who can think on their feet that way.
• IntolerantElle.com asks the immortal question, "How Twisted is This?" The obvious response, at least to my way of thinking, is VERY. Go there, read, and be outraged.
• Grace Notes 4 Teens asks the other immortal question -- Why are there so many gods? It's an important question to consider, and I plan on getting that book to the top of my read list soon. My read list is huge -- I'll get through it sometime in 2104, hopefully in the fall ...

And none of these blogs have trackbacks enabled. Oh, well. I tried!

Don't forget to head over to Mind and Media. Stacy's set up this blog to promote Christian authors, film makers, etc. If we're really going to engage this culture, we are going to have to do it through the arts and through the media.

We live in a culture and a society that focuses a LOT of attention (not to mention money) on the media. The media has a lot of influence. It stands to reason that a Christian influence in the media is going to make a real difference in our culture -- as long as the Christian media and art we are producing is of a high quality.

That's another part of what Stacy's doing over at M&M. She's distributing some of the products she gets (books, video, etc.) to bloggers, who review what she's sending out. And we're not going to be nice just because we're getting free stuff! If I don't like something, you'll know about it. Of course, I will let Stacy know first, and see if she wants to give the thing to someone else to review. But there will be several bloggers reviewing each book/video, so if you get a bunch of bad reviews, you'll be warned. And if there are a bunch of good reviews, you'll know to run out and buy the thing!

And I will be doing the reviews here. The Pew Reviews blog that I started is, I think, going to die a slow, quiet death. When I started it, I had time to do two blogs -- now I barely have time to do one. I'll keep it up, because there are some reviews up there, but new reviews will be here. I get to keep my sanity that way (what's left of it, anyway)!

Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say that the Son of Man is?"And they said, "Some say John the Baptist, others say Elijah, and others Jeremiah or one of the prophets." He said to them, "But who do you say that I am?"Simon Peter replied, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jonah! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.
(Matthew 16:13-17 ESV)

The Council of Nicea was called to answer one basic question that had been plaguing Christians for the past hundred years -- how can a faith that affirms the basic unity of God also assert the diety of Jesus Christ? There were many attenpts to answer this question, but all were unsatisfactory at some point. Some, adoptionists like Theodotus, taught that Jesus was born a normal man, and that the Christ, the Logos of God, descended upon him at his baptism. This denied the eternal existance of God (which the Bible clearly teaches). Others, such as the monarchians, acknowledged the diety of Christ but denied that He was distinct from the Father. This lead ultimately to the idea of patripassianists -- those who taught that the Father Himself suffered on the cross. There is no distinction between the Father and the Son -- which minimizes, or even obscurs, the humanity of Christ. In fact, many who believed this ultimately taught that Christ's humanity was an illusion -- a clear contradiction of Christ's teaching, especially after the resurrection.

Ultimately, each attempt to reconcile Christ's diety with Judeo-Christian monotheism strayed in one of two directions: either emphasizing the humanity of Christ at the expense of his diety, or affirming his diety while minimizing his humanity. Early Christians recognized the problem, and spent a lot of time trying to come up with a solution that would affirm His diety and humanity. Nicea was the first step; later councils would address Christ's dual nature (Ephesus and Chalcedon), and the wills of Christ (3rd Constantinople). Trinitarian thought was further developed at 1st Constantinople, when the diety of the Holy Spirit was affirmed. Each of these councils will be treated in depth later on in the series.

The issue that finally made a general church council necessary was the prevelance of the teachings of Arius. Arius believed that the Son was divine, and was the agent of creation, but the Son was not God. They were similar, but not the same. Arius taught that God created the Son to act as His agent in creation, so that "All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. (Joh 1:3 ESV)" Arius had been excommunicated twice for his unorthodox beliefs, and finally left Alexandria for Palestine, and won support for his beliefs there. Soon Arianism spread throughout Christendom.

The chief opponent of Arius was Athanasius, the bishop of Alexandria. Athanasius advocated the idea of Christ being consubstantial with God and coeternal with God. "There was no time when He was not" vs. "There was a time when he was not." "homoousios"(of the same substance) vs. "homoiousios"(of like substance) -- amazing what the addition or subtraction of one vowel can do to a word in Greek.

The exact number of bishops present at the council is uncertain. Eusebias records 250, Athanasius himself says around 300. The most commonly accepted number is 318, given by Hilary of Poitier. The bishops heard arguement from both sides, and judged the issue by Scripture, finally determining that the Arian position was incorrect and, in fact, heretical.

We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten of the Father, that is, of the substance [ek tes ousias] of the Father, God of God, light of light, true God of true God, begotten not made, of the same substance with the Father [homoousion to patri], through whom all things were made both in heaven and on earth; who for us men and our salvation descended, was incarnate, and was made man, suffered and rose again the third day, ascended into heaven and cometh to judge the living and the dead. And in the Holy Ghost. Those who say: There was a time when He was not, and He was not before He was begotten; and that He was made our of nothing (ex ouk onton); or who maintain that He is of another hypostasis or another substance [than the Father], or that the Son of God is created, or mutable, or subject to change, [them] the Catholic Church anathematizes.

The decision, contrary to popular opinion, was near unanimous. Five bishops disagreed, though that number was quickly reduced to two -- Theonas of Marmarica and Secundus of Ptolemais. Both of these men were exiled and anathematized.

The major issue of the council was thus settled, and yet at the same time, it wasn't. Later councils would address the idea of the person of Christ and the nature of Christ, in an attempt to express exactly how He could be both God and man at the same time. Christological conflict was not over, but at Nicea an important foundation was established.

Other issues that were addressed by the council included the controversy over the date of Easter, and another schismatic named Melitus of Lycopolis, whose name has gone down in obscurity just as Arius' has gone down in infamy.
------------------
Additional Sources:
The Medieval Sourcebook documents from the First Council of Nicea.
The First Council of Nicea
The Catholic Encyclopedia articles on: Arius, Arianism, and the First Council of Nicea

I like the "top five" thing I did yesterday, so I'm going to do the same thing. The first five blogs listed in the Church Directory.

• First up, Double Toothpicks. Is atheism in decline? And is the stuff that's replacing it even worse?
• Berkeley Godspot hasn't been updated in a while (uless they changed URLs and didn't tell anyone), but what's there is a great read. I especially enjoy the post on Sproul Plaza and the Christian speakers there.
• Jollyblogger offers the usual outstanding fare. The posts on infant baptism are well-written and interesting, even though I'm still a credobaptist. Maybe David just needs more cowbell. (Hey, he likes the Yeti games, AND snowball fight! He can't be a bad guy!)
• Eternal Perspectives is giving away a Systematic Theology text written by Dr. Robert Cook at Dallas Theological Seminary. When you get done begging for your copy (like I did!), read the rest of the blog. There's too much of worth to list just one or two posts.
• My wife would have enjoyed Bear Witness if she had stayed up long enough to see the page. She loves teddy bears. Check out the moral dilema in this post -- and think about what you would do.

Figure if I keep doing this, I'll work my way through the whole directory! Don't forget to click through the SBC Aggregator, either -- we're growing!!

Just got back from hearing David Ring at First Baptist Ironton, OH. If you EVER think that you can't do something God has called you to do, or start feeling sorry for yourself because of some problems you are facing, go hear him speak. In fact, even if you don't ever feel that way, you should hear him speak anyway.

From the website:

Few individuals have felt the crushing blows that have besieged David Ring since birth. He was born to lose. On October 28, 1953, in Jonesboro, Arkansas, David was born with cerebral palsy. Orphaned at age 14, he was cast about from family to family, with nowhere to call home. He endured constant physical pain, humiliating public ridicule and constant discouragement. Yet in the face of these seemingly insurmountable obstacles, David emerged not victimized...but victorious! Life was worse than hopeless to him until his relationship began with Jesus Christ who taught him self respect and an acceptance of his physical challenges. To most, physical challenges of this magnitude would prove to be a tombstone. For David, his coming of age was and remains a milestone.

I've heard a lot of motivational speakers in my life. David Ring is the best. And as far as preaching goes -- there's not a lot of theology in his message, but you will leave revived and ready to do whatever you are called on by God to do. And every time you come up with an excuse to NOT do something, you'll hear David Ring in the back of your head, prodding you. "I have cerebral palsey -- what's your excuse?"

(It's BACK! Did you miss it?)

March 5, 1797.

Henry Nott arrives in Tahiti to begin his missionary work. Twenty-two years later, he rejoices in his first convert.

How many of us would have that kind of patience? How many of us would stay in a country to minister after all those who came with us were killed by the natives? How many of us would have stuck with it?

We live in a society that demands instant results. We have microwaves because we can't wait for our food to cook. The other day, I saw microwaveable peanut-butter and jelly sandwiches in the freezer section at the grocery store. My wife assured me that they are not a new thing. It takes longer to nuke the sandwhich than it does to spread peanut-butter and jelly on bread!!

We have the internet so we can communicate instantly with anyone, no matter where they are. My first modem was a 300 baud modem for my Commodore 64. I still have it somewhere. Now I have a cable modem that gets me information almost instantly. And in another ten years, THAT will probably be too slow.

We are a people who cannot wait. And some things require patience -- like evangelism. God does not work in our time, even though we expect Him to. We need the patience of a Henry Nott, and we will see change.

Nott's first convert? King Pomare II, one of the most violent men in the world at that time. His conversion changed Tahiti forever. You never know who you can reach, if only you don't give up.

It sure has taken them long enough!!

And it's a pretty fair assesment of the religious blogosphere, including references to Jewish, Muslim, and Mormon blogs in addition to the Catholic and Protestant blogs.

SmartChristian gets a plug for GodBlogCon2005, meeting at Biola this year. WISH I could go, but it's going to be in the middle of school season, so I'll either be teaching (actually substituting) or in class myself at Southern. Maybe next year.

Joe Carter is mentioned, of course, as is Blogs4God.

Head over there and read it -- encourage the NYT to interact with our community!

Returning to the Cruise today, I decided to take a look at the top five blogs mentioned on the "Church Directory" (the Evangelical Outpost list).

• Dunker Journal is talking about colleges and leftism. UVa is "creating power bases" for budding socialists all over America.
  
• Cerulean Sanctum wants to know if Christianity is broken. "I wonder if we Christian bloggers are actually doing a disservice to people, especially to those who are struggling in the faith or are considering the claims of Christ for the first time." I sometimes wonder the same thing. Christian blogs have a huge responsibility, and sometimes we forget about it. Sometimes we are the only examples of Christians people see, and we keep acting like the stereotypes they read about in the MSM. Then we wonder why people believe all the stuff that the NY Times says about us.
• Desperate Vision has a post in a similar vein. Also read the post about Artificial Sweetner -- very good reading at this blog.
• Fallible.com asks the eternal question -- What's up with those tennis balls?
• And my old friend Rebecca writes about the Ordo Saludis and other soteriological terms. If you want to actually understand theology, read this blog. I may have to get her to help out with my Systematic II midterm next Friday!
  
  

I'm being interviewed by Nick at NickQueen.com (formerly Patriot Paradox). If YOU want to be interviewed HERE, leave me a comment, and I'll ask the questions -- I'm taking the first three. Answer them on your site, and offer to interview people too!

1. How would you describe yourself, and how would this differ from your wife's description?
   
   I'd describe myself as a complete geek. Roleplaying games (pencil and paper with real dice, thankyouverymuch), Star Trek (all of them!), computers, the works. I'm also a devout reader -- given a choice between reading and watching a movie, I'll read any day. I'm also devoted to my family, especially my daughter.
   
   My wife would say about the same thing, but she'd probably add something about how obnoxious I can be, and also how lazy I can be.
   
   
2. What is your favorite joke?
   
   hmmmmmmmmm.
   Q. How many KJVOnlies does it take to change a light bulb?
   A. "That's the problem with these liberals today. They want you to think that that light bulb -- the one that was good enough for Paul and Barnabas, needs to be changed. They want to take away your light, friends! WHy, I was in the hardware store the other day, and you should have SEEN the number of different light bulbs that they had there. You know why they want you to change that bulb? It's simple -- money. Not ME, friend! I'm NOT CHANGIN' that old light bulb."
   
   
3. What is the worst job you've ever held?
   
   My very first job, I worked at a kennel. BIG one, had something like five different buildings for the dogs to stay in. 8 AM every day, I was there shovelling out what the dogs had done the night before. Did that until noon. THEN we had to walk the dogs. ALL AFTERNOON. The walking wasn't bad -- it was the cleanup in the morning that really got to me.
   
   
4. If ever stuck on a deserted island what 3 things or people or combination of each would you want with you (assume you already have your Bible)?
   
   My wife, my daughter (misery loves company), and a computer with a REALLY long extension cord and wireless Internet.
   
   
5. What was your favorite toy when you were a child?
   
   I had some REALLY cool boxes when I was a kid. Some of them were big, and some were small ...
   
   OK, actually my prized posession was my Micronauts collection. I had a ton of the things, and they always fought. I had battles staged out on the floor for days -- sometimes, I'd throw a quilt or blanket down, and wrinkle it up, so there were elevation changes and places to hide.

OK, those are MY answers. Now it's YOUR turn. You volunteer, and I'll come up with five questions of my own for YOU to answer!

I've got a new template ... sort of.

It's up over at The Testing Center, and it looks like crap. I'm a rookie at CSS, so I could use some help if anyone has the time or inclination ...

I'm going for a look that's kind of like seeing notices posted on a church bulletin board. Eventually I want to try to put little push-pins at the top of each section. I'm not thrilled with the overlap, and I don't have much more time this week to play with it.

I appreciate all the help I can get!!

To the poor, twisted individual who ended up here after searching for Christians and Speedos in Yahoo. I don't know what you expected, but I know you didn't get it here. It frigtens me that you might have found it somewhere else ...

... the more they stay the same. Consider this quote, taken from Andrew Fuller's letter to the chairman of the East Inia Company concerning Christian missionaries in India:

I have observed with pain, sir, of late years, a notion of toleration, entertained even by some who would be thought its firmest advocates, which tends not only to abridge, but to subvert it. They have no objection to Christians of any denomination enjoying their own opinions, and, it may be, their own worship; but they must not be allowed to make proselytes. ... They do not propose to persecute the Christians of India, provide they would keep their Christianity to themselves; but those who attempt to convert others are to be exterminated. Sir, I need not say to you that this is not toleration, but persecution.

This was written in 1807, when the East India Company was protesting the missionaries in India -- accusing them of fomenting revolution and rebellion after some of the company's sepoy troops mutinied. Thomas Twining, of the famous tea Twining family, wrote to the chairman of the East India Company urging him to not allow missionary activity in India any longer. British Baptist missions were under attack, and unjustly so.

But it could have easilly been written yesterday. As long as Christians keep our faith to ourselves, we are allowed to exist. When we start obeying the command of Christ to teach the nations to obey His commands, we need to be eliminated. In many parts of the world, Christians are eliminated in the most precise meaning of that word; they are killed. We have not reached that point in the US yet, though many things I have read on the Internet show me that many people are not opposed to that idea at all. Here, we are told simply that our beliefs have no place in the public forum, since they are religious in nature.

This is not tolerance. This is not simply an issue that Christians should be involved in. This is an issue that people who are interested in true tolerance of all beliefs should pay attention to, and protest against.

Nobody will ever write a history of Europe that will make any sort of sense, until he does justice to the Councils of the Church ...
---G.K. Chesterton

The first two centuries after the death of Christ were marked by periods of intense persecution of the church. The early Christians had little time to concern themselves with systematizing their beliefs -- their primary concern was to preach the Gospel of Christ, to make converts. Some early Christians were able to pass along teachings that they had learned from others, but there was some unity in these teachings, as they all came from a common source. As the apostles and their students began to die, however, the church was faced with a problem.

Teachers arose whose doctrine was not considered true. Controversy arose between followers of different teachers, some of whom claimed to have a "new revelation" of truth from God. The early church quickly established a canon of Scripture, so that everyone knew which books were authoritative and could be used in discerning what true doctrine was. Of course, not everyone agreed even on this point. And so Councils were called.

The idea of a council of church leaders was not new to the fourth century. The early church based their councils on the model set in Acts 15, when the apostles gathered to discuss the conditions under which Gentiles would be welcomed into the new faith. A council was called in 175 to address growing concerns about Montanism, and in 190 to reconcile Eastern and Western methods of determining the date of the Easter celebration (which was really never fully resolved). Cyprian of Carthage called one in 256 to discuss problems relating to persecution of believers in North Africa. Councils were widely used by the early Christians to attenpt to resolve disputes among believers. In this series, though, I will focus specifically on seven councils which are commonly called the Seven Ecumenical Councils because thier rulings were considered to be binding on all of Christianity, and the subjects delt with affected Christians all over the world.

Today, many Christians are ignorant of the councils -- especially Protestant Christians, who tend to regard tradition as something to be ignored and avoided in favor of Scripture. This is unfortunate, because much of our theology is based on these councils, who based their decisions on Scripture. Tradition and Scripture can exist side-by-side -- we simply must be sure that tradition never trumps Scripture. Scripture must be our principle guide, and when tradition and Scripture conflict, it is tradition that is wrong.

Church history is one of my passions. I love looking at the development of Christian theology, and seeing how early Christians looked at the Bible. I think that there is value in exploring where we have come from -- the more we know about our past, the better we can deal with our present, and look forward to the future. Controversies that the Church has delt with in the past can also be a help to us today, and that's what I am hoping to bring out in this series.

In this series, I am going to take a look at each Council individually, the reasons it was convened, it's decisions, and the fallout from it. Then, I am going to look at the Council's statements in light of Scripture, and see where tradition has taken over from the Bible as our guide in faith. I'm going to try to leave preconceptions at the door when I do this, but to an extent that is not possible. I am a conservative Protestant Chrisitan, with all the baggage that comes along with it. And I hope to have some comments from people who disagree with me -- I hope that we can learn from each other.

The series is going to be a little more scholarly than other things that I do here. The wisecracks and sarcasm I tend to inject in many posts won't be there. But I hope I won't make this study too dry, because there is value in it.

My principle source for this is going to be Leo Donald Davis' book The First Seven Ecumenical Councils (327-787): Their History and Heritage. Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1983. This should combat my own preconceptions and prejudices, since the book is written from a Roman Cathollic perspective. I'll note any additional sources at the bottom of each post, so that you can do your own study, and see if I'm getting it right!

A bill in Maine attempts to protect homosexual fetuses from "discrimination."

Essentially, you can kill your baby all you want in Maine -- as long as it's straight. If it's going to be gay, then you can't do that, because it's a hate crime.

It is the public policy of the State that the State not restrict a woman's exercise of her private decision to terminate a pregnancy before viability except as provided in section sections 1597-A and 1597-B.

Thank you Dean Hamer. This is all your fault.

I'm taking a look at the things people have typed into search engines to get here. I don't get as many bizarre ones as some people do, but some of these are interesting.

'difference in fundamentalists and evangelicals': #2 in Yahoo!, not even top 50 on Google.
'Al Mohler God gene': #1 in Google, not in the top 50 on Yahoo!
'Christians in public schools': #38 on Yahoo! (they must have ben looking at every link to get here!), not in the top 50 on Google. And I thought I'd said enough on that issue ...
'View from the Pew': I'm #1 on both. Wasn't always that way!
'open source theology': #3 on Google, #2 on Yahoo! I bet the guys over at Open Source Theology don't like what I had to say about it.

Think that's all the mindlessness for now. Currently in progress: the completion of the Faith and Reason series (promise!), the series on the Seven Ecumenical Councils, and something on "Baptist distinctives" -- the things that make a Baptist a Baptist and not a Presbyterian or something else. And it's NOT going to be a diatribe against anyone who isn't Baptist, either! I have too many friends (online and off) who aren't Baptists to go in that direction. Might even get a TWiCH up, and the Mark study!

Never thought I'd be linking to an MTV story, but I think this is important.

"Korn has parted ways with guitarist Brian 'Head' Welch, who has chosen Jesus Christ as his savior, and will be dedicating his musical pursuits to that end," a statement from the band reads. "Korn respects Brian's wishes, and hopes he finds the happiness he's searching for."

I'm hoping that Christians will react to this in several different ways:

• Pray for Brian Welch. Pray that he can grow in his faith without being thrown into the "new born again Christian former rock star" limelight. We tried to do that to Alice Cooper, remember?
• Pray for the rest of Korn. Pray that through Brian's witness (even if it's simply walking away from a great gig to follow Christ) that they will be impacted, and they may come to find the peace that Brian has.
• DON'T start talking about "ulterior motives" behind his conversion. People in the spotlight don't convert to Christianity and leave their current gig for monetary reasons. I got tired of hearing this about Deion Sanders, and I didn't even really like him.

He's already involved in a church, which is a good thing. I'm praying that he can grow there, and praising God for his conversion.

Blatently ripped off from Jared and the Songstress.

1. Open the bookmarks list in your favorite web browser and note the bottommost entry (which may or may not be the last one you added), even if it's inside a folder. Copy the bookmark title, along with the URL, into a post or comment.

2. Count up your list from there, and select every fourth bookmark, until you've picked another four. Add them to your post or comment.

3. Publish the list of five bookmarks and wait for the world to marvel at your eclectic and sophisticated interests!

Your Guide to Bathroom Design and Remodeling -- I was feeling ambitious, OK? We even went out and bought the tile -- it's still in boxes.
The Shakespeare Classroom -- You DID know that my wife and I both teach (well, I did until this past fall). What do you expect?
Beatles Christmas Records -- I downloaded all of these this year and burned them onto a CD for us to listen to while travelling.
The Homestar Runner Wiki -- He IS the fastest runner, after all.
Harrison Bergeron by Kurt Vonnegut -- If you haven't read it yet, you need to. One of my favorites, even though the kids didn't get it when my wife taught it.

Those are my five. How about you?

MOST blogs get spammed by poker sites, porn sites, things like that. Not me.

I get spammed by sites that sell clothing for dogs. I'll fix it Monday evening when I get back home, and let the owner of the site know exactly how much I appreciate them messing with my comments.

And it IS mandatory. All married blogging males MUST at least refer to Valentines Day on their blog, else they will incur the wrath of the Wife. At least it's in the copy of the rules I got ...

We actually celebrated over the weekend, with a trip down to Charleston, WV to Town Center Mall and Bennigans. The Carribean Crab Cakes are quite good, by the way, and if you get a side of fries they make a rather filling meal. Spent the whole day together, just the three of us (can't have Valentines Day without my little Valentine, too!).

And yesterday was our anniversary. Yep, guys, I managed to combine the two holidays that every male forgets into (almost) one day. AND I get roses dirt cheap the day after Valentines Day, so what are you gonna do? Still not sure why we picked February to get married (other than the reason I just gave, which I remember telling her when we were discussing dates).

It snowed two days before we got married. I was flying to Lynchburg from Atlanta, and was meeting my sister in Charlotte. My flight was delayed because of bad weather, and the flight to Virginia was delayed too -- there was a blizzard. So we ended up staying in Charlotte overnight, and worrying everyone that we wouldn't make it the next day, either.

But we did. Got an early flight out, got to Virginia with no further problems, and got hitched on February 15, 1997. So Happy Valentines/Anniversary, Thanea -- even if I didn't get this done on time (what else is new, right?).

You might have noticed I missed a few days. No, no blogger angst this time. No scholarly excuses, either. I've been playing a game.

Not just any game. Shot Online golf.

The game might remind some people of Tiger Woods 2004 -- but I never played that one (I'm a Links 2003 man myself). You play, earn money and experience. Money buys you new clothing, hair, or clubs. Experience makes you better. Every hole you play, you get a little of both. The game is in open Beta right now, but I haven't run into many problems so far. And I've been levelling up pretty quickly. Which is why I haven't been writing much.

But I'm not addicted. I can quit any time I want to -- really. But I only need to win another 50,000 Ng (the in-game currency) to be able to afford new irons. And I need me some new irons...

Checking in with my very favorite New York Times columnist, Nicholas Kristof, today, I was amused to notice that, this one time, he's been scooped by some of us religious nuts.

He's written a column about "prominent American geneticist" Dean Hamer, and his 'God gene' idea. Kristof likes the idea, it seems -- it explains why so many people decide to be irrational enough to actually believe in this God character -- "... faith may give people strength to overcome illness - after all, if faith in placebo sugar pills works, why not faith in God?"

And I tend to agree that this really, in the long run, doesn't matter.

Of course, none of that answers the question of whether God exists. The faithful can believe that God wired us to appreciate divinity. And atheists can argue that God may simply be a figment of our VMAT2 gene.

But what the research does suggest is that postindustrial society will not easily leave religion behind. Faith may be quiescent in many circles these days, or directed toward meditation or yoga, but it is not something that humans can easily cast off.

A propensity to faith in some form appears to be embedded within us as a profound part of human existence, as inextricable and perhaps inexplicable as the way we love and laugh.

But, of course, loyal readers of this blog will remember that Dr. Al Mohler has already talked about this book of Dean Hamer's -- waaaaay back in October. And I talked about him talking about it here. So this is really old news. Maybe Kristof should read more Godblogs.

And a little bit of a Blogroll Cruise for good measure.

First, a little randomness. I've been leaving BlogExplosion alone for a bit, conducting an experiment. I wanted to see what impact being close to the top 1000 in the TTLB ecosystem was having on my actual hits, rather than just links. I have noticed a slight increase -- of course, me not posting anything for five days didn't really help endear me to any new readers (HEY, come back! I'm writing stuff now! PLEASE!!!). Now I've decided I like the little line graph going UP on statcounter, so I'm back on the 'Splosion. And I remember what I didn't like about it the last time -- a lot of people with nothing much to say (kinda like me today, huh?).

Stones Cry Out is talking about First Principles. I find myself disagreeing with the principle that conservatives adhere to custom, convention, and continuity. I'm not what I would consider a conventional person. Custom is a wonderful thing, but it isn't a rule of my life. I DO like continuity, though, since I am a (budding) historian. Continuity for its own sake, though, is wrong. I'm looking close at the other ten principles here, and if I think it's warranted I'll put a post together about my thoughts on the subject.

Scott over at the Crusty Curmudgeon reminds me that yesterday was the feast day of Caedmon, which the Celtic/British history nut in me should have remembered. I have an excuse -- I've been reading a LOT more "modern" (18th century and later) church history recently. I think this summer will be time to pull out the Bede again.

Rebecca must be reading my mind. Go read this post. We argue about doctrine, disagree about everything under the sun -- but we are still brothers and sisters in Christ if we have the same trust in Christ for our salvation. I'm getting ready to put a study together on "Baptist Distinctives" that I hope I'll get to do at church, and I got to thinking about them. I realized that while I think they're all important things, I am good friends with people who would disagree with me on just about all of them. And these are people whose salvation I do not question, and whose walk with Christ is beyond reproach. God doesn't mind if they're wrong ;-)

The King of the Blogs tourney is still running, and they've had a ruling monarch last long enough to be inducted into the Hall of Fame. And rumor is that a former monarch (who is working on a new template) is considering an attempt at regaining his throne. . . Or maybe he's just pulling people's chains, who knows. He's strange that way ......

... to the judges at the KotB tournament, anyway. They've changed the Blogger comment thing so that you don't have to have a Blogger account anymore to leave comments on a blog with their comment thing turned on.

I still like Haloscan better, though. BlogSpot still doesn't have trackback, for example.

I really don't have anything else to say, but I wanted everyone to know about that -- it was advertized on the Dashbard page when I logged in.

The irony of this quiz result is that I was going to use this guy in my last King of the Blogs defense, to answer the challenge post about who I would base my rule on. Unfortunately, I forgot the guy's name until two days later when my wife mentioned him. Yes, we are both history geeks, so we DO have conversations like that all the time.

Which Historical Lunatic Are You?
From the fecund loins of Rum and Monkey.
This guy actually declared himself Emperor of the United States. From what I've been able to gather, he was in reality pretty harmless, and left the folks in Washington alone. The people who lived near him humored him, and he didn't really give anyone any trouble, but he never really did much of anything, either.

I heard a little about this story on the way to school this evening. Once I got here and had dinner, I figured I would check into it a little.

Is anyone else VERY disturbed about this? The fact that someone can go to the FBI and claim that your sermons are inciting violence, and the FBI then shows up and gets transcripts or recordings of your messages bothers me more than I want to even think about.

I've been struggling for the past several days with a lot of stuff. For a few hours today I was thinking about shutting down the blog -- but I'm not. It's hard to describe what I was feeling, because a lot of it was nothing at all (which is far more frightening than feeling something), but I think that this Steve Taylor song probably does a pretty good job of it.

The Finish Line

Once upon an average morn
An average boy was born for the second time
Prone upon the altar there
He whispered up a prayer he'd kept hid inside
The vision came, he saw the odds
A hundred little gods on a gilded wheel
"These will vie to take your place
But, Father, by Your grace I will never kneel"

And I saw you, upright and proud
And I saw you wave to the crowd
And I saw you laughing out loud at the Philistines
And I saw you brush away rocks
And I saw you pull up your socks
And I saw you out on the blocks for the finish line

Darkness falls, the devil stirs
And as your vision blurs you start stumbling
The heart is weak, the will is gone
And every strong conviction comes tumbling down
Malice rains, the acid guile
Is sucking at your shoes while the mud is fresh
It floods the trail, it leaves you dry
As every little god buys its pound of flesh

And I saw you licking your wounds
And I saw you weave your cocoons
And I saw you changing your tunes for the party line
And I saw you welch on old debts
I saw you and your comrades bum cigarettes
And you hemmed and you hawed
And you hedged all your bets waiting for a sign

Let's all wash our hands as we throw little fits
Let's all wash our hands as we curse hypocrites
We're locked in the washroom turning old tricks
Deaf and joyless and full of it

The vision came, he saw the odds
A hundred little gods on a gilded wheel
"These have tried to take Your place
But, Father, by Your grace, I will never kneel
I will never kneel"

Off in the distance, bloodied but wise
As you squint with the light of the truth in your eyes
And I saw you, both hands were raised
And I saw your lips move in praise
And I saw you steady your gaze for the finish line
Every idol like dust, a word scattered them all
And I rose to my feet when you scaled the last wall
And I gasped when I saw you fall in His arms at the finish line

Written by Steve Taylor © 1993 Warner Alliance Music/Soylent Tunes ASCAP

You can download the MP3 (legally) at this website.

School tomorrow, so I'm off again until Saturday. But this time, I WILL be back Saturday.

• Midwestern Mugwump offers a critique of the Iraqi insurgents who apparantly have taken a GI Joe doll hostage.

• Eternal Perspectives gives us another perspective on the whole Unity in Christ issue. We are to be united in Christ -- what exactly does that mean? Does it mean we support everyone who claims the name, or do we have divisions based on doctrine?
• Sacra Eloquia, which is the Crusty Curmudgeon's less-crusty blog, has a great Intro to Philemon post that MIGHT end up being used by yours truely at some point in a Sunday School class (or possibly sermon ...). If this one isn't in your blogroll, you're missing a great blog.
• And make sure that you check out the Southern Baptist Bloggers aggregator that I've set up -- and let all your SBC friends know about it.

I'll probably do the trackbacks for this post later on.

A few other people have noticed that the US military seems to be involved in religious torture. I'm a little upset that more people aren't makeing this an issue. We need to seriously ask the questions that Jeff Jacoby asks -- "Are Americans OK with using religious humiliation as tools of war? How about religious torture?"

Marcus Sheffield has a good editorial in the Chatanoogan about not counting on AMerica being the new incarnation of the Kingdom of God. He reminds me about Christ's words in John 18:36.

I'll be doing the Blogroll Cruise in a bit. My medication has worn off, which is a good thing, and I'm not in pain anymore (not much pain, anyway). I might be able to manage something original soon, who knows. I missed classes this week, because I couldn't handle sitting in the car for three hours, then sitting in class for three hours. If they'd let me lay down in class, I think I'd have gone. Not much chance of that, though. I'll be back to full strength next week, though.

... from an oxycodone-fogged mind.

Monday was surgery day -- the hernia I had in September of 03 came back, and I wanted to get it fixed before it got too bad. I waited five years to get that one fixed, and it was NOT pretty. Also had to spend a week in the hospital after the surgery. This time, it was outpatient, so I'm home, but I'm still hurting. I SHOULD be OK to drive to school tomorrow, though, as long as I don't take my medication before I try to drive.

I've been reading a lot of Andrew Fuller lately, for class. I've said it before, but I'll say it again -- this is someone that everyone should be familiar with. He was a driving force in turning around the English Particular Baptists in the 18th Century, at a time when hyper-Calvinism had really taken hold and was hindering church growth. His apologetic and polemic works are outstanding, and incredibly well-thought-out. And his sermons are inspiring. I may set up an Amazon "So you want to ..." list with some recommended books on him for those who are interested, but that probably won't be until Saturday or Sunday.

Work on the new template has been nonexistant lately, but I know a little better what I want to do. The creative part is almost over, so now I actually have to try and build the thing. And I think everyone will like it -- if nothing else, the colors will be a bit easier on the eyes. And the newspaper links are going away.

Time magazine's 25 Most Influential Evangelicals in American wasn't quite what I was expecting. I think that Joe Carter's series at Evangelical Outpost is much better. But one think got me thinking -- both lists show how diverse the evangelical community is. You have to wonder what would happen if all these people got together and worked together in a more concerted effort to share the Gospel with the world. Of course, many of them would have some theological differences that they would have to work out (or agree to disagree on) first.

Well, I'm due for more medication, and after that I doubt I'll be able to blog anything even remotely coherent. Might be back this evening or later tonight. If not, I WILL be posting on Saturday. I might even have the rest of my "Faith and Reason" series finished ...

Well, unite as much as Southern Baptists ever do! (that was a joke folks!)

Seriously, in yesterday's Blogroll Cruise, I talked about denominational aggregators and how they can be useful. I've gone ahead and done it -- there is a Southern Baptist Blog Aggregator set up at Blogdigger.com (I actually set one up at server.com as well, but I think that the blogdigger site is where we're going to be for now). NOW all I need are some SBC bloggers to join.

If you are interested, email me at wkelly42 AT adelphia DOT com. I need to know your URL, your feed address, the title of your blog, and your email address. Pass this along to other SBC bloggers who may not read this blog, so that we can get this running ASAP. And if you have any questions, let me know.

{That title should get me some unintended Google hits!}

I was planning on stopping tonight, then I read this.

I'm not a political blogger. And I think that the war in Iraq is justified, even as I fervently wish that other means could have been used, and I pray for peace there every day. But I think that this article shows exactly what lengths the military is willing to go to in order to get information and break prisoners.

I was sickened when I read this. I don't think Islam is true: they deny that Christ is the Messiah, and look to other means to get to heaven. But there are a LOT of Muslims who have distanced themselves from the radicals, and I think that it is incredibly unfair that their faith is under assault by our military. I don't have to approve of Islam; in America, they have the right to their faith as much as I do.

The worst thing is, it didn't have to be anything sexual. Pork products would have had the same reaction, and would have been less distasteful for many Americans who are still seeing images of Abu Grahib (I hope I spelled that right!). But even that would have offended me, and should have offended any person of faith.

We have said for years that faith is under assault in this country. Now we have an example of how faith is treated on the battlefield. If this had been a Christian soldier of the US Army in the hands of Iraqi captors, and his faith had been assaulted in this manner, our entire nation would be outraged. The Christian community would be up in arms. And rightly so.

We should express our outrage at this treatment as well. This religious exploitation must end. Assaulting faith is too far. This is NOT a religious war, after all.

First up, Jollyblogger. I haven't been linking to him much lately, and I am not sure exactly why. Today, he's tough to ignore, with not one but TWO great reads.

First, the McChurching of America talks about the franchising of the Megachurch. I'm torn here, because in a way, it seems that the megas are doing what I want them to be doing -- they are starting new churches rather than keeping a central church that requires its own ZIP code. But I'm not sure that these satelite churches are anything more than elaborate small groups, whose identity is still tied to the "mother church" -- it almost sounds like an Evangelical form of the Catholic parish church. Maybe that's not a bad thing, but THIS jury is still out.

Second, his post yesterday about Blogging and Walls. I have to salute someone who links to a post that criticizes him (although indirectly), and takes the time to respond to it. And I like what David has to say. I kinda like the idea of denominational blog aggregators -- simply because it would help network some of the bloggers out there. I know a few other Southern Baptist bloggers out there (one, Matt Hall, is also at Southern, and he's got links to a couple other SBTS bloggers), and it would be nice to cooperate, and possibly meet up (especially at the national convention) -- maybe even set up a blogging symposium or something to show the average church how a blog would compliment their ministry. There is a LOT we could do, but we don't know each other. For every SBC blogger I know, there are probably 10 that I don't. Denominational aggregators can build a community online, and help that community work together offline. If I had the tech know-how, I'd set up the SBC agg. myself. Maybe if I could get a lesson or two from someone with a few more skills.....?

Rebecca over at Rebecca Writes is one of my favorite bloggers. She was also pretty much my first regular reader, so not only is she a good blogger, but she has great taste! And she's got some great theological writing over at her blog. She's doing a semi-series about the anathemas of the Council of Constantinople which is great reading. She's done a series about the purpose of Christ's death that is outstanding. So I'm going to link to her post about haggis. Why? Because I have a warped sense of humor. Deal with it.

Bobby Griffith is an internet friend of mine -- he posts over at the PCCBoard Forums, and is most likely doing his PhD work at Southern -- in Church History, no less. He's like me, but more Reformed! And he's posted the Christianity Today list of Ten Reasons to Study Church History -- which should be required reading for everyone, IMnsHO.

Adrian Warnock has been accused of being too close to the Jollyblogger -- in fact, he was accused of BEING JB by one blogger (whose link I cannot find right now, unfortunately). So he's decided to disagree with Jollyblogger ... or at least, try to. Careful Adrian -- David's in Baltimore, and probably could get to Fort McHenry before you could get to him -- and you remember what happened the last time the Brits tried to take that Fort.

Now I'm closing. I just found out that I am pulpit supply on Sunday for a small Baptist church, and I have a sermon to write AND a Sunday School lesson for my own church to get ready. And maybe another post or two -- I can always prepare tomorrow .....

... to celebrate my birthday. Yep, it's that time of the year, and I'm another year smarter.

Hey, I'm 37, I'm not old!

So I'm just going to put my feet up and play on the internet this evening, and post something intelligent later, maybe (why start now, right?).

And if you feel so inclinde, my Amazon wish list is right here -- newly updated and everything.

This piece from the New York Times just cruised through the RSS reader, and I'm more than a little disappointed.

Never mind the fact that I don't like using politics to effect a change that can really only come through Christ. Never mind the fact that I think that Social Security is in need of an overhaul. Using SS reform to get what you want socially is not a good plan.

Let's say that Bush, for whatever reason, decides not to push for the marriage ammendment. Maybe he's decided that he resents the Religious Right(tm) thinking they own him because they voted for him. Maybe he never really wanted to do it to begin with -- it was just campaign rhetoric to get our votes. Whatever the reason, he decides not to do it after all. So the Social Security reform doesn't get passed because of a lack of support.

Now, in thirty years or however long SS has left in it's current state, the whole thing tanks. People are upset: "Why wasn't something done about this?" And the answer? "We tried, but the Christians fought us, so it didn't get done. Blame them, not the GOP."

Don't think it will happen? Ha. The GOP will turn on us so fast it will make EVERYONE'S head spin, if it means staying in charge and in power. They don't owe us a thing.

The gay marriage issue won't go away because we legislate it away. The solution is changing hearts, minds, and lifestyles with the message of the Gospel of Christ. Let's be about our Father's business.

This week's Christian Carnival is at Digitus, Finger & Co. http://www.neiluchitel.com/

To enter is simple. First, you post should be of a Christian nature, but this does not exclude posts that are political (or otherwise) in nature from a Christian point of view. Secondly please send only one post dated since the last Christian Carnival. Then, do the following:
email me at
Uchitel (at) slappo (dot) com
Please put Christian Carnival Entry in the Subject
Provide the following:
Title of your Blog
URL of your Blog
Title of your post
URL linking to that post
Description of the post
Cutt off date is midnight Tuesday EST
INVITE A FRIEND TO CONTRIBUTE THIS WEEK!

A brief note: I'm not linking to posts on the whole SpongeBob thing. NOT because it isn't an important issue, but because if I did that, I wouldn't have room for anything else on the cruise. Google SpongeBob and Dobson if you want a rundown of those posts.

Allthings2all has an account of a Christian doing what Christians are supposed to be doing -- meeting people where they are. This is something we forget way too easily, and far too often. We are all ministers of the Gospel, after all.

For the Joy is doing a running series on The Scandal of the Evangelical Conscience -- about emphasizing living lives that are consistant with our beliefs as Christians. We can never hope to show the world how Christ can change lives if our own lives remain unchanged.

Rolling Stone won't take religious ads. GetReligion exposes their hypocracy. I love it when the intolerant get caught with their pants around their ankles.

More tomorrow, promise!

Head over to The Owner's Manual for this installment of the Bets of Me Symphony. This week's conductor is George Bernard Shaw, and he's got some great comments for all the entries this week.

Next week's installment is hosted at the same place. Send Gary an email at gcruse AT netscape dot com and submit your entry. Only requirement is that it's good (duh), and it's two months old. Get some new traffic to your site, and recycle one of those great old posts!!

{edit: fixed the email!}

Now when the Pharisees gathered to him, with some of the scribes who had come from Jerusalem, they saw that some of his disciples ate with hands that were defiled, that is, unwashed. (For the Pharisees and all the Jews do not eat unless they wash their hands, holding to the tradition of the elders, and when they come from the marketplace, they do not eat unless they wash. And there are many other traditions that they observe, such as the washing of cups and pots and copper vessels and dining couches.) And the Pharisees and the scribes asked him, "Why do your disciples not walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat with defiled hands?" And he said to them, "Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written,
" 'This people honors me with their lips,
but their heart is far from me;in vain do they worship me,
teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men."And he said to them, "You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition! For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother'; and, 'Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.'But you say, 'If a man tells his father or his mother, Whatever you would have gained from me is Corban' (that is, given to God) -- then you no longer permit him to do anything for his father or mother,thus making void the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And many such things you do."
(Mark 7:1-13 ESV)

Confrontation by the Pharisees. They've been out to get Jesus for some time (since Mark 3:6, when He challenged their Sabbath laws in a way that they could not refute) and now they've decided the disciples were unclean because they didn't wash their hands before they ate. Verse 3 tells us whose law that was -- and it wasn't God's. There was a LOT of washing going on -- ritual cleansing was a rule of the day.

And Jesus points out the hypocracy of the Pharisees. They follow their own laws and regulations, but in doing so break the Law of God. People were to honor their parents. But when someone's parents were old, and needed help, the money they should have received from their children was already promised to the priests for "God's use." He also says that this is only one of many ways they honor themselves over God.

I see a lot of parallels with today. We work so hard, trying to make sure that God is happy with us, that we forget what our priorities should be. We spend so much time running our ministries that we don't help the needy. We spend so much time in study that we ignore our families. We get so wrapped up in what we're doing for God that we forget to worship and praise Him.

We also tend to exult our own rules and legalities over what God says to do. We've decided women shouldn't wear pants, that men should have short hair, that music with a beat is sinful, that movies are evil, etc., and we forget that God is no repector of persons -- He wants us to talk to people who aren't our idea of "good Christian folks" so that we can be a witness to them; but our legalism gets in the way. We can't walk up to a group of skater punks and share the Gospel with them, because they are different. They need to get a haircut and buy some decent clothes before they can get saved. And that's just wrong. We need to get over ourselves and our legalities, and be faithful witnesses for Christ.

{Edit: I fixed the link to the DHMO site.}

I've just finished reading this at USA Today. I have a few questions about the article, and the idea of a Blogger Code of Ethics.

First, why? The Blogosphere is self-policing. I can guarentee that if I write something stupid (as I have done in the past), or blatently wrong, someone will let me know about it (whether I actually admit I was wrong is another thing). Accuracy isn't really that big an issue, is it?

Second, is anyone really reading blogs looking for objectivity? Does anyone approach the news looking for objectivity? I would hope that we're intelligent enough to realize that we all bring bias into whatever we write, in varying degrees. Readers need to be made aware of what our biases could potentially be -- which is something the blogosphere is pretty good at uncovering and letting people know about.

The very definition of a weblog seems to include the idea that the author is writing about things he/she enjoys, or opinions that they hold, or things they do for a living. I think the problem is that many people don't want to have to think, or examine things they read. We just want to take things at face value, and that's what we do. The problem isn't blogger ethics -- the problem is general gullibility and a lack of critical thinking skills.

Third: HOW did those people get the gig with Marqui? $800 a month to talk about their products? I'd do that in a heartbeat -- but you all would know they were paying me (mainly because of the post that would say "I AM GETTING PAID $800 A MONTH TO BLOG!!!!! WHOOOO HOOOO ME!!!!!!!!!!!"). In fact, if Dell, HP, Sony, Titelist, Taylor Made, or anyone like that would like to drop some $$ or free products on me to post reviews of them at my other blog, I won't complain at all. I promise to be fair and impartial.

When I get a blog host that allows it, I think one of my blog categories is going to be Intolerant Tolerance. I've done several posts on this subject, and yet it just gets worse, and more obvious. The theme seems to be, "Why don't those silly Christians get over their ignorance and realize they should all be just like us?" Sounds like tolerance for a conflicting worldview to me, doesn't it to you?

Or maybe an award. The View From the Pew Award for Incredible Intolerance. You could call it a Pewie for short. And I know who'd get one this week, thanks to Sarcasmagorical.

Michael Ventre, YOU are this weeks Pewie Award Winner!!

In my humble opinion, Jesus Christ was an important and influential figure in world history, and I respect that. Because he was a symbol of love and understanding, the term 'What Would Jesus Do?' resonates powerfully. If we all acted as Jesus would, I believe the world would be at peace, and love would wash over all of God's children.

But of course, not all Christians are alike. Many, if not most, Christians understand the true message of Jesus. But there is a frightening number of so-called Christians who can be best described as creepy, rigid, arrogant, cruel, know-it-all, pompous, obnoxious and treacherous - better known by the acronym C.R.A.C.K.P.O.T.

Now let's examine Ventre's article, because I'm concerned that HE may be exhibiting some of these symptoms -- he may be a C.R.A.C.K.P.O.T too!!

He's upset about the hoopla over the We Are Family foundation's video and tolerance pledge, and the use of popular cartoon characters in this video which is intended for use in classrooms throughout the country. He's REALLY upset about the criticism of Spongebob. I don't like Spongebob, never have -- but I do like some of the other characters, and my daughter watches some of the shows they're on. I don't like having these symbols appropriated by someone who is intent on teaching my kid that homosexuality is an acceptable lifestyle alternative.

The mere fact that Ventre glosses over what the real controversy is about, focusing instead on the protest over cartoon characters, is a bit creepy. It's as if he wants discussion of the issue to be deflected from where it really is -- the teaching of someone's morality to elementary school kids. If Christians were doing this, we'd be hauled into court. Because it's someone else, and someone else's morality, it's obviously OK.

The first step for the CRACKPOT Christians is to accept that they have a problem. I know programs exist that can reprogram the insufferably preachy and transform them back into normal people like the rest of us. They have to get the message that taking the Good Book, living by the parts they agree with and disregarding the parts they don’t, is a learned behavior and can be cured. They need to be taught that looking for secret messages where none exist is an urge that should be resisted.

There's the rigid part -- obviously, it's Ventre and folks like him who are right, so why should they change? WE are the ones with a problem.

For arrogant, well, just read what he has to say. He reminds us repeatedly of how tolerant he is normally, and how compassionate he is. Show, don't tell.

Anyone who is obviously as hung up on telling Christians they're sick is cruel -- religious faith is an important part of someone's life, and their psyche. Any abuse or misrepresentation of that belief is incredibly cruel.

Know-it-all, pompous -- just read the article. It's amazing that he knows so much better than someone who has actually studied the Bible what it's really all about.

Obnoxious --

I've only caught bits and pieces of SpongeBob, but I never noticed any Bette Midler playing in the background. Nor have I seen SpongeBob shopping for china at Williams Sonoma, or French-kissing another male sponge. He does, however, hold hands with his sidekick Patrick and enjoys watching the imaginary TV show, 'The Adventures of Mermaid Man and Barnacle Boy,' so I can see why the CRACKPOT Christians might get their knickers in a knot believing that the moral foundation of our nation's schoolchildren is in grave peril because a couple of cartoon characters touched each other.

I rest my case on that one.

That leaves treacherous. This country was founded on the idea that people could hold their own religious beliefs, and were free to practice them, without interference from anyone. Ventre's belief that we should all go into a 12-step program to "cure" us of our faith is an attack on the Constitution itself! Treacherous doesn't begin to describe him!

Was that over the top? Yep. I look forward to a time when Michael Ventre decides to talk about the real issue -- that kids' cartoon characters are being used to teach them that their parents are intolerant idiots and that they should not listen to them OR their ministers about homosexuality and what the Bible teaches about it. That is what I find most offensive. I could care less about Spongebob. Discuss the facts, sir, and try to do it without the ad hominem attacks on people who actually believe in something.

{edit: Fixed a really bad sentence fragment in the last paragraph. Sorry.}
{UPDATE: Take a look at this over at Imago Dei if you want an even better treatment of the issue. Note that I'm not defending anything that Dr. Dobson may or may not have said, I'm trying to show that Christians are protesting the content of the video, not the alleged sexuality of the cartoon characters}

JivinJehoshaphat (gotta LOVE that name) has a multi-part series about How Pro-Choicers Argue (the link is to part 5, but there are links in that post to the other parts as well). We should be knowledgeable about how our opponents think and debate, so that we can work more effectively against them. This is a great series -- read it from the beginning, and use it!

Along the same lines, Proverbs Daily has a series about the sanctity of human life. He's up to part 3 right now, with four more parts to the series. This time of year, it seems that we focus on the abortion issue a lot. We all need to take advantage of those who are posting this material, and use it all year round.

The Grey Shadow blogs about bloggers, and being transparant. This has a lot to do with Christians especially, and how we blog -- with humility.

Matt Hall talks about unmortified sin -- and how as Christians we walk a fine line between our quest for a holy life and the pit of legalism. The Bible commands us to live holy lives, but we are so often worried about becoming legalistic that we don't live as we are commanded to. There's a happy medium, and that lies in obedience to God and His commands.

Head over to Bobby Griffith's blog, where he's talking about Christians and our need to use the Old Testament. We owe it to ourselves to read and study the OT -- if for no other reason than the fact that it was the Bible the disciples and Christ read from. The Old Testament is not the "lesser Testament" -- it is just as inspired as the New, and it containts treasure that Christians are forgetting to mine.

Echo Zoe is blogging Oswald Chambers. This is stuff that every Christian should be familiar with -- and even if you are, it never hurts to read it again. And again. Chambers doesn't get old to me.

Ok, this is going to be a little bit on the technical side. The other day, I was cruising through the Church Directory and I was amazed at how many blogs listed there don't have an RSS feed, or at least don't advertise it if they have one.

RSS feeds are simple to set up, and let a LOT more people have access to your content. I admit -- since I started using an RSS reader, I've gotten lazy. I don't visit as many sites as I used to (though I still run through my main blogroll once or twice a week). It's easier to fire up the reader (right now I'm using Blog Navigator, which is quite nice) and skim headlines, and read the selections I want to, rather than surfing around and wading through a lot of things I'm not interested in to get to the one that I want to read. It's actually cut my surfing time in half (which my family loves -- my wife can actually get on the computer herself now!), and it makes things more efficient.

If you have a Blogger blog, you have a feed, whether you know it or not. Just go to settings, site feed, and say "yes" to "Publish Site Feed" and you're set. I recommend setting the descriptions to 'short' but that's just me. Once you do that, you have an ATOM feed, which most RSS readers can read just fine. If you need something a little more detailed, check out Feedburner. They syndicate, AND provide stats on how many subscriptions you have, how many times your feed is accessed, etc. You get stats that your stat tracker won't give you, PLUS you get some great tools -- I love the animated headline feature like this:

RSS is the wave of the future. Actually, it's the wave of the present. Get on board, if you want to increase readership really easily.

First, I noticed that Evangelical Outpost was doing something called Outtakes -- Joe is basically going through his blogroll and commenting on noteworthy posts -- with links, of course.

Next, I saw that Rusty at New Covenant is doing something called Rusty Nails, where he goes through his blogroll and comments on noteworthy posts -- with links.

And now, I see that David at Jollyblogger has started his Jolly Digest, where he goes through his blogroll and ... well, you get the idea.

Far be it from me to ignore such a great idea, especially when it's being done by so many bloggers who I read and respect. So I would like to introduce the Blogroll Cruise, where I go through my blogroll and comment on noteworthy posts -- with links and trackbacks, of course. The idea is to do it daily, but I'm not going to promise that -- I will most likely miss Fridays and possibly Wednesdays. And I'll try to feature blogs that the others don't cover, especially blogs that I think are not getting the attention they deserve.

This first edition will be brief, but here goes:

• 21st Century Reformation has an inteesting piece about blogs and churches as "Power Networks" vs. "ghettos." There has been a lot of discussion about this throughout the evangelical blogs that I read (Razorskiss, Evangelical Outpost, for example). I've been doing some thinking about it as well. Our churches tend to minister to the same group of people, and when we get a couple new members, we are "really starting to grow!" We should be trying to broaden our influence. As bloggers, we get a LOT of inbound links, but they're from people within our community. All of my inbound links are from people who are Christians, and who consider themselves to be, at least part of the time, evangelical bloggers. I have linked back to the people who link to me, which perpetuates the "ghetto" that we blog in. I get hits from people outside the ghetto, but most are from Blog Explosion (and how many stay and read anything beyond the 30 second requirement, much less come back?) or from people hitting the "Next Blog" button in the Blogger bar at the top of the page. I get some interaction with people (though I'm waiting for one in particular to react to the Church/State post I made), but most of the interaction is from within the evangelical ghetto. We should strive to interact with people outside the community -- and there are bloggers who are doing a better job of that than I am right now.
• Speaking of Razor'sKiss (and you REALLY need to check this blog out, it is outstanding!), there's a great post about a potential solution to the problem of the evangelical ghetto, and it sounds to mme like it bears more than a passing resemblance to the idea of the "Body of Christ" analogy in Scripture. Evangelical bloggers have different strengths, and different roles to play. By banding together in a community, we can use our individual strengths more effectively, and make our message clearer to the general population. All of us together can be more effective than each of us separately.
• Blogcorner Preacher talks about the value of salt. Sometimes we forget how apt an anaolgy this really is for our role as Christians, and I can even relate it to the previous two posts! Salt is useless when it's still in the salt shaker, after all -- it has to be poured out onto something with no salt for it to be really noticed and appreciated.
• Sarcasmagorical posts a prayer request -- another use for this community of bloggers. The best thing that we can do for each other is to uphold one another in prayer.

From the New York Times:

Ken Mehlman, chairman of the Republican National Committee, has asked an Ohio Republican who supports some abortion rights to be his co-chairman, stirring the ire of social conservatives.

Mr. Mehlman's choice is Joann Davidson, who was chairwoman of the Bush campaign in the pivotal Ohio Valley region and a former speaker of the Ohio House of Representatives. In an interview on Thursday, Ms. Davidson declined to discuss her views on abortion. "My focus is on building a stronger party," she said.

Her nomination awaits approval by the Republican National Committee.
She has been a member of the advisory board of the abortion rights group Republicans for Choice since its founding in 1990, according to a statement posted on the group's Web site congratulating her.

So what was all that back in December about how the Republicans were going to govern according to the wishes of the Religious Right(tm)? And what was that from evangelical circles about how the GOP now "owes us one?"

Politicians aren't the answer, folks. And this shows what the GOP thinks of us, especially of the nomination passes. And from a political perspective, why wouldn't it pass? It's just what the "big tent" GOP needs. I'm just not sure that they need us anymore -- but there aren't many decent options out there.

This is a soap-box issue for me, as an educator and a Christian. And there are no easy answers, and no really nice way to say it, so I'll just be blunt:

Americans -- both Christians and nonChristians -- are woefully ignorant of the Bible.

Non-Christians at least have an excuse -- it's not their holy book, after all. It's like asking Christians about something in the Koran or the Talmud. With the impact that religion has on our society, though, I think it would be a good idea for everyone to know what each religion teaches, and a little bit of the basics of each. Non-believers don't have that, and it causes a lot of misconceptions and misunderstandings between people.

And the Supreme Court agrees with me.

In a majority opinion in a 1963 church-state case (Abington v. Schempp), Supreme Court Justice Tom Clark wrote, "It might well be said that one's education is not complete without a study of comparative religion ... and its relationship to the advance of civilization." If so, the education of nearly every public school student in the nation is woefully inadequate.
from the Tallahasee Democrat

In public education, the emphasis should be on comparing religions, and examining the contributions of each faith to American society. How many people are aware of the role that American Baptists played in the establishing of freedom of religion? They played a huge role, because in colonial America the Baptists were the ones being thrown in jail for their beliefs (including accusations of child abuse, for refusing to baptize infants). Not many know even the most basic facts of the influence of religion on our nation (both good AND bad), and we should not ignore these contributions because of a fear of lawsuits. Facts are facts, and should be taught.

I think, though, that before we can expect the average man on the street to learn the basics of our faith, we need to learn them. I've quoted Barna surveys before, detailing how many Americans consider themselves Christians and how many of them believe things that are contrary to the Bible. Ask a group of high school students in your church if the book of Hezekiah is in the Old or New Testament (hint -- it's in neither. The "books" of Hosanna and Jubilations are also good ones to use). Discipleship is seriously lacking in many of our churches -- and yet we expect the world, and the mainstream media in particular, to get facts right about matters of religion and faith.

What is the answer? I think that, to start with, we need to return to teaching and preaching the Bible, rather than offering motivational speaches and calling them sermons. Many churches are doing this already, but many many more are not. Bible study used to be something that was enjoyed and encouraged -- now it's a duty that we "have to do" if we expect God to do anything for us. Read some of the writings of the early Puritans, and think about this: they were written to average people, with average educations. The difference is that these people studied the Bible, and discussed it daily, like we discuss sports or TV programs.

I think we'd be amazed at the change in our churches, and in our society, if we returned to sincere, devoted study of Scripture, both in church and at home.

LaShawn Barber has posted these questions for us all to post. They're pretty good questions, so I figured I'd answer here:

1) How long have you been blogging?
Started at the end of March, 2003.

2) Do you believe you’re addicted to blogging? Please explain, and be honest. It is habit-forming, I must confess. (If I decide to use your response, I may have follow-up questions.)
Absolutely. I even feel guilty when I don't post -- even when I have a good reason for not posting.

3) Have you ever taken a hiatus? If so, for what reason and how long?
Nope. Might have to someday, but I'm not sure I could do it right now. (see question 2)

4) Have you ever thought of giving up your blog? Why or why not?
Once, for about five minutes. I had gone a few days without posting anything, and couldn't think of anything interesting to say. Then I found something to talk about.

Most blogs do a Week in Review every Friday or Saturday. I'm doing it the other way around. This is what the week looks like, and what my goals are. I'm hoping that by doing this, I'll have some direction to what I want to post, and I'll make sure I have something substantial every week.

This week I start classes back at Southern. Thursday evenings and Friday mornings will be taken up by classes, and I'll probably be spending Friday afternoons in the library working on papers and classwork. Don't know how much blogging time I'm going to have those two days, so I'm planning on doing more on Monday through Wednesday and on weekends.

I still have the Faith and Reason series I'm working on -- might have the next part of that this evening. TWiCH and the Mark Study will also be up this week. I'm also working on something history-related about the Ecumenical Councils, but I want to have all seven done before I start posting them. I'm going to take a look at the factors leading to the council being called (religious and political), the decisions, and the fallout from those decisions. Not sure if I'll be able to start those this week or next, but they're coming.

Also, be sure to cruise the new blog directory on the left side -- the Church Directory. There are a few repeats (and some that I've got listed three times!), but there are some great new blogs that you really should check out.

... another Christian Carnival.

This week, it's over at Sidespot. All posts should, of course, be of a Christian nature. Politics and things that are NOT especially religion-oriented are welcome if written from a Christian perspective. If you take a look at this post, there are some good ideas for those who are totally stuck, but want in on the Carnival.

Then all you have to do is send:

Title of your Blog
URL of your Blog
Title of your post
URL linking to that post
Description of the post

to sidesspot[at]comcast.net by Tuesday at 10PM Central Time. It's that easy.

I really recommend it. Last week's carnival was linked to by MSNBC (of course, I missed that one), so you can get some really good exposure for your blog.

There's a new poll over on the right side. Should I keep the links to the newspapers over there on the left, or should I get rid of them? I'm still working on the new site design, and I'm not sure I like having them over there, but I want to know what you all think! Let me know.

There are two church/state separation issues in the news right now, and I haven't really been talking as much about this as I should, so I want to cover them both here.

First, the prayer at the Inauguration. Michael Newdow is back in court, challenging the President and his desire to have a prayer at the inauguration. And Newdow does have a good point, if this is true:

"The government is coming out and saying, 'OK everybody, while you watch, we are a Christian nation,' " Mr. Newdow said. "It is a declaration to the nation and the world that we are a Christian nation."

We're not a Christian nation. We are a nation founded on Judeo-Christian principles, in which the clear majority of citizens are Christians (or at least claim to be Christians). Our country was founded to be a refuge for people who were persecuted for their beliefs -- no matter what those beliefs are. We take pride in our stand that people should be able to practice their religious beliefs, no matter what they are.

President Bush is a Christian. What I do not understand is how being President makes George W. Bush unable to practice his faith. He's not allowed to make public references to God. He's not allowed to pray, or have a prayer said, at his inauguration. It seems that what Newdow is saying is that Christians, and other people of faith, are only allowed to practice their faith in private. No public displays, no public acknowledgement, especially if you are a government employee or politician.

If the President were trying to make this a Christian nation, I would be on the front line trying to stop him. The Christian faith is not something to be forced on anyone. I believe strongly that only God can convict someone to become a Christian, and that if God is convicting, there is no resistance to His call. When we look back in history, we see what happens when Christianity becomes an established religion -- just look at the Inquisitions in Europe, Constantine's forced baptism of his troops, the persecution of non-Puritans in New England in the 17th and 18th centuries. I believe that Christianity is true. I believe that Christ is the answer to the problems we have today. But we cannot force people to become Christians -- all that makes are pretenders.

I don't think that is the President's goal. I think that he simply wants to recognize publically his dependance on God, as have past Presidents, and I am angered that people who are supposed to be in favor of tolerance are being so intolerant on this issue.

The other issue is over the "evolution stickers" that have now been removed from Georgia biology textbooks.

This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically considered.

I see no reference to creation in that. What is wrong with encouraging students to approach things in science with a critical mind? It seems to me that science is all about looking at things critically. If evolution is a clear scientific fact, as most opponents of the stickers believe, then it will stand up to critical scrutiny. If it can't, then it needs to be discarded and a new theory developed.

I will be the first to admit that I am not the person to debate creation/evolution. I actually never studied it in high school -- the biology teacher (an evolutionist) didn't have time to cover it because there were things she thought were more important. The two best students in the class were both creationists, so I wish we had been able to get into the subject -- it might have sparked some interesting debate. Back then, I was a serious science student -- and creationist. Now, I'm just a creationist -- a four-year degree in business doesn't leave much opportunity to keep current on the debate. (There are plenty of blogs out there that do discuss it well -- a couple of them are on my blogroll.) I think that we are being arrogant to think that we know conclusively how the earth was created, and how life began and has developed -- I don't see how science is threatened by telling students to examine it's claims critically.

I am in favor of keeping the government out of the church's business, and keeping religion out of the political arena. There should be no "religion test" to see if a candidate is suitable for office. But we should never expect people to ignore their religious beliefs when they are in office, or to stop practicing their faith.

Hat tip to Scott over at The Crusty Curmudgeon.

Cruising through some news stories that I've heard about today -- and commenting on them, of course!

• 2 stories about the "James Ossuary." I tend to agree with the Observer article -- whether the ossuary is authentic or not is NOT going to change anyone's mind about the truth of Christ, or the truth claims of Christianity. Plenty of people believe that Jesus existed, and that He taught and was killed by the authorities, but they don't believe that He was the Messiah. It is reassuring to some Christians that they can point to the existence of something like this to support their faith, and we like to be able to show archaeological evidences for things that the Bible records. But we cannot rely on history or archaeology to win people to Christ -- only the faithful preaching of the Gospel and the working of the Holy Spirit can do that. Note to the Observer, though -- the jury is still out on whether the findings of the IAA were accurate. There are some indications that their findings were biased from the beginning.
• The New York Times is reporting that religion is on the rise, but not the "fundamentalist" kind. Not surprising. I THINK they are including evangelical Christianity in their definition of "fundamentalist," and I think that the reasons people don't like evangelical Christianity are obvious. They want spirituality without responsibility. They don't want any obligation to any type of holy living. They don't want to think that God has any claim on their behavior at all. They also don't want to think about having to share their faith. They've found a type of "this works for me, go see what works for you" spirituality, and that contradicts the claims of the Bible that Christ is THE way, not A way. Biblical Christianity is an exclusivist faith, and people don't want to think that way.
• The Dallas News (which is a great source for good religious news reporting) has an editorial that should make us thing about what we are doing when we say something like "God says" or "Jesus says." I love this statement:

  If Jesus is just a metaphor, or one of many paths to God, then speaking for him is treacherous enough. But those Christians who flatly reject that notion ought to set for themselves an even higher standard of caution.
  Because if Jesus really is the one and only true Son of God, then who would dare presume to speak for him?

  We all need to think seriously about that.
• National Review Online has a great interview with Naomi Schaefer Riley about the potential influence of "Generation M" -- the students who are currently enrolled in religious schools. Not much comment on this one -- except to say that there is a LOT of potential out there to make a tremendous difference in our society.
• Crosses have been banned along the parade route for the innauguration this year, and some Christians aren't happy about it. Personally, I really don't care if they are there or not, though I think there's a problem because no other religious symbols were mentioned in the memo.

I'm a bit bored, and suffering a bit from writer's block, so I decided to check some of my stats. Here are some of the searches that have landed people here, and how high I rank on Google for that search:

• You Might Be a Baptist If ... : I'm #1 right now.
• "In the event of rapture this car will be unmanned : I'm #3!
• This Week in Church History: #7
• Study of Mark: #9
• View from the Pew: #1, though I wonder what else people are looking for when they search for this -- there are a bunch of old Catholic pages with this on them. Bet they're surprised!
• Michael Moore atheist: Yahoo has me at #14. Google doesn't list me at all. Go figure.
• secular holiday: Yahoo at #6, Google doesn't have me in the top 100.
• leperous colonies: I'm #1 on Yahoo, and on Google as well, thanks to this post. Not sure I'm going to write home to Mom about that one!

Think that's enough for now. Back to working on the new template (which you'll be able to see at this site when it's ready).

When they had crossed over, they came to land at Gennesaret and moored to the shore. And when they got out of the boat, the people immediately recognized him and ran about the whole region and began to bring the sick people on their beds to wherever they heard he was. And wherever he came, in villages, cities, or countryside, they laid the sick in the marketplaces and implored him that they might touch even the fringe of his garment. And as many as touched it were made well.
(Mark 6:53-56 ESV)

Conclusion to the chapter, illustrating the rise in Jesus' popularity. This is pretty important to what comes next -- the Pharisees begin to take an active interest in Him, and His disciples. Their influence is being threatened -- they want to make sure that this new guy conforms to their view of the Law, so that they aren't threatened more.

The first six chapters of Mark detail the good that Jesus did throughout the land. He healed people, he ministered to people, he taught them about the Kingdom that was to come. I think it's important that we notice the order that these events are told in Mark -- He ministers while He is teaching. People come to Hm to be ministered to physically, and He does that, but He also is ministering to them spiritually, and is teaching them. He's also teaching the disciples. He knows that no matter what He teaches them, it will not make any sense until after His death and resurrection. He is simply trying to prepare everyone for the message of the Gospel.

We can learn a LOT from this. First, we can learn to minister to people -- meet their needs where they are. It's almost become a cliche, but it's true -- people don't care how much you know until they know how much you care. We tend to forget this. I think some of the greatest outreach opportunities that we have are lost because we don't meet people's needs. We focus primarilly on the spiritual need -- which IS the most important, ultimately, but it's not the most important TO THEM. Meet physical needs, show people that you care about them -- and all the while, preach the Word to them, letting them know that God cares about them.

I HATE doing these, and I seem to do them a lot, but I feel guilty when I don't post each day. I guess I AM a blogaholic.

I have a good reason, though -- I'm reworking the template for this blog. I'll have a test site set up hopefully by the end of the week for everyone to look at and comment on. I'm also working with GIMP to create some blog buttons for some of the links over there on the right side -- should make things look better.

As of right now I plan on having the Mark study up tomorrow evening, for those who are following that. Also, if anyone knows where I can put a 22MB .wav file so people can download it, let me know. I recorded the sermon I preached Sunday morning, and I figured some of you might want to hear what I sound like -- I don't know why.

To enter is simple. First, your post should be of a Christian nature, but this does not exclude posts that are political (or otherwise) in nature from a Christian point of view. Secondly please send only one post dated since the last Christian Carnival. Then, do the following:

Send your entry to

Please put "Christian Carnival Entry" in the subject line

Provide the following:

Title of your Blog
URL of your Blog
Title of your post
URL linking to that post
Description of the post

Deadline is 9pm Tuesday EST

INVITE A FRIEND TO CONTRIBUTE THIS WEEK!

January 3, 1560.

The death of Peder Palladius.

"Who?" you ask? Good question; Palladius isn't the best-known reformer, after all. He never gained the notoriety of Luther or Calvin, or even Zwingli. But the reform he brought to Denmark was just as important as their work.

Palladius was a student himself when the Reformation started, and was heavilly influenced by the writings of Phillip Melanchthon, travelling to Wittenberg to study under the great reformer. He devoted his life to Reformed teachings, and to service of the Church.

Denmark was split by civil war because of the influence of Protestantism. Catholic citizens refused to be ruled by a Protestant King (understandibly, since their nation could suffer interdiction, when Sacraments were witheld from the citizens by the Church), and revolted. Christian III defeated the Catholic forces and became the first Protestant King of Denmark. Christian proved to be a rather tolerant king, one of the few Protestant monarchs who didn't actively persecute the Catholics in his kingdom.

Palladius completed his studies in 1537 and was appointed to the highest church office in Denmark by the king. He proved to be not only a devoted bishop but also a porlific teacher and writer. He never forced conversion on anyone, but taught with love -- letting the Holy Spirit do the work of conversion.

The Reformation was a time of great turmoil in Europe; wars were regularly fought between Protestant and Catholic forces, both claiming to be the true faith. The example of Palladius (and the other reformers <-- requires Acrobat) in Denmark show that the Holy Spirit will work when we allow Him to, and that (contrary to popular belief) not all religion requires violence in it's service.

I admit, I was a bit offended and irritated when I hear the UN call us stingy. After all, they're staying here rent-free, on a prime piece of New York real estate. And we DO send money to relief efforts -- we tend to do it through various charities and religious groups, but we do it.

I read Kristof today (piewview; blogger42 to log in) -- I missed the last two of his pieces because I was on the road, and it looks like I'd have LOVED the December 22 piece -- and I am once again placed in the difficult position of agreeing with him. We are great at responding to disasters, but we're lousy most of the rest of the time. We focus on ourselves and what's going on here, rather than being globally minded.

We're like this in a LOT of different ways, too. While Canadians are lamenting the potential loss of the entire NHL season this year, the subject has been missing from US papers. Out of sight, out of mind, I guess. I was in Pensacola, Florida over Christmas -- there are still a lot of people who are homeless there, and a lot of devestation and damage still hasn't been fixed. Don't hear much about it, though, do you? I'd expect that the Orlando area is still trying to recover from the 'canes that hit them as well.

We have a very short attention span. We saw in this election that the average American cannot focus on much more than a soundbite at a time. I saw it when I taught -- kids were shocked that I expected them to remember something I taught a week ago. We pay attention only to what's new and different, and ignore or forget about things that aren't. Part of the blame is simply cultural -- we live in a society that is always in motion, always fast. We buy more powerful microwaves because we don't want to wait 4 minutes for our popcorn. We want our internet fast, so we pay mor money for faster services, better wireless connections.

My real concern is that in a few more months, when the relief efforts in Asia aren't front-page news, and when the recovery and rebuilding can actually begin, when our help is needed, we'll have forgotten all about the tsunami. We'll be on to the next big thing, and our money will go elsewhere. In another week or so, people will start complaining about the extensive coverage that the tsunami is getting -- "Can't they tell us about something else? There are other things going on in the world." And the people there will still be right in the middle of it, and they'll be forgotten.

I hope I'm wrong. I hope that we will keep these people in our prayers, and keep their needs in mind. I hope that the generosity will continue, and our attention spans will be lengthened so we are not so easilly distracted.

I'm not going to go into the "why" about the tsunami. I've been hearing "Why does God do this??" all week long, and I keep telling people "Who are we to be so arrogant to think that God owes us an explanation? Who are we to think that we can understand everything about God?" And those answers aren't satisfactory at all to most people.

I'm leaving the philosophical answers to the philosophers for once. I'm trying to help with the practical stuff. There is a link on the left margin to my tsunami relief page. It's set up through Justgiving.com (which I wish I had known about back in December -- I'd have used them rather than my Amazon thing!), and wil track your donations for you -- and you get the tax deduction, too. My goal right now is about $500 -- which is ambitious for a blog with the traffic this one has, but I figured I'd aim high.

So head over there to donate, and show the world that we care.

I wanted to make sure everyone saw this, so I created a new post rather than editing the one below.

If you are interested in this subject, you HAVE to read this at The Evangelical Outpost. Do it now. Outstanding post that I wish I had written.

That's all.

In Part 2, we talked about Tertullian, and his contention that faith and philosophy don't mix. This is a position that has been used and abused by Christians down through the ages, and we looked at what Tertullian might have meant.

Now, I want to take a look at another early theologian and philosopher, Augustine. Augustine wanted a faith that was consistant with reason, and he went in a LOT of directions to try and find one. He started off in Manicheanism, an early dualistic belief that taught two conflicting gods -- one good and one evil. In the ancient world, this religion held quite a bit of prestige, and Augustine was reluctant to abandon it completely. Finally, he realized that he couldn't ignore his doubts about this belief system, and embraced skepticism. He quickly saw some of the problems with this system, especially after reading neo-Platonist writings, and so he became a neo-Platonist for a time. Finally, through the influence fo Ambrose, the bishop of Milan, Augustine embraced Christianity. (The Catholic Encyclopedia has a good, short biography of Augustine here).

Augustine didn't see any conflict between faith and reason. Faith and trust are synonynmous to Augustine, and it's clear that there is a LOT of knoweldge that we have based on our trust of some other source. I know that the capital of England is London, and I know that London Bridge is there, but I've never been to Enlgand. I have to have faith in my sources of information on England to have any idea what England is like. Augustine defined faith, then, as knowledge that is gained without our own personal experience.

Reason, then, is knowledge that is gained through our experience. If I know that something is hot because I touch it, or because I see the steam from it, that is reason. If I know something is hot because I see someone else burn themselves on it, it's faith.

Faith and reason are like the two blades on a pair of scissors. Our knowledge comes from the interaction of both faith and reason, just as scissors cut something by using both blades. Faith is not something that only involves religious belief -- it is integral to any system of knowledge. Augustine expressed it this way: Credo ut intelligam -- I believe that I may understand.

I tend to be Augustinian. I don't think that faith means setting reason aside -- I think that faith and reason must be paired together to gain any real understanding of the world around us. We exercise faith all the time; religious faith is simply one aspect of the faith that we all have in facts that we have not experienced. We cannot experience everything that we know -- history is a perfect example of this -- so we have to exercise faith that our sources are correct.

But how can we be sure that even our reason is reliable? People are imperfect, after all. How can we rely on our reason to be accurate? How can we be sure that the reason of those we trust is accurate? Augustine had an answer for that, as well, which has been called his illumination theorywhich I'll discuss in the next installment of this series.

December 31, 2004. Another year gone.

My first year of blogging. I know that everyone does the whole year in review thing (even the design shows on TLC have been doing them, for crying out loud!), but maybe mine will be a little different. After all, I'm a little different.

First, my five favorite posts. The Corner suggested it first, and I have seen it don all over the blogosphere, so far be it from me to fail to jump on the bandwagon. In no particular order:

• My First Post -- not a great one, but it's my first one. Figured some people might want to go all the way back to March and read what I had to say back in the "early days."
• Jesus, Paul, and Peter Jennings -- my first really long, thought provoking post. Got me on a few search engines, too.
• Any of the Today (or This Week) in Church History posts -- I just love church history. Gimme a break, OK?
• A Nation of Jonahs -- I've gotten a lot of mileage out of this simple observation -- it's showed up on the King of the Blogs competition, the Christian Carnival, and the Best of Me Symphony. And next Sunday, I'm preaching it (actually, the same theme, but MUCH more involved).
• Study of Mark -- it's turned into a lot more than I thought, and it's gone longer than I expected (and it's overdue!), but I'm enjoying this study.

And there are a lot more. My comments on the Constitution Party, my religio-political posts (not always received sympathetically by people who normally agree with me). It's hard to pick favorites, and I've cheated on this list.

The year has seen bloggers become ABC's People of the Year. Blogospherians helped take down Dan Rather. Election coverage was taken to new heights (or depths). Sociologists and communications specialists are taking notice of this "new trend" in communication. And bloggers are getting book deals. Blogging is making an impact on our culture in ways that we won't really be able to see for years, if not decades. And it doesn't look like it's going to die out. Slow down, maybe. Change, certainly. Die out, not even.

This is the first year that I've really read blogs. I've met interesting people, discussed and argued with people I'll never see, and been quoted by people who think I had something interesting to say. Bloging is addictive, and I'm hooked. I'm looking forward to the next year.

My hopes for the new year:

• New host, new URL, bigger site. I can do more here than just rant, and I'm hoping that I'll be able to soon.
• Increased exposure for the little blogs that have something to say. There seem to be two groups in the blogosphere that get the most attention -- the big pundits like Instapundit and Kos, and the personal diaries of teenagers who cannot spell, but want to tell the world about their day at school. The third group, which I think is a majority, is made up of people like me, and the people on my blogroll. People who have good things to say, but don't get much attention. I read things as I cruise through my daily-read blogs (got a nice new RSS reader just for that purpose!) and I think to myself, "More people should read this. This is good stuff." There are people blogging who should be heard, and I think that 2005 is going to be the Year of the Blogging Underdogs.
• Increased exposure for the Godblogs. And maybe I'm being a bit selfish here, since I consider myself a Godblogger. There is a LOT of intense theoloogical discussion going on out here, and people should be aware of it. There's a lot more that I should be aware of -- I find new blogs every day that blow me away with some of what they are saying.

And that's the year that was. 2004 was fun. May 2005 be even better, for us all. Happy New Year.

Well, I've finally been able to gain computer access. For now. SO, the Week in Review:

My reign as King of the Blogs was a short one, thanks to a substandard challenge post on my part. I still could have won if I had gotten more votes at the site, but I lost by 0.5 points. Thanks to the four of you who voted or me!

Now to get back to "business", whatever that means.

My wife is reading Fank Schaeffer's Faith of Our Sons, which is an awesome book. I'm looking forward to reading it when she gets done. Some of the things she's read to me really remind me of what I've read of his father -- especially his reaction to people who are "thinking about" our troops, rather than coming right out and saying "praying for" them. I'll have more on this later, and a full review will show up at The Pew Reviews fter I get to read it.

There's a pretty good story about the real Santa Claus here, and an atheist talks about finding "spirituality" at Christmas -- even if you don't believe in God -- here. I think that's wonderful and all, but I still wish that people would just get their own holiday, and keep their hands off of mine. You don't believe in what the day is all about, don't celebrate it. I'm sure that some creative atheist could come up with something they could celebrate at about the same time of year. Of course, as I've mentioned before, I also wish that Christians would take their holidays seriously, and actually remember that there was a purpose to them beyond getting presents -- and giving presents. Of course, if we're going to get away from any religious recognition at all, we'd have to get rid of the word 'holiday' -- comes from holy day, after all.

The Decatur Daily has the right idea, but they miss the point with this sentence: "Our weeks of celebrating can add to the event if we keep in mind that Christ came to earth to offer mankind a new code by which to live."

He did much more than that. If all we do is live by His teachings, and ignore who He was, and what He came to do, we miss the real point of His teachings. He came to die, and to conquer death, and by doing so made it possible for man to be reconciled with God. We can't do it on our own -- we can't even figure out how to do it ourselves, and we've spent millenia trying. Christ died and rose again so that we don't have to keep trying.

The Best of Me Symphony is up at The Owner's Manual. Head on over and check it out -- and get something ready for NEXT WEEK'S symphony.

Email Gary at gcruse AT netscape DOT com to send your submission in for next week's symphony.
__________
Trackback to this post to express your support of my reign as King of the Blogs!!

Everyone is taking this Geek test. I rated a 46%, Geek Interpreter, and I wanted a second opinion, so I went here. There I scored 44%, Major Geek. I think the Innergeek test is more comprehensive, but they both seem pretty good.

I've decided that my previous State of the Blogosphere address, while good, was not a real address from the King, since I wasn't King yet. So I am going to spell out what you, the citizens of the Blogosphere, can expect from my reign.

Everyone is influenced by someone. Everyone can look back on their life and see people who have influenced them, without whom their own lives would have been radically different. Politicians look back to people like Abe Lincoln, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson. Musicians are influenced by the music they listened to growing up. Writers are influenced by the greats in literature.

Kings are influenced by other kings, of course.

So the question is, who? There are so many great kings, who to emulate?

King Richard, the Lionheart? Shall I lead my followers into a Holy Crusade against unupdated websites? Go off to war and leave the blog in the hands of my evil brother?

William the Conquerer? Shall I lead invasions of those blogs who do not recognize my Kingship, and subjugate them? Change their language and force them to assimilate my culture?

But I have chosen my role model. Life is tough, and the King of the Blogs needs to be tougher. But the King of the Blogs should also know how to enjoy life to the fullest, so I will model my reign as King of the Blogs after King Arthur, the legendary King of the Britons.

Arthur appreciates science and technology, so the blogosphere is a perfect place to immitate his reign. His combat abilities (as evidenced in the fight against the Black Knight) show his willingness to fight against his foes, but to show them mercy when needed. Plus, Camelot was a notorious party center, and we all know how blogospherians like to party. And he is legendary, so I can basically do whatever I want, and say that it's based on something Arthur did that scholars don't know about yet.

Arthur surrounds himelf with quality advisors, and I would have to have some of those. One would have to be The King of Fools, since he is a fellow King (and has been a king longer that me, so he can give me suggestions). The current judges are former rulers, and persons of exquisite taste, so their opinions would be vital to my reign.

I think that an Arthurian reign will benefit the entire blogosphere. ANd this way, if I lose, I can always come back. Blogius rex quondam, blogius rex futurus.

This week's blogging will be light, unfortunately, if it is existant at all after today.

My laptop isn't working. The cord to the power supply shorted, I can't fix it, and another power supply will cost $60 and take at LEAST a week to get. I MIGHT be able to wrangle some internet time at the public library, or from friends, but I'm not going to promise much. All the series that are running WILL continue -- and will probably be even better, since I'll have time to formulate my thoughts.

NEXT week will be better, since I will be able to use my father in law's computer starting Tuesday or Wednesday of next week, when we get to the Virginia leg of the Kelly Family Christmas Tour 2K4(tm).

me.

KOTB - Rulings
Final Ruling
View from the Pew 40
I Hate My Cubicle 31.5
illogicology 28.5

Wow. What can I say but -- awesome. As I mentioned in the previous post, I've gotten some great feedback on my blog -- as you can see, the graphic is back on top! Working on an 'About Me' thing right now -- I may have to use BlogSpot's Profile feature for right now. And I'm tweaking the present template in response to the reactions from the judges.

Now I have to defend my crown next week. And if the challenge next week is as good as it was this week, I'll have my hands full.

To the judges: My thanks for your gracious comments, and suggestions. Especially for the suggestions.

To the other pretenders to the throne this week: You both did a good job. Owen, with more experience under your belt, you'll be an even bigger threat to the throne. Steve, you've got a great blog - keep up the good work.

Next week should be interesting.

Surfing aimlessly through the BlogExplosion links so I can get some more visitors gives me a lot of time to ponder the State of the Blogosphere. Since I AM in the running for the King of the Blogs crown, I figured I'd issue a State of the Blogosphere Address.

Ahem.

My fellow blogospherians (like that word? Me too. Think I'll keep using it.). The blogosphere is a huge place, and each of us is trying to carve out our own little space in it. I have been roaming my (future) kingdom, and several things have attracted my attention...

1. You may enjoy your music. Your friends may enjoy your music. But you do NOT have to inflict your music on the casual surfer. If you MUST put the latest Ashley Simpson MP3 on your blog, have the decency to put the OFF button at the top, so that those of us who HAVE musical taste can turn it off quickly.
2. There is a LOT of whining about BlogExplosion. Hint 1: It doesn't work unless you surf it. Hint 2: If you aren't getting repeat visitors, it MIGHT be because your block is bad, not because BlogExplosion is bad. Many of us ARE getting repeat hits.
3. The business of choice in the blogosphere seems to be Multi-Level Marketing. Been there, done that, didn't have enough upline to buy the T-shirt. Pretty soon, everyone in the blogosphere will be selling, and nobody will be buying.

And now, the State of the Pew:

Actually, I've got some great suggestions out of the KotB competition, so even if I don't win, it's been worth it. I'm going to have to do something about the overall design of the site, and improve my CSS abilities. I was hoping to do it over Christmas, but I don't know if I will or not. Soon, though -- promise.

Next week will be in Florida on the 2004 Kelly Family Christmas Tour, so the blogging will be done through the laptop (not quite Lappy 486 vintage, but close). The Faith - Reason series will continue, as will TWiCH and the Mark study.

Let me know if you know of any worthwhile blogs that should be in the blogroll. I'm about to prune it again, and I don't just want to get rid of stuff -- I want to get some new stuff. I've already added a few from my BlogExplosion roaming (see, it DOES work).

I keep telling people that it's easier to shop online. And I keep hearing about credit card security, and how bad it is on the Internet.

And I see these same people sit in a restaurant and pay for their meal by credit card. And hand their credit card to a waiter or waitress that they don't even know. Seriously -- with a cheap magnetic strip reader, this person could have your card, and you'd never know it until the charges showed up on your account.

My wife had a card number stolen not long ago -- off the ticket she filled out for a Fed Ex delivery. I've used cards on the Internet all the time, and the only time I've ever had a problem was when someone working at a hotel I was staying at snagged the card number off my receipt (which also had my address and phone number).

Yes, there are scams on the internet. There are scams in real life, too. I don't stay inside all the time, and I'm not going to stop shopping on the 'Net. Here are a few good things to think about:

• Shop at places you know. Amazon is a great place to shop, and they are secure.
• Shop places online that you shop in 'real life'. If an internet store has a brick and mortar equivalent, you can be pretty sure they are trustworthy, and are going to be around for a long time.
• Don't give ANYONE your account number or information by email. REAL companies don't do business this way, only scammers.
• Look for security. That little padlock in the browser frame is a good sign -- click on it to see how secure things really are. Also look for https:// at the beginning of the site address.
• Use common sense. Think about what you are doing online.

Follow these tips, especially the last one, and you should be OK shopping online. Now, where did that waiter go with my card?
__________
Trackback to this post and express your support for MY bid to be King of the Blogs!!

December 11, 1792.

One month from now, Louis XVI would be executed for crimes against the French people. But on this day, something more important happened.

Joseph Mohr was born in Salzburg Germany. He was illegitimate -- the son of a German soldier (Franz Joseph Mohr) and Ann Schoiber, whose family he was living with at the time. When informed of her pregnancy, Mohr did what too many soldiers have done in similar circumstances -- he ran, even deserting the army. Ann was left holding the bag, and was forced to bear the shame and fine alone.

Young Joseph loved to sing, and was allowed to join a Benedictine choir, and studied music with the choirmaster's other students. He excelled, learning several instruments by the age of twelve. He was ordained a priest in 1815.

Three years later, faced with a broken organ and no Christmas music, Mohr wrote the words to one of the most beloved Christmas carols of all time, "Silent Night, Holy Night."

Mohr never became wealthy because of the song; in fact, he died penniless, having devoted his money to a school for poor children. But his example -- a child who had no hope for any future, whose stigma could have prevented him from receiving an education, but was given a chance by people who loved him -- is an inspiration for us all.


Stille Nacht, heilige Nacht,
Alles schläft; einsam wacht
Nur das traute hochheilige Paar.
Holder Knabe im lockigen Haar,
Schlaf in himmlischer Ruh!
Schlaf in himmlischer Ruh!

Stille Nacht, heilige Nacht,
Hirten erst kundgemacht
Durch der Engel Halleluja,
Tönt es laut von fern und nah:
Christ, der Retter ist da!
Christ, der Retter ist da!

Stille Nacht, heilige Nacht,
Gottes Sohn, o wie lacht
Lieb' aus deinem göttlichen Mund,
Da uns schlägt die rettende Stund'.
Christ, in deiner Geburt!
Christ, in deiner Geburt! (If you have problems with some of the characters, change your Encoding to Unicode UT-8)
__________
Trackback to this post and express your support for MY bid to be King of the Blogs!!

What has Athens to do with Jerusalem? What have heretics to do with Christians?
This is the attitude of a LOT of modern people. What has reason (Athens, the ancient seat of reason and philosophy) to do with faith (Jerusalem, the center of Christian belief)? Most would agree with Tertullian -- nothing at all.

Tertullian had a good reason to give up on a 'reasonable' approach to Christianity. The Greek and Roman philosophers were pagans, after all. The Roman emperor was the one putting Christians to death. He wanted to move Christianity as far as possible from their influence. He was really one of the first to proclaim sola Scriptura -- Scripture alone, without the philosophy and logic. He went so far as to say that because the crucifixion and resurrection were absurd -- the idea that God would come to earth, die, and then rise from the dead is so illogical -- that it must be believed. Tertullian rejected the notion that faith must be understood -- he felt that if it was understood, it was not real faith.

Tertullian was inconsistent, though. He used Greek ideas of philosophy and logic in his arguments and disputations. In his Apology, he expects the Roman authorities to treat Christians the same way that they treat other "criminals" (since that is what Christians were considered at the time). He portrays the Roman condemnation of Christians as unreasonable because it is based in ignorance (Book I of Ad Nationes.)

It seems that we have misunderstood Tertullian's reluctance to mix faith and reason. He should not be considered anti-intellectual -- rather, he is trying to keep overtly pagan influences out of the Church. His major opponent was the heretic Marcion, whose theology was heavily influenced by Greek dualistic ideas.

Unfortunately, there are many who have decided that 'pagan influences' have infiltrated higher education today. This hasn't been helped by the influence of liberal theology in seminary education -- many young men have entered seminaries full of a desire to preach and teach the Gospel of Christ, only to have their faith shattered by professors who don't really believe what they are being paid to teach. In many cases, we have thrown the baby out with the bathwater -- to get away from bad schools and bad theology, we have abandoned the scholarly realm. Mark Noll has a LOT to say about this in his book The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind (a review of which will shortly be up here). As we continue with this series, we will see that faith and reason are not incompatible at all, and that in many cases, Athens and Jerusalem have a lot in common.

The next installment of this series will concern Augustine, and his idea of faith seeking understanding.
__________
Trackback to this post and express your support for MY bid to be King of the Blogs!!

I mentioned this in another post, but I wanted to elaborate a little bit. I was inspired by this at Wheat and Chaff and this at the Evangelical Outpost. Both make great points.

I am sick of the commercialization and secularization of Christmas. I worked retail, and spent a LONG time actually dreading the Christmas season, simply because of the long hours, the bad attitudes, and the stress. Now that I'm out of retail, I'm getting better, but it still takes me until December 23 to really get into Christmas. Of course, the Christmas spirit usually lasts me until after my birthday (January 26 -- put it on your calendars now!!), so maybe I should observe the Orthodox Christmas on January 6.

Maybe we all should. All Christians, I mean. Let the secularists and the rest of the world have their holiday in December. They can call it Santaday, or something like that. Even call it Yule -- I don't care. They can celebrate it on December 25. Have their truely secular holiday.

We can still participate in it -- that's the beauty of the idea. We can still, if we want to, go out and spend ourselves into a huge debt buying things for everyone so they can exchange them on the 26th for what they really want. But on January 6, we have Christmas to do what you are supposed to do on Christmas -- celebrate the birth of our Savior.

I found it interesting that Christmas wasn't on December 25 until about 350 AD. Before then, the birth of Christ was supposed to be celebrated by a solemn feast. We've lost the solemnity of the day.

I doubt we'll ever change the day we celebrate Christmas. But maybe we should think seriously about celebrating it our way. Buy presents for people -- but don't blow the budget for the next two years. Decorate -- but don't take out a substation with all the lights you put out. And maybe, when we remember that Christmas celebrates the day when God, in His infinite mercy, sent His Son with the ultimate goal of dying in our place, for our sins, we'll remember the true meaning of Christmas AND of Easter. Because when we look at the manger, we should see the cross as well. And we should never forget that without that baby in the manger, nothing that we can do could ever bring us closer to the goal of reconciliation with God. Not because of what we've done, but because of who He is. And maybe we'll remember what the last words Jesus spoke were:

But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.
Acts 1:8, ESV

And that's the true meaning of Christmas, Charlie Brown.
__________
Trackback to this post and express your support for MY bid to be King of the Blogs!!

The battle is raging, and I'm in second place in the polls. Head over here and vote for View from the Pew. This isn't the final vote, but it gives the winner three points. Also don't forget to trackback to this post, and tell everyone how much you want ME to be King!! If you need help tracking back, try this out.

In any case -- VOTE FOR ME! How often do you get to vote for a King, anyway?

It's UP!!!


The Anais Nin edition -- one of the best ever - Symphony is up at http://gcruse.typepad.com/the_owners_manual/2004/12/best_of_me_symp_1.html

Head over there and check it out. It's worth a look or two.

So, some people have been asking me -- "WHY did you start another blog? Why couldn't you be happy with one?" And I answer -- vanity. I am trying to start a virtual media empire. First, it's a couple of blogs. Then, a game site or two. Then an e-commerce site. Pretty soon ........

{insert dream-sequence/flash-forward music here}

Dateline: Saturn. Virtual Media mogul Warren Kelly has solidified his bid to take over the rule of this entire planet. Following a virtual-media bombardment of epic proportions, which natives have started referring to as a Pew-a-lanch, local governments surrendered control of the planet to representatives of PewView Communications, Inc. late yesterday evening in a secret meeting.

We are told that there will be a press conference later this week, but a press release has been issued. Mr. Kelly has decreed that his official title will be Lord High Communicator, and that his Official Portrait(tm) will be the required on-screen picture for all computers and cellular phones. The people of Saturn will daily kiss the picture of their Lord High Communicator and bow to show their devotion and honor.

Existing Saturnian laws will be preserved, but His Lordship has issued the following Three Demandments:

1. The official Planetary Sport of Saturn will be changed from Dominos to Brockian Ultra-Cricket.
2. The Planetary Anthem will be changed from "Hey, Look -- Rings!" to "Finland, Finland!" (with the word Finland changed to Saturn, obviously).
3. The people of Saturn will be required to spend two years extended duty on assignment with the Ring Cleaning Squad.

His Lordship explained the last new law by saying, "They are not just SOME Saturnians' rings, they belong to us ALL, and we ALL need to help clean them up. Besides, it builds character."

{no, I haven't lost my mind -- this post is the Weekly Challenge in this week's King of the Blogs competition. Go there and vote for me -- and THIS is the post you need to trackback to. Remember, you readers are the BEST. You guys rock. In fact, j00 R0><0r5}

... to Parableman (and yes, I know it still says Parablemania in my blogroll. I haven't bothered to change it -- you all know who I'm talking about!).


To enter is simple. First, your post should be of a Christian nature, but this does not exclude posts that are political (or otherwise) in nature from a Christian point of view. Second, please send only one post dated since the last Christian Carnival (i.e. starting with posts from this past Wednesday). Then, do the following:

Email parableman ATT gmail DOTT com. Please put "Christian Carnival" in the Subject. Provide the following:
Title of your Blog
URL of your Blog
Title of the post you're submitting
URL linking to the post you're submitting
Trackback URL of the post (if you want a trackback)
Short description of the post
The submission deadline is Tuesday, December 14, 9pm EST.

I'm getting back into the Carnival thing, and I actually have a post or two that are worth submitting this time. This carnival does attract new readers to your site, so it's worth posting to. Now I have to get my own submission ready.

There's a new 'wrinkle' in the KotB tournament this time. Part of the voting process will depend on YOU, my wonderful, faithful readers. YOU can help me achieve my dream of being King.

Ever since I was a little boy, I've looked forward to a time when I would be King. Of anything -- it didn't matter. I was so little that I always got beat playing King of the Mountain. I was lousy at checkers, so I never got kninged there. And the set of playing cards I got for my birthday when I was six only had 48 cards. Guess which ones were missing. Go ahead, guess.

Anyway, all you have to do is trackback to this post in a post on your own blog, and tell the world that you think that View from the Pew should be the King of the Blogs. If you follow that link, it will even give you info on how to go about tracking back! How hard can that be?!

{This is part one of a multi-part series about Faith and Reason, and the various ways that Christians have tried to reconcile the two.}

There seems to be an attitude among many people today that Christianity -- especially modern Christianity -- is anti-Enlightenment, and anti-intellectual in general. In a recent article , the Asheville Citizen-Times talks about the evangelical Christian goal of repealing the Enlightenment.

Many of us remember the Age of Enlightenment for opening the way to science and technology. It did so by separating the realms of faith and reason and giving preference to reason where conflicts arose between the two.

I'm not sure that the Enlightenment did that, exactly. I think the Enlightenment started the trend toward replacing faith in God with faith in human reason. It was about finding something different to place faith in, rather than separating faith from reason. In fact, the Enlightenment often tried to bring reason INTO matters of faith -- especially when it came to Biblical interpretation methods. The Enlightenment gave rise to the "historical-critical" model of study, which led to the rise of religious liberalism throughout the 19th and 20th centuries.

This isn't the place to critique historical-critical hermeneutics, or religious modernism (I'll do that later, though). The point is that the Enlightenment and religious faith were far more intertwined than most people want to admit.

Christians have historically believed that faith and reason went hand in hand. As far back as Tertullian, we've been trying to figure out exactly how they fit together, and we've wavered between saying that they didn't at all (Tertullian) to saying that they were essential to each other (Augustine). And we are still debating this among ourselves, so how can we even begin to think about explaining to others what we think about the subject?

The definition given above sounds a lot like what Francis Schaeffer talks about -- the idea that faith and reason are separate, and cannot tell us anything about each other. Science can tell us all baout how things work, and why things work the way they do, and how to make things work better, but it cannot tell us about God. Faith can tell us all about God, and the supernatural, but it can't tell us anything about the material world -- including how it came to be. I'd agree with Schaeffer that this idea is NOT a working worldview, for a LOT of reasons, which I will address later on in another section.

What I want to do in this series is look at the various ways we've tried to reconcile the two seemingly opposing forces -- faith and reason. In the end, I'll talk about why it's important, and how Christianity can be looked at as a rational worldview. In the next part, I'll take a look at the early Church, and how Tertullian tried to reconcile faith and reason -- and why so many Christians today would agree with him today.

Ok, so I didn't get a nomination for the Weblogs Awards. I can live with that.

I already have one nomination for "Best New Blog" in the Best of Blogs competition, but that's only because I made it. I don't even know if that counts. So everybody go over there and nominate me.

Because, like I said before, you guys, my loyal readers, rock.

Seriously, you do.

Even the people who only show up here for 30 seconds. You BlogExplosions guys rock too.

Just not as hard.

You can win, too! Check this out.

As you can see from the chart on the left, there has been a final contestant named. Let the contest begin!!!

Also, I've had a few people ask me why I didn't kiss up to the Commish in my previous post. I naturally assumed that his highness the King would already know how highly he is thought of here at the Pew. Of course, he IS in my Blogroll. I was remiss in congratulating him on his winning entry in the Watchers Council, but I am sure that in his wisdom and kindness he will overlook that slight, minor oversight.

{To be serious for a moment, I just wandered my way to this article, which I highly recommend. A LOT of great points made there.}

I love reading LarkNews. I enjoy The Holy Observer. I'll probably (when I actually have money and a job again) support both of these websites. In short, I have a sense of humor, and the ability to laugh at myself. Especially, I see some value in satirizing religious practices (though I don't find Landover Baptist especially funny anymore; they've gone more than a bit over the top, and it seems they're not quite as relevant as they once were).

So I would be in opposition to the law in Britain that would potentially outlaw religious satire, claiming that it fosters religious hatred. And I hope I'm not alone.

I've said my piece about people ridiculing religious ideas. There is a difference between ridicule and satire -- though it is a fine line. I think that it's ironic that England is doing this -- England has largely abandoned any real religious practice in favor of ceremony, it seems to me. I would have expected this to come from the "tools of the Religious Right(tm)" who are running the US right now. Maybe I just missed the meeting when we discussed that, I don't know. You'd think they'd have sent me a memo or something -- after all, my dues ARE paid up.

Satire is a valuable tool, and I think of myself as rather satirical at times (though I haven't done much of that on this blog yet). And the ability to laugh at ourselves is important to a sane outlook on life. The line that we walk, though, is when it stops being satire and starts being mean-spirited, or ridiculing. That's when I stop laughing and start getting offended.

But government shouldn't decide where that line is. Good taste should. And if I don't like what someone says on TV or in print, I can always ignore them. Or work to try to change their mind -- which is what the Christian mission is.

{edit}And, in case anyone was wondering, I thought the nativity at Tussauds was pretty funny.

Ok, I'm competing in the King of Blogs tournament again -- yeah, I know I got my behind whomped the last time, but this time will be different! How do I know? I'm kissing up this time, that's how I know.

I've added the judges to my blogroll. Of course, News From the Great Beyond was already there. She's been a wonderful Queen of the Blogs, and I'm sure that as a judge she will be even better. I'm ashamed that Bad Example wasn't on the blogroll before -- how could I expect to win without having a link to this exceptional blog on my blogroll? No wonder I got stomped. AND he's competing in the 2004 Weblog Awards (which he should win with no problem, of course -- go vote for him right now!!). And then there's The Smarter Cop. What an appropriate name! Just read a few of Pietro's posts and you'll see just why he was chosen to be a judge for this tournament. This quality blog is a great addition to any blogroll, and mine looks even more intelligent than it already was just for having it there. In fact, I feel smarter just having read it.

And I'll be asking for YOUR support later on. My faithful readers. My wonderful, intelligent, faithful readers. You guys rock, you know that?

Really.

You do.

I've said it a few times before -- I think Christians need to pay attention to politics, we need to vote according to our beliefs, and we need to encourage others to do the same. But politics is not going to make America "God's Country" -- and it shouldn't be our focus to change the US into some sort of 21st Century Christendom.

Christian principles are to take care of the poor without obligating them to anything, to forgive people who have done things to us WITHOUT thought to whether they deserve our forgiveness. Government can't do this all the time -- when it's been tried, it has failed. It is not the job of government to take care of the poor. It is not the government's job to decide right and wrong -- the government decides what is legal and what is illegal. It is the church's duty to be the arbiter of morality, and to strictly enforce those standards on it's members. If we can't even get THAT right, how can we expect to be able to run a country?

But society can not, and should not, expect Christians, or anybody of any faith at all, to set their beliefs aside when the time comes for important decisions like who to elect to the highest office in the land. It is insulting when I read that Christians need to leace the religion stuff at church -- as if my faith should have absolutely no effect on who I am today. (I always thought of that song when I heard John Kerry campaigning this past year.)

There are a whole host of articles about this topic wandering about on the internet. Here are a couple that peeked my interest:

• The Cinci Enquirer on Christian Democrats. Little known fact: when I was at Liberty, there was a Christian Democrats club on campus. Not very big, but it was there. If you believed the press, Jerry wouldn't have allowed it, but he did.
• Minnesota Daily on the extreme center.

{Hat tip to Christianity Today's Weblog}

The Vatican is pressing for the UN to recognize hatred of Christians as "an evil equal to hatred of Jews and Muslims," and some Christians think it's a bad idea.

"Obviously we have seen many countries where Christian minorities are in danger, but we don't think this is the appropriate way to really ensure protection," said Alessandra Aula of Franciscans International, a Catholic pressure group.
"What we fear is that this is the way to start eroding universal human rights," she said from her office in Geneva. "You will then have Sikhs and Buddhists and all the others coming and claiming rights. Where does it end?"

Haven't heard of the term before? Not surprised.

This campaign has been so discreet that the term was hardly known until the Vatican's foreign minister, Archbishop Giovanni Lajolo, said last Friday that the Holy See had insisted the U.N. list it along with anti-Semitism and Islamophobia.
"It should be recognised that the war against terrorism, even though necessary, had as one of its side-effects the spread of 'Christianophobia' in vast areas of the globe," he told a U.S.-organised conference on religious freedom in Rome.

I've thought about starting a list of Christophobic blogs that are out there. I've run into a couple through BlogExplosion (including one who was offended at my "Would be nice if you had a clue" comment), but I really don't think that anyone cares about hatred of Christians.

For the record: I hate nobody based on their actions or behavior. I don't hate homosexuals (even though I wish they would stop trying to impose their morality on me, and expect me to approve of their lifestyle). I don't hate Muslims (had a good friend in Georgia who converted from Christianity to Islam. Never stopped liking the guy). I don't even hate hypocritical Christians (there are a few out there). I hate what people do. Heck, I hate people drinking too much, but some of my best friends partied their way through a few years of high school. They knew I didn't do that, and didn't bug me to go drinking with them (that much), and knew who to call if they needed a ride home (though they never called me). There are a few Christians who carry the stupid "God Hates Fags" signs, but they're rejected by most Christians -- even my ultra-fundamentalist friends at the FFF think they're disgusting and an embarassment to real Christians. But if you read some of the media, and a few blogs, we're all alike.

Maybe someone should start Christaphobics Annonymous. But I doubt anyone would come, because there aren't that many people who think it's a problem.

{This should have gone up yesterday, but I goofed. Sorry.}

I've done one of these this week, but I have a couple more. Some important things happened, and we need to think about the implications.

December 6, 1273.

Throughout his life, Thomas Aquinas had fought to be able to express his beliefs. He was called a "dumb ox" by his fellow students. His wealthy family didn't want him to become a monk -- going so far as to hire a prostitute to seduce him.

Thomas prevailed, and the church has been indebted to him ever since. Without his writings and philosophy, the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church would be very different. His Summa Theologica is regarded as one of the most important writings of the Middle Ages. He is widely regarded as being one of the greatest thinkers in all of Christendom.

On this date, he received a vision. When he was asked to tell of his vision, he simply said "Such things have been revealed to me that all I have written seems to me as so much straw. Now I await the end of my life."

What did Thomas see? Nobody knows. I think that it's clear that whatever he saw, it was enough to show him that, in the long run, disputations and debate are meaningless. Aquinas' theology, and that of most of the medieval Scholastics, taught that reason alone was enough to get to a saving knowledge of God. Centuries later, Martin Luther realized that the endless string of "ergo" {therefore} was leading people nowhere. He realized that you can 'ergo' straight to Hell -- the key to saving faith is in the word "Nevertheless."

God is omnipotent
Jesus is God
Ergo Jesus is omnipotent
Ergo Jesus could have defeated the Roman soldiers and established His kingdom on earth.
NEVERTHELESS, He dies willingly for our sins.

God is holy
We are not holy
Ergo there is a separation between God and Man
NEVERTHELESS, God has made a way for us to be reconciled to Him.

That one word makes the difference.

I've decided to set up my Amazon donation page to collect donations to sponsor a World Vision child for one year. Everything I get in that account between now and January 6 will be donated to World Vision, but my goal is to raise the $360 that it will take to sponsor a child for one full year.

All you have to do is click on the box, and donate. You can donate as little as a dollar, or as much as you want. Everything goes to World Vision, and I'm NOT taking any tax writeoff for myself. If we get enough to sponsor a child, I will post all the information I get about that child, so that everyone will be informed.

If you've ever wanted to sponsor a WV child, but haven't had the resources to do it yourself, this is a great opportunity. So go over there on the right side, and click the button.

Just when I thought that I would never have to talk about something like this again. Just when I thought that Kristof's articles were starting to get through (the two I have agreed with so far, I mean).

The Philly Inquirer reported that a WHYY reported called the offices of a conservative group and left the following message (emphases added)

"Hi, my name is Rachel, and my telephone number is... I wanted to tell you that you're evil, horrible people. You're awful people. You represent horrible ideas. God hates you and he wants to kill your children. You should all burn in hell. Bye."

She apologized later, saying that it was a "personal matter that was turned into a public issue." Yeah, I guess saying that over 150,000 people (the subscribers to laptoplobbyist's newsletter) AND their children should go to hell is a personal matter.

There's a difference here between Christians and this garbage, by the way. Christians are trying to get people to NOT go to hell. Maybe we go oer the top sometimes, but the goal is to get people out of hell. We all deserve it -- that's what God's justice is about. We don't have to get what we deserve -- that's called grace. That's what the Christian message is -- or should be, at any rate. And, in case you're interested, God doesn't want to kill your children, or mine. Just thought I'd clear that up.

But I'm the intolerant one. Yeah, right.


{Almost forgot -- tip o' the hat to James at the PCCBoard Forums

Well, this is my first day on BlogExplosion, and I'm shocked and impressed. So far, 70 hits just from BE. My total page loads is over 100 for the first time since I started writing.

If you're stopping by from BE, stick around and read a bit. Some of what is here might challenge a stereotype or two that you might have, but don't be afraid. I've been told that that could be a good thing -- usually by people who refuse to understand anyone with any faith whatsoever, but especially those pesky evangelical Christians. If you've ever wondered what's up with "those people," then stick around. You might also want to read this post on just that subject -- "those people" I mean.

So bookmark this page, and check back by every so often -- you might learn something. A few regular features that you can count on (though the schedule I once had is WAY off right now -- I'm hoping to get back to one in January): This Week in Church History is a regular, as well as the ongoing Bible study in Mark's Gospel. The study is NOT an overly scholarly study -- in fact, it's usually rather devotional, but that's OK too. I think it's important to apply the Bible, not just to know all about it -- though I do think Biblical illiteracy is a big problem in the church today.

I also started a "regular" thing about the little guys in the Bible, but I've only done one of those so far. I should probably revisit that soon.

So anyway, welcome to all the Blog Explosion visitors. Stop by often! ANd you regulars -- you can always say "I knew that blog when it only got 5 readers a day! Now he's all the way up to 50."

LOL

December 5, 633.

A church council was convened in Seville, Spain, ordered by Archbishop Isidore of Seville. The council ruled on a anumber of important issues -- some of which we should pay attention to today. They affirmed the unity of God, while also affirming the Trinity. The ruled that Christians should not force Jews to convert. They also ruled that once a person became a monk, it was for life. They even got a little political, backing the newly-crowned King Sisenand even thogh he had deposed the old king. In exchange for their support, the King freed the clergy from any mandatory state service, and made the Church tax-exempt.

They also ruled on a controversial new form of music -- hymns. Prior to this time, most of the songs sung in church were Biblical passages set to music, but recently some Christians were writing their own praises to God. This caused a huge stir in the church, as people wondered whether these works of mere men were suitable for use in the church of God.

In the end, it wasn't much of a conflict. The council ruled that the hymns written by holy men, such as bishops Ambrose and Hilary, could be considered fit for use in holy services. When we read some of these hymns, it's clear that the content of the songs are scriptural, the music was the same style as had been used before, and the character of the writer was unquestioned. The music was fit for use in the Church.

We face a similar "controversy" today -- the feud over "praise music" and "contemporary worship" in churches. The songs are the same, the message is the same, but the fight is over the style. Can "modern music" praise God?

It always has in the past. God doesn't give us a formula in Scripture about what kind of music He likes, and what kind He doesn't. Christians are commanded to "do all for the glory of God" -- that includes our music, no matter what we listen to. I'm amused at the ammount of time we spend fighting about this issue -- a church can have a growing ministry, a tremendous outreach, and fantastic expository preaching, but if they have a praise band and play CCM, we want to lump them in with the apostates who deny the Gospel, the Bible, and every teaching of Scripture! This is self-defeating. We have more important work before us, and we should be worrying about that, not what style of music God likes.

We need to remember that this fight has always gone on, and has always been regarded later in history as a petty debate. We need to get over it, and get about more important work.

I have joined Blog Explosion. I figured it would be an interesting experiment, so I followed Challies.com, Patriot Paradox, Spare Change, and several others in the blogroll into the explosion.

I've gotten a few visits from it, but no reviews yet. I figure it will take a little while, so I'm being patient. This service has been beneficial to a LOT of people out there, so who knows?

If you want to join up too, just click on the banner below, or the link on the left hand side of the page (what I've started calling my NASCAR panel, for obvious reasons).

I'm having a hard time coming up with something insightful, witty, or new to say, so I decided to cruise through the blog at Christianity Today, and add my own pithy comments on the news. Unlike CT, though, I've already registered with all the "registration required" sites, remember? Username: either piewview or piewview@yahoo.com, password is blogger42. It's that easy! (If this doesn't work on any newspaper sites you find, let me know, and I'll fix it.)

• The UMC has defrocked their resident lesbian priest -- first time since 1987. Is it just me, or does the term 'defrocked' just seem a bit awkward in this context? I can honestly say that the Southern Baptist Convention has never had to do anything about a lesbian minister -- not allowing women as pastors kinda eliminates that problem, doesn't it?
• The UCC (to continue the acronymical insanity) has a new commercial. Maybe you've heard about it. ABC, CBS, and NBC won't air it. Now, I don't like what they're saying -- I know of no evangelical church that would turn people away because of their sexual orientation. Now, if they wanted to be married in the church, join the church, or minister in the church, there may be problems. See, Jesus said something like "Go, and sin no more" once, if I recall correctly. We don't condemn sinners -- the One without sin has the only authority to do that. But we can not condone their sin -- that is also clear from Scripture. I think maybe part of the problem is that people identify themselves too much with what they do, rather than who they are. AND, I think that the Church often doesn't do enough about sin in it's own ranks. I remember Jesus saying something about a beam in the eye, too.
• I really wish this story would go away. I think it's a stupid idea, and I think the Convention is overstepping their bounds by expecting people to pull their kids out of public education. Maybe we should be training people to go into the schools and be a positive influence. Maybe our youth ministers should focus more on discipleship and less on pizza parties (and yes, I know there are awesome youth ministers out there -- I know several of them from Southern). I salute parents who choose private schools. I salute parents who homeschool. I salute parents who are involved in their kids' public education. The key is to be involved, folks. There, I think I've beat that horse enough.
• One sample of the many "Holiday Controversy" type stories. I agree with Pseudo-Polymath on this topic, I think. Let them have their "secular holiday" (now THERE'S an oxymoron!) in December. But they have to stop calling it Christmas, and leave us alone to celebrate the birth of our Savior. I end up stressed at this time of year, over what to get people, if I've gotten them enough, and all that garbage. It's easy to lose focus on what's important. Maybe it's time to reclaim Christmas as our own -- they don't really get it anyway. I think our Jewish brethren have the right idea -- how much Chanuka-related marketing do you see? Very little in many parts of the country. THAT would be refreshing.
• And as we're fighting our own culture wars, our brethren in Europe have seemingly been pushed too far. Unfortunately, they may have been snoozing too long. Check out this Guardian story, and think about how close we have come, and how close we still may come, to a society just like this. Cultural engagement can help avert this; of course, if the left was really tolerant, they'd never have attacked us for our religious beliefs in the first place.
• In case you were wondering why all of us evangelical-type peole got so politically active this election, Alan Boraas at the Anchorage Daily News has the answer. It's not concern for our rights as citizens. It's not a desire to make the country a better place. It's not even because we're all brainwashed. It's all because of the rapture. Read the article, and think about how sad it is that a professor of anthropology has absolutely no clue about the topic he's writing about. NOTHING WE DO CAN MAKE THE RAPTURE HAPPEN ANY FASTER!!!!!!! A good majority of evangelical Christians don't believe in the rapture anyway -- what motivates them????? No answers, because that line of questioning tends to defeat stereotypes of Christians. Too bad, the article had a little promise. And I hold out little hope that anything will change people's minds. Don't confuse them with facts, their minds are made up. And they say we're anti-intellectual.

Now I'm going to head over to GetReligion, and see what I should have said about all these articles.

I've talked about the various types of free will before. In this post, I'm going to discuss the different perspectives on how free will and divine sovereignty coincide.

Some people think they don't. If we have free will, then God really cannot know what the future holds, whether ten years from now, or ten minutes. God rolls the dice and takes a chance. He's got a better chance at being right than we do, but He still only has a chance. He could be wrong, he could be surprised. He is often disappointed. But He's still God.

That, in a nutshell, is open theism. God makes mistakes, and learns from us. We control our destiny, and God is just along for the ride. I'm working on a post where I look at the various Scripture passages that open theises typically use to support their view, and I'll post that later on. For right now, I'll say that I really don't think that this is the omnipotent, omniscient God that the Bible shows us.

If we hold to libertarian free will, though, open theism is not that big of a stretch, philosophically. We can always do things differently, so our actions influence God's knowledge and planning. Some people have adopted a different view, which is called Molinism.

Molinism essentially teaches that God has 'middle knowledge' -- that He knows things based on His creative action (free knoweldge), based on 'the way things have to be' (natural knowledge, things that are necessarilly true and not dependant on anything), and based on His absolute knowledge of all possible actions that His created beings can take (middle knowledge). This is a very complex system (I just finished writing a 15 page paper on it for philosophy, which I will post somewhere later on) -- suffice it to say that it involves God knowing absolutely everything that we could possibly do, not just what we actually do. His knowledge of the future is tied to this middle knowledge.

I am a compatibilist: I think that our freedom is based in God's will and our character/personality. We are therefore free, but not absolutely free. In His sovereignty, God knows what choices we will make -- based on either the situation we are in, or His understanding of how we will react to a situation, or simply because He knows how He will act in the situation and thus knows its outcome. This is similar to middle knowledge, but is based ultimately in God's creative act -- either in His creation of us and our personalities, His shaping of the situation around us, or His special act in creation. (This ended up being the thesis of the paper I just mentioned -- that the idea of middle knoweldge is correct, but it is not separate from God's free knowledge -- what He knows because of His actions. Here is an article by someone who agrees with me. There is an excellent one in the recent Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society that says essentially the same thing).

Sovereignty and free will is not an issue for compatibilists. Our free will is always exercised under the supervision of God, and He works through our actions. Because His will is always accomplished, He is in control of the circumstances, even though we are exercising our freedom. Libertarian free will implies a God who is always having to guess to stay one step ahead of HIs creation, or at the very least a God who really doesn't know everything.

I'm trying to get my act together and participate in carnivals and symphonies more often. I'm hoping that this coming semester I'll be able to do more, with my classes only meeting Thursday through Saturday.

Anyway, the Best of Me Symphony will be at The Owner's Manual. If you want to participate (and who wouldn't?), email Gary at gcruse AT netscape.com with your info. Only requirement is that the post be two months old or older.

Ok, it's turkey day here in the States, and time for the obligatory "What I am thankful for" list.

• I am thankful, first and foremost, for my salvation, by grace through faith.
• I am thankful for my family.
• I am thankful for the calling and the opportunity God has given me to attend seminary.
• I am thankful that I finally got the turkey breast I bough fried (not to self -- it takes a LONG time to heat oil in my turkey fryer. Plan ahead next year!).
• I am thankful that I live in this country.
• I am thankful that I don't have kids in this school (hat tip to The Crusty Curmudgeon).
• I am thankful for that second piece of pumpkin pie.

I'd figured my blogging was over for today. I was casually surfing through my bookmarks, and hit my link to Nicholas Kristof's page at the New York Times.

Time to fire up the blog again -- Kristof still doesn't get evangelicals.

You'd think as many times as people have surely tried to correct the man, he'd have figured a little bit out about this vast sub-culture called evangelicalism. But if you read his article "Apocalypse (Almost) Now", you'll understand what I mean.

Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins, the co-authors of the series, have both e-mailed me (after I wrote about the "Left Behind" series in July) to protest that their books do not "celebrate" the slaughter of non-Christians but simply present the painful reality of Scripture.
"We can't read it some other way just because it sounds exclusivistic and not currently politically correct," Mr. Jenkins said in an e-mail. "That's our crucible, an offensive and divisive message in an age of plurality and tolerance."
Silly me. I'd forgotten the passage in the Bible about how Jesus intends to roast everyone from the good Samaritan to Gandhi in everlasting fire, simply because they weren't born-again Christians.

Let me refresh your memory, Mr. Kristof:

• And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire. (Revelation 20:15 ESV)
• And they said, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household." (Acts 16:31 ESV)
• he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, (Titus 3:5 ESV)

It's clear that we are taught by Scripture that if you aren't in the book of Life, you will burn. Sorry if this offends anyones sensibilities, but it's true. And we don't get in because of the good stuff we do, we get in because of our relationship with God in Christ.

Kristof applauds evangelical social action, and our relief efforts throughout the world. Unfortunately, he misses the reason we do those things. They are not a means to an end -- we don't do them to score points with God, or to counteract the effects of all the bad stuff we've done. We do them out of a sense of service to God -- He has commanded us, as His children, to do these things. Point is, we become His children first, by faith in Christ, through the grace of God. Kristof, and liberals like him, put the cart before the horse: they put the good works before the faith (if they include faith at all). But the Bible says that without faith it is impossible to please God (Hebrews 11:6).

Kristof then brings up the repeated attempts at date setting -- the whole 88 Reasons thing, and the Millerites I've talked about before, and ties LaHaye and Jenkins in with them. This makes me really wonder if Kristof has bothered to read the books -- never has any attempt been made at setting a date for anything that happens in the books. No references to Presidential administrations (which I've seen in other books in the genre), etc. They are writing about what they think will happen eventually -- not in ten years.

THEN Kristof calls them on the amount of money they've made -- even though Jerry Jenkins admits to donating 20-40% of his income to charity, Kristof says it isn't enough. This is a typical liberal response -- criticize the wealthy because they've managed to do something well enough to make a lot of money by doing it. The very fact that they are rich means they are corrupt. When Nicholas Kristof donates 20-40% of his paycheck to charity, I'll take him seriously. Not before.

So what we have is an attempt to 1) make Christians ease up on the whole "The Way, the Truth, and the Life" thing (I've talked about that before, too), 2) ridicule Lehaye/Jenkins for claims they never make concerning the timing of the end of the world, and 3) indict wealthy people because they're wealthy. This isn't unique to Mr. Kristof -- this is standard operating procedure for the left. I'm not buying it.

There has been a lot of discussion in the Reformed neighborhood of the Christian blogosphere on the subject of free will, or the lack thereof. I'm writing my philosophy paper on an aspect of the free will/sovereignty discussion (which I'll talk more about later on, probably), so I figured I'd weigh in.

First, if you want to take a look at what has already been written, check out these links:

1. Jollyblogger on Free Will and Total Depravity (part of his series on TULIP)
2. Parableman on Calvinism and Free Will.
3. Pruit Communications, where Terry talks about his own Free Will Journey.
4. Rebecca Writes about Isaiah 10.
5. And Adrian Warnock promises us that There is No Such Thing as "Free Will."

The first thing I want to do is talk about the two definitions of free will. Most Arminians will advocate libertarian free will, which simply says that for every decision we make, we are always capable of doing the anything other than what we've done. For example -- this morning, I had eggs and toast for breakfast. Under libertarian free will, I could have just as easilly had steak and eggs, or poached eggs, or Corn Flakes. There is nothing that coerces us or forces us to do anything -- it's all up to us.

I see a couple of problems with this -- I don't know how to fix poached eggs, and my wife isn't home to fix them for me, so there's one option I'm not free to take. We have no steak, so there goes another option. We have Corn Flakes, but I like mine with milk, and we're out of milk (yes, it's grocery day!), so there goes that option. Doesn't sound like my will is very free, does it? Sounds like there are external factors that influence my decisions. Adrian mentions that even the laws of physics constrain our free will -- I can't climb to the top of my house and decide to fly, can I?

Most people don't believe in total, fatalistic determinism -- the idea that God has determined our every move, and that we are simly robots programmed to do what He tells us in every instance. Obviously, if we did that, God would take the heat for every evil act done on earth, because we're only robots performing according to our operating system that He designed and programmed. So there has to be another option.

Most Calvinists I know (and a LOT of people who don't consider themselves Calvinists) believe in compatibilistic free will. This holds that our will is free to the extent that we are given some choice, but not total choice. My breakfast decision was limited to the food on hand, and what I can cook. My college selection was based on what I could afford and who would let me in. I had the choice of several options for breakfast, and several options for college, but I was not free in the libertarian sense of the word. My free will had to be compatible with the influences on my life, both external and internal.

This sounds like determinism to a lot of people, especially once you factor God into the equation. An omnipotent God can manipulate things in our lives so that the circumstances and resources point us to only one option. I've been wanting eggs for a while now, and this morning was the opportunity that I had to fix them. The deck was stacked against me choosing anything else -- and that, some would say isn't a free choice. I would say that I was behaving in a manner that is compatible or consistant with my personality and situation.

There are some free acts that aren't possible in some situations -- that doesn't mean that we are any less free. That means that we do not have total control of our destinies: that, ultimately, we are slaves to something, whether that is our environment, our psycological makeup, or even God and His will. Our decisions are dependant on something, and that violates the definition of libertarian free will.

Coming soon in Part 2 -- how do we reconcile free will and divine sovereignty? Good question.

Immediately he made his disciples get into the boat and go before him to the other side, to Bethsaida, while he dismissed the crowd. And after he had taken leave of them, he went up on the mountain to pray. And when evening came, the boat was out on the sea, and he was alone on the land. And he saw that they were making headway painfully, for the wind was against them. And about the fourth watch of the night he came to them, walking on the sea. He meant to pass by them, but when they saw him walking on the sea they thought it was a ghost, and cried out, for they all saw him and were terrified. But immediately he spoke to them and said, "Take heart; it is I. Do not be afraid."And he got into the boat with them, and the wind ceased. And they were utterly astounded, for they did not understand about the loaves, but their hearts were hardened.
(Mark 6:45-52 ESV)

Jesus goes back on retreat. After this miracle, they all head back to where they came from, and He goes into the mountain to pray. I won't make the obvious application to personal quiet time/devotion here -- it's too obvious that if Jesus needed it, so do we. I think what happens afterwards is much more interesting.

While Jesus is off praying, the disciples apparently decide to do some fishing. This is sometime between 3 and 6 in the morning, but they're fishermen, so they know the best time to fish is in the early morning. They head out, and immediately get into trouble. They run into a headwind, and can't get back to shore, and they are panicking. I can just see Jesus sigh right now, and head out across the water to them.

This passage sounds like Jesus was just going to head right by them, but the parallel passage in Luke makes it clear that Jesus only seemed to be heading past them (Luke 24:28). The disciples have no clue who He is.

Sounds like us, doesn't it? We're in trouble, cry out to God for help, and don't recognize it when it comes. Reminds me of a joke I used to tell when I was younger:

A man living in Florida decided to ride out the hurricane that was coming. Sure enough, the floodwaters started to rise, and soon he had to run to the top floor to stay above the water. A police officer came by and told him he needed to evacuate, and offered him a spot in the boat he was in. "No," said the man, "I'm trusting God to save me, and I know He will." A half hour later, another boat comes by, and makes the same offer. Same response. Finally, the waters are so high that the man takes refuge on his roof. A police helicopter flies by, and once again the police offer the man a ride to safety. Same response.

Finally, the waters rise too high, and the man soon drowns. He arrives in Heaven, and is rather upset. "I trusted You!" he sayd to God. "I trusted You, and You left me to die!"

God said, "What are you talking about? I sent two boats and a helicopter, what do you want?"

Even though the disciples had seen what Jesus could do, in the miraculous feeding of 5,000 people, they still didn't know who He was, and really hadn't understood what they miracle meant. They lacked the faith to see that Jesus could provide them safety, and assurance, and security. They missed the point, and they didn't see Him as their shepherd. They were so fixed on their one idea of a conquering Messiah that they missed the servant Messiah that was prophecied as well.

The theme of this section seems to be that Christ supplies all our needs. Our problem comes in when our expectations are different from God's. He knows better than we do what we really need, and what we simply want. We need to recognize what God is providing for us, and be grateful.

Ok, I got the idea from this post at Reverend Mike's, and some of these are probably NOT original (I've heard this done so many different ways), but here we go:

• If you believe that Jesus fed 5,000 people with catfish and hushpuppies, you might be a Baptist.
• If you have never sung the third verse to any hymn in the hymnal, you might be a Baptist.
• If the first question you ask a pastoral candidate is, "Do you like chicken?" and question his salvation if he answers "No," you might be a Baptist.
• If you've ever collected an offering using Kentucky Fried Chicken buckets, you might be a Baptist.
• If you think that a Biblical benediction is seventeen verses of "Just As I Am," you might be a Baptist.
• If, when someone says "AMEN" during a sermon, you look around to see who the visitor is, you might be a Baptist.
• If your definition of "fellowship" involves fried chicken and sweet tea, you might be a Baptist.
• If you believe that the Marriage Supper of the Lamb will be potluck, and leave instructions in your will to be burried with a covered dish, you might be a Baptist.
• If you have a bumper sticker on your car that says, "In the event of Rapture, this car will be unmanned," you might be a Baptist.

Credit for some of these should probably go to Grif.net, though I'm really not sure which ones -- that's the one place I know I've seen a list like this before.

I need to define my terms first, because I'm using the word 'Christendom' in a different way than I usually do. I'm going to use Christendom to describe Western society in general, assuming (I think correctly) that much of Western culture, especially it's morality, is rooted in the Judeo-Christian tradition.

I started thinking about this topic on Thursday in my Intro to Philosophy class, as we discussed Nietzsche's The Madman and it's claim that God is dead. I'll start by letting the text speak for itself:

Have you not heard of that madman who lit a lantern in the bright morning hours, ran to the market place, and cried incessantly: "I seek God! I seek God!"---As many of those who did not believe in God were standing around just then, he provoked much laughter. Has he got lost? asked one. Did he lose his way like a child? asked another. Or is he hiding? Is he afraid of us? Has he gone on a voyage? emigrated?---Thus they yelled and laughed

The madman jumped into their midst and pierced them with his eyes. "Whither is God?" he cried; "I will tell you. We have killed him---you and I. All of us are his murderers. But how did we do this? How could we drink up the sea? Who gave us the sponge to wipe away the entire horizon? What were we doing when we unchained this earth from its sun? Whither is it moving now? Whither are we moving? Away from all suns? Are we not plunging continually? Backward, sideward, forward, in all directions? Is there still any up or down? Are we not straying, as through an infinite nothing? Do we not feel the breath of empty space? Has it not become colder? Is not night continually closing in on us? Do we not need to light lanterns in the morning? Do we hear nothing as yet of the noise of the gravediggers who are burying God? Do we smell nothing as yet of the divine decomposition? Gods, too, decompose. God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him.

"How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it? There has never been a greater deed; and whoever is born after us---for the sake of this deed he will belong to a higher history than all history hitherto."

Here the madman fell silent and looked again at his listeners; and they, too, were silent and stared at him in astonishment. At last he threw his lantern on the ground, and it broke into pieces and went out. "I have come too early," he said then; "my time is not yet. This tremendous event is still on its way, still wandering; it has not yet reached the ears of men. Lightning and thunder require time; the light of the stars requires time; deeds, though done, still require time to be seen and heard. This deed is still more distant from them than most distant stars---and yet they have done it themselves.

It has been related further that on the same day the madman forced his way into several churches and there struck up his requiem aeternam deo. Led out and called to account, he is said always to have replied nothing but: "What after all are these churches now if they are not the tombs and sepulchers of God?"

As of 2002, 85% of all Americans considered themselves to be Christians, according to the data at the Barna group. 87% of Americans say that they believe that God created the world. Only 69% believe that God is all-powerfule, all-knowing, etc. But clearly, there is a majority of people who claim to have some type of faith in God, most of them considering themselves Christian. But what kind of God do they really believe in?

• 54% believe that being good enough gets someone into heaven. For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. (Ephesians 2:8-9 ESV)
• 60% say that Satan is not a real being, but the personification of evil. And he said to them, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.(Luke 10:18 ESV)
• Only 20% have volunteered time to help out a church. Only 25% volunteer time to help a non-church-based nonprofit organization. And the King will answer them, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brothers, you did it to me.'(Matthew 25:40 ESV)

We aren't consistant. We pay lip service to God, and deny Him by the way we live our lives. We're like the people in Nietzsce's parable: we are shocked when someone actually comes out and says there is no God, or that He is dead, but we live so that people cannot see Him through us. We lament the fact that our society has no moral base, that in essence God is dead, but we ignore the fact that we are the ones who killed Him, through our apparant unbelief.

We get upset about the risque commercials airing before Monday Night Football. What do we expect from a fallen society? What do we expect, when we have by and large abandoned popular culture, choosing to live in our Christian ghettos -- listening to our Christian music, reading our Christian fiction, watching TV on our Christian satelite channels. We rarely engage anyone who is not a Christian, and when we do, we find we have nothing to say. We cannot relate to them at all, on any level.

We have bought into the lie that faith should have no impact on our lives outside of the church building. We've also bought into a false notion of what the Christian life really is. We've forgotten that living the Christian life is more than "giving Jesus a try." It's more than becoming Jesus' best friend. Jesus really has become our "homeboy" -- He's one of the gang, He fits in. He doesn't tell us to change our lives. He doesn't tell us what to believe -- matters of religion are personal things. He doesn't expect us to make an impact on society.

We need to rediscover a faith that impacts every aspect of our lives, a faith that makes it impossible to live contrary to our beliefs. We need to recover a belief in a Savior who commanded us to go and make disciples.

// posted by Warren @ 11/21/2004 05:43:00 PM

Yup -- by now I'm sure you've heard. The DaVinci Code is going to be made into a movie.

I have to wonder -- if Christians (myself included, I will admit) hadn't gotten so upset about this book, would anyone really have noticed it? I haven't read it, though I have been meaning to, but from what I've heard, the book isn't all that great. It's biggest selling point is that it gives "deep, dark secrets" about the Catholic Church. If we hadn't paid as much attention to it, the Catholic apologists out there would have taken it on with all the seriousness that they afford Jack Chick -- which is actually more than he deserves, and more than this book deserves.

I really think that this book would have had some moderate success without the "bad press" from Christian circles. After a while, people would have started talking about something else, and the world would have forgotten about the book -- untill the paperback came out.

Now, there are a couple more books planned, with the movie options surely being negotiated for them as well. I just hope they don't start with the anti-DaVinci movies.

Take a look at the poll over there on the right side of the page (those of you reading a syndicated feed will have to come by the site to see this poll, obviously). There really IS a reason that I'm asking -- I'm seriously thinking about setting up a View from the Pew radio station on Live365, and I want to make sure that people will listen to it. This will let me get the MP3 files off the drive at home, but still have them somewhere that I can get to them.

This is part of the upcoming upgrade to View From the Pew 2.0. Over the break from school (since I'm not taking a J-term this winter), I'm going to work on updating the blog's theme and incorporating it into a new site (right now, it will be a free site at bravenet.com, but it may soon get it's own domain, POP3 email, the works).

By the way -- I feel a little embarrassed. Some of you donated through PayPal, and I have yet to thank you. Some of the donations took place some time ago, so I REALLY am upset at myself. I have no excuse other than I missed reading the email that PayPal sends letting me know I got money. You WILL be getting a personal thank you this weekend, when I get home from school. But I want to publicly thank each of you for your donation!

I've only ever been to one Baptist state convention. I spent one day in Warner Robbins, GA at the Georgia convention, and was pretty much bored to tears. The conflict that everyone thought would happen didn't, so I spent most of the day wandering the exhibits and reading pamphlets.

So I wasn't expecting much yesterday when I went to the Kentucky Baptist Convention. Vote for the president, listen to the sermon, hook up with some people I know, that sort of thing.

I walked into controversy. In fact, if I didn't have a very important class this morning, I'd have gone back, and probably would have addressed the convention on one issue this morning.

Yesterday there was a proposal to study "how the KBC should relate to the Baptist World Alliance." A nine-member panel would be appointed to research the issue. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but we just DID that on the national level. The national convention has more money to sink into the study, and more resources, so why can't we simply review the data from their study and base our path on that?

Because a bunch of people in Kentucky don't like what the national study found. And I don't have a problem with disagreements -- unless you're the guy who sat behind me yesterday. He kept heckling people who were peaking against the proposal, yelling out "That's not true!!" -- but NEVER taking the mike and voicing his opinion. Truthfully, everyone's minds were pretty much made up on the issue before the discussion started, and the vote was narrowly opposed to the study. Individual churches who want to support the BWA can still do so -- that's the beauty of the Convention -- but churches who don't want to support them don't have to worry about their money going to the BWA

Another proposal (one that I was amazed even made it to the floor) was that we ammend the constitution of the state convention to allow "up to 25%" of the trustee board of state Baptist colleges to be NON-BAPTISTS. I have NO problem with people who aren't Baptists -- I am friends with good, conservative, theologically sound Presbyterians and Anglicans, with whom I agree to disagree on matters that are not essential to the faith (more on that in another post, maybe later today). But if the school is a Baptist school, shouldn't the people overseeing it be Baptist? The purpose of the proposed ammendment wasn't to give "greater diversity" -- it was to reward community members with large pocketbooks for donating to the school. State Baptist colleges are in bad shape anyway -- they are notorious breeding grounds for any number of heretical notions, from process theology to open theism and beyond. We need strong Baptist trustees who can take charge of our state colleges, and I'm hoping that we'll begin to see that in the next few years, especially in Kentucky. There is a reason that so many Southern Baptists send their kids to Liberty and Cedarville -- because they get a quality education AND orthodox theological training.

And this morning, the convention revisits the "pull our kids out of public schools" issue. By now, the discussion is over. I REALLY wanted to be there, but I know someone who feels the same way that I do -- and is a youth minister, so his words carry more clout than mine would -- and he was planning on being there.

All in all, an interesting experience. And next year should be even more interesting, I think, as both sides marshal their forces for a big showdown.

To enter is simple. First, you post should be of a Christian nature,
but this does not exclude posts that are political (or otherwise) in
nature from a Christian point of view. Secondly please send only one
post dated since the last Christian Carnival. Then, do the following:

email ChristWeb at

christweb at gmail.com

Please put Christian Carnival in the Subject

Provide the following:

Title of your Blog
URL of your Blog
Title of your post
URL linking to that post
Description of the post

Cut off date is Tuesday at midnight EST

World Magazine has it, but it was Jollyblogger who broke the news to me -- Jerry's decided that it's time for a reunion tour.

I was at Liberty when Jerry decided to retire the Moral Majority. I saw the revival that broke out on campus, just because we had a Chancellor who was involved, and was able to contribute spiritually to the university. It made a huge difference in a lot of lives.

And now, even though we've got the closest thing to an evangelical President that we've ever had, Jerry Falwell is gearing up for another try at influencing national politics, with the Faith and Values Coalition. He's turning over day to day operations at Liberty University to Jerry, Jr., and day to day at Thomas Road Baptist Church to Jonathan Falwell. Jerry, Jr. is a pretty good choice, with his legal background. I feel a little sorry for the folks at T Road, though -- looks like they won't get to pick their own pastor when Jerry fully retires from the pulpit. He still plans on preaching each Sunday, but he's handed the control of everything else over to his son.

I hope this turns out well. I really do. I hope that Liberty continues to be the school that it has become, and can improve without sacrificing the values that made the school what it is. I hope that the church grows, and continues to be a blessing in the community. I hope that Jerry will not forget that the church that God gave him to lead is his primary responsibility.

But I only expect to be disappointed. So the only hope I have left is that the Faith and Values Coalition will remain true to it's name, and not end up becoming the Christians for Republicans Coalition.

Now many saw them going and recognized them, and they ran there on foot from all the towns and got there ahead of them. When he went ashore he saw a great crowd, and he had compassion on them, because they were like sheep without a shepherd. And he began to teach them many things. And when it grew late, his disciples came to him and said, "This is a desolate place, and the hour is now late. Send them away to go into the surrounding countryside and villages and buy themselves something to eat." But he answered them, "You give them something to eat." And they said to him, "Shall we go and buy two hundred denarii worth of bread and give it to them to eat?" And he said to them, "How many loaves do you have? Go and see." And when they had found out, they said, "Five, and two fish." Then he commanded them all to sit down in groups on the green grass. So they sat down in groups, by hundreds and by fifties. And taking the five loaves and the two fish he looked up to heaven and said a blessing and broke the loaves and gave them to the disciples to set before the people. And he divided the two fish among them all. And they all ate and were satisfied. And they took up twelve baskets full of broken pieces and of the fish. And those who ate the loaves were five thousand men.
(Mark 6:33-44 ESV)

This is probably the most familiar parable of them all. Five thousand men (and who knows how many women and children) fed with a few loaves of bread, and a few fish. It's parallels are in Matthew 14:13-21, Luke 9:10-17, and John 6:1-14 -- one of the few miracles that are mentioned in all four Gospels. I think that should show us the importance of what happened here.

Something bigger happened than just a bunch of people pooling their lunches so that everyone could have enough to eat. This is Jesus making sure that the people who had followed Him had enough to meet their needs.

Most of the people hadn't left their houses planning on following Christ that day. They saw Him, and decided they wanted to hear what He had to say. He could have easilly decided that the crowd was too big to deal with, and gone back to where He and the disciples had been for their retreat. But He was moved with compassion on them, because they were "like sheep without a shepherd." They had no real leadership, no instruction, nobody to take care of their real needs, and they didn't even realize it. They were just wandering around, and they saw in Jesus someone who might be able to meet their needs, and take care of them. They didn't realize who He realy was, but they knew that they could count on Him to meet their needs.

And then the test came. After listening to this guy teach all day long, they got a little hungry. They hadn't planned on sitting in on his teaching -- they were out running errands, maybe shopping. It was late, and they had to get some food. Jesus could have turned them loose, sent them out to buy their dinner, but He was their shepherd. He was taking responsibility to meet their needs. And He did it in a way that helped show them all the kind of power He had.

How often do we have needs, and panic? How often does the car break down right when funds are at their lowest, and we have no clue how we're going to pay for it? And how often do we sit calmly back and say "God will handle it. He's in charge, not me."

As familiar as this passage is, I think we often forget the message. My God shall supply every need of yours according to His riches and glory in Christ Jesus.

You are a Gumby! You like to smash bricks and say
things that no-one can understand...

What Monty Python Sketch Character are you?
brought to you by Quizilla!

MY BRAIN HURTS!!!

Thanks to the Spanish Inquisition.

It's 7pm, I'm typing my paper. My mind is not itself.

So I take a break, and decide to hit the "Next Blog" button at the top of the page a few times, just to see what will happen. Maybe I'll find someone who I can add to the blogroll. Maybe I'll find someone intelligent. Maybe ...

But no. I find a bunch of angst-ridden teenagers writing bad poetry about the boy who broke up with them to date their best friend's neighbor's sister's cousin, and how could he DO that, and other such nonsense. So I decided to try it out myself. I'm going to write som blog poetry now -- pure stream of conscousness stuff. Maybe I can finally be a cool teenager -- Lord knows I wasn't 20 years ago, when I was IN high school.


I see my two feet
sneakerclad, tapping my toes.
Going nowhere, fast...

The computer glares
The cursor flashes insults
My prose, it is bad.

Melanchthon is dull
So much has been written
All is in German.

People pass by me
They stop, staring at foolishness.
Bad poems on my screen.

Wow. I feel cool again. That was just so cathartic. I think the haiku is an underrated form of verse, don't you? So structured -- it's a challenge to get your thoughts to fit the meter. People don't write that way anymore.

Ok. Break's over. Back to Melanchthon, and you all can go do something much more constructive.

Get something ready and submit it!! I'm rooting through all the drek I've posted in the past week to see if I have anything worthy.

This coming Wednesday is the next Christian Carnival, and will be
hosted at Digitus, Finger & Co. If you have a blog, this will be a
great way to get read, and possibly pick up readers in the process or
highlight your favorite post from the past week.

NOTICE: DUE TO AN OVERSIGHT AT PATRIOT PARADOX, NOT UNCOMMON IF YOU
KNOW ME, I FORGOT TO SWITCH THE DATES ON MY SITE. IF YOU HAVE SENT TO
CHRISTWEB THEN PLEASE RESEND TO NEIL. CHRISTWEB IS HOSTING NEXT WEEK,
THE 17th OF NOVEMBER! PLEASE EXCUSE MY BLUNDER! STEPHEN WILL SHOOT ME
NOW. :-)

To enter is simple. First, you post should be of a Christian nature,
but this does not exclude posts that are political (or otherwise) in
nature from a Christian point of view. Secondly please send only one
post dated since the last Christian Carnival. Then, do the following:

email Neil at

uchitel AT slappo.com

Provide the following:

Title of your Blog
URL of your Blog
Title of your post
URL linking to that post
Description of the post

Cut off date is Tuesday at Midnight EST

I'm hoping right back on this horse -- I think that our idea of Scripture is vital to the future of the Church, and I think there are a LOT of misunderstandings concerning the doctrine of sola Scriptura.

Of course, a lot of great information was available in the League of Reformed Bloggers carnival, Post Tenebras Lux. There is a wealth of information on the Net, too -- both good and bad. But I have to clarify this little issue.

Where does sola Scriptura stand on tradition? And specifically, how do we deal with this verse: "So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter." 2 Thes. 2:15 (ESV)

First, sola Scriptura does not ignore tradition. It does not mean that we ONLY accept what the Bible says, and avoid anything it doesn't talk about. I've said this before, but I still get people asking about it. Someone posted a comment at Jollyblogger, commenting on the carnival, that essentially was this verse and a rant about the Reformation. People still don't get it.

Tradition is important. But tradition does not trump Scripture. When Scripture does speak, we cannot follow a tradition that contradicts it. The verse from 2 Thessalonians teaches us that we need to listen to what we're taught, whether we read it or are taught it orally. That's all it says. But Paul teaches, just as clearly, that we are to test any teaching that we hear with the Word of God. That's what the Bereans did, when they encountered Paul's teaching -- and they saw that what he was saying was true. It didn't contradict Scripture.

Sola Scripture doesn't say anything about rejecting tradition. Anyone who has any knowledge of the Reformers knows that both Luther and Calvin quoted from the patristic writings. They didn't reject history, or historic teachings. They DID reject those teachings that they felt contradicted Scriptural teaching -- and that is what we must do today.

From the Dallas News:

Forty years ago, the moral values – against abortion, and for traditional marriage exclusively – that motivated one out of five Americans last week to vote for George W. Bush were so mainstream as to be unremarkable. Gay marriage was unthinkable. Regarding abortion, a top Washington politician wrote this in 1971: "Human life, even at its earliest stages, has a certain right which must be recognized – the right to be born, the right to love, the right to grow old."

The author of those words was not a Republican. It was Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts.

Head over to Jollyblogger for a great discussion on Bridging the Chasm.

This one seemed right on:

You Are a Religious Republican

You make up the conservative, Christian, dedicated core of the Republican Party. You believe it's important for religious people to stand up for their beliefs in politics. And for you, this means voting your conscience - which almost always means voting Republican. Your pet causes include the sanctity of life, school vouchers, and prayer in school.

(via Farther Steps)

And no blog would be complete without the obligatory Monty Python reference:

You are Tim the Enchanter! Sure you can blow up
small objects, but no-one really respects you.
But you'll have the last
laugh...MUAHAHAHAHAHAHA!


Which Monty Python & the Holy Grail Character are you REALLY?
brought to you by Quizilla
(via News from the Great Beyond)

The apostles returned to Jesus and told him all that they had done and taught. And he said to them, "Come away by yourselves to a desolate place and rest a while." For many were coming and going, and they had no leisure even to eat. And they went away in the boat to a desolate place by themselves.
(Mark 6:30-32 ESV)

Short passage today -- I hope to have the rest of the chapter up by the end of the week. The priority this week has to be the theology paper -- 12-15 pages due Friday, about the theological method of Philip Melanchthon.

And a more ironic passage I could not have used. After teh interlude where Mark tells us about what happened to John the Baptist, the disciples return from their teaching trip (verses 7-12). They tell Jesus about the things they did -- but we don't get to know. This is one of those places in teh Bible where I really wish we got more information -- what happened? Were they able to cast out demons? Were people receptive of them? Did anyone come back with them, to learn at the feet of Jesus? We don't know.

I figure that's for a good reason. The teaching that the disciples were doing didn't have the power of the resurrection behind it. They taught that the Kingdom of God was coming -- that Christ had arrived, and that He was going to establish His kingdom. Without the truth of the resurrection, though, that could have been misunderstood. We've seen examples already, and we see a great example in Acts, of people who expect Jesus to be the political Messiah they were expecting. That wasn't His goal -- He came to be the sacrifice for our sins. Without redemption, without the reconciliation between God and fallen man, the Kingdom of God cannot be established. Fallen mankind has no part of the Kingdom -- that is for the redeemed of the Lord.

I expect that there were people who became interested in Jesus, probably started paying more attention to His teachings. I wonder how many were still there after He was killed. That's probably the other reason we don't know about the results of this trip -- many were not true conversions. You've seen those if you've ever gone door-to-door on a Saturday morning.

The part of this passage that gets me the most is the last part. They've just finished some hard work -- their first, really, since they started following Christ. They're tired. They may be frustrated. So Jesus suggests a retreat.

If you've spent any time in Baptist churches, you know what a retreat is. You take a bunch of people, in the middle of summer (or fall, sometimes. I always went to the summer ones), go out to the middle of nowhere -- usually the middle of the woods, near a lake, on some property that the church owns. Bunch of cabins, a kitchen building, a chapel, and nature. Time to recharge -- physically and spiritually.

This is something that I think we tend to ignore. We're so busy doing God's work, we burn ourselves out. We end up being no good to anyone, and our other responsibilities (family, friends, etc.) tend to get ignored. We make the sacrifice -- and never even think that our loved ones never got a choice in the matter. They sacrifice, too. And sometimes, they don't like it.

We don't have to go out in the woods. All we need to do is take a time out, to take care of the other things God has given us.

I just read Kristof. And I agree with him.

This is tough to admit. And I don't really like the implications of what he has to say -- especially if the Democrats listen to him. He's basically callling the Dems to pay attention to the people that they just assumed would vote for them.

I'd like to see the Democrats become more than the ultra-left version of ultra-right Republicans. This election was painful -- mainly because for so many people, there wasn't an option. I am very impressed that so few people fell for the third-party candidates -- it show that the American people at least know that you have to have some kind of backing in Congress to make any impact.

What I'm hoping to see, in a couple years, is a third party who actually cares about Senate seats. A third party who wants to work in state politics. A third party that is as concerned about winning the governor's mansion as the White House. That would be a third party that is in it for the long haul. And it would be a third party that would have a credible chance at the White House in 2012 or 2016.

It might even be a third party that I could support. The Libertarians could do it; so could the Constitution Party, if they got a little more realistic in their foreign policy. The Green party could do it, though they will still end up skewing further left, just as the Connies would skew further right. A viable third part would make politics interesting again for a lot of people.

This is what I was trying to post. Thanks to Spare Change for posting a .joeg! 

Is this the America that YOU see?? 

This is the view that many people on the Left have since the election. Now look at this map (thanks to GetReligion -- stupid Hello won't post .gif files). That is a map of the actual election -- NOT by state, but by district. Soo ALL those red spots -- with little blue dots mingled in? THAT is what the nation looks like -- and those blue dots are carrying a LOT more clout than they deserve. They want to preserve democracy? That means rule by majority, folks -- and the red states (and districts) are the majority. Cope with it. Or cry in your beer. It really doesn't matter to me right now. But remember -- democracy works.

And yes, I know this is actually a representative democracy -- maybe a federal republic, as I've heard before. Point is -- the system has spoken. If you want to complain, get a time machine and whine to the founding fathers. Or get organized and try again in two years.

First, I'd like to thank those of you who joined me in a prayer for our nation and the election.

More importantly, I want to ask you to join me in a prayer of thanksgiving to the One who guided the results and reminded me once again that if I look to Him and not CNN I'll find the true answers.

Dear Heavenly Father,

Thank you for guiding our election.
Thank you for giving us a leader who lives his beliefs everyday.
Thank you for helping us learn to rely on You and Your Son.

Please continue to lead us in Your direction.

Let us come together as a nation, while following Your laws.
Let us love our adversaries, without accepting their wrongdoing.
Let us support our leaders, whether we voted for them or not, through prayer.

Lord, make me a good citizen and an even better child of the kingdom.
May I witness for you while standing on Your holy word.

In Jesus' name,
Amen

Gay marriage has been soundly defeated. It's clear from the results in the 11 states who were voting on the issue that the majority of Americans are opposed to recognizing same-sex marriages as legitimate.

3-1 margins in Kentucky, Georgia, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Arkansas. 3-2 margin in Ohio, Michigan. 6-1 in Mississippi. 2-1 in Montana, and Utah. Oregon was the only close vote, and the measure passed by 200,000 votes.

No matter what the lobbyists and action groups want you to think, this is an issue that Americans are pretty united on. Unfortunately, it's not going to go away -- even though it has been beaten. Too many liberal activists have latched onto this issue for the long haul for them to let go of it now.

HOW can we vote 62% to 38% to reject same-sex marriage, and affirm male-femal marriage, yet vote this closely for President? Don't you know what the guy you're voting for beleives in??

3,242,160 voted for the marriage ammendment.
2,010,876 voted against it.


2,794,346 people have voted for Bush.
2,658,125 people have voted for Kerry.

500,000 people think that their vote against gay marriage is consistant with voting for John Kerry -- who thinks that you need to keep your opinion about this to yourself, and has courted the gay lobby on this issue throughout the campaign.

I don't mind people voting their conscineces -- in fact, I firmly believe that is how we should vote. I WOULD like for people to be consistant with their voting. Maybe that's too much to ask.

And I KNOW I wasn't supposed to post on the election again. I'm sorry.

Call me a "Nervous Nelly." Call me a "woman of little faith." But I'm getting scared.

The thought of John Kerry and his unique wife in the White House makes my blood run cold. I did my part. I voted for Bush. I voted for a marriage amendment to the state constitution. I did what I could at the polls.

Now I'll do what I can on my knees. I ask, even beg, you to join me. Please pray for a conservative voice, a return to God. We must save this country. We must ask for God's grace. Thank you.

And this will be my only election-related post. Promise.

First off -- I WOULD have voted for Bush, had my voter registration not been totally messed up by someone in Ohio (probably a Democrat). I sent the thing, sent for the absentee ballot weeks ago, and heard nothing. Found out that my registration was never processed. Since I mailed it from Louisville, I don't even know that it got to Ohio -- something got majorly messed up here. Now I know better, but I'm still NOT happy.

Reason I wasn't already registered? The last election was shortly after we moved to Ohio. I had no clue about any of the people, or ballot issues, or anything. I wasn't an educated voter, and following my own advice to others, I didn't vote. I also didn't complain about the way things turned out two years ago.

Second -- I am taking the Post Election Peace Pledge.

After the election results are in, I promise to:
: Support the President, even if I didn't vote for him.
: Criticize the President, even if I did vote for him.
: Uphold standards of civilized discourse in blogs and in media while pushing both to be better.
: Unite as a nation, putting country over party, even as we work together to make America better.

Hat-tip to TTLB

Third -- CNN has Bush ahead 30-something to 3. A ten to one margin. The experts here at View from the Pew have decided to call this one for Bush -- a ten to one deficite? Not even the Red Sox came back from that far back!!

Fourth -- For the gullible among you all, the last item was supposed to be funny. Emphasis, I guess, on the supposed to be.

from Bryan at Spare Change. And since it's the final installment, I'll cut and paste it here.

Lord God,
The day has finally arrived...the culmination of this small but faithful group of prayer petitioners. Lord today we ask that your will be revealed...not necessarily in the outcome of the election, but in your will for this great nation, for this great people, represented by the leader chosen today.
Lord, I ask you that you give us the President we deserve, a man who is a reflection of who we are before you. I ask that you would allow us to be humble enough to look at our President elect, and in him, we would see ourselves from your eyes. Lord, I ask that this leader who truly represents us...maybe in our best moments, maybe in our worst moments, probably in all our moments, would then be empowered by you to rise above our limitations, by our predispositions, by our own limited estimation.
Lord, I pray for your grace and mercy upon the winning candidate and his family. I pray that you give this man wisdom beyond his years and his experience. Lord, I ask that you give him a double portion of patience, a full complement of your courage and conviction, and through the power of your Holy Spirit, an awareness of Your presence and pre-eminence over all matters under his jurisdiction.
Lord, I pray for the President-elect's protection. I pray that you would thwart any individual or terrorist organization who would attempt to take his life. I pray for his spouse and children, that they too would be protected and ever free from harm's way. Lord, I also ask for the spiritual protection of the President-elect. Such a person of great power and responsibility will be subject to tremendous temptations, as well as spiritual assault. I pray that your Spirit will lead our President elect to seek your face and seek protection in your sufficient grip. I pray that you will bind the enemy from this man, from his family, and from his staff.
Lord, I also ask that you bless and comfort the candidate who does not win today. I pray that your Spirit will encourage him and lead him to continue in a place of service that will bless many.
Father God, I pray for our nation...today could be filled with violence, controversy, danger, animosity...I pray for Your Spirit to rest heavily over this great land, that people would seek peace amidst our differences, and understand that even well-intentioned people can disagree civilly, for the sake of the nation. I pray that this election may serve as a tool to heal that which divides us, and that it would begin soon. I pray that our divisions over race, economics, social issues, and political issues would be reconciled by Your Holy Spirit, by the power of the blood of Jesus Christ.
Lord, I thank you for these forty days where we have been focused in prayer for you. I don't know if its changed our nation, but I know how your Spirit has changed me in this time. You have been so faithful to encourage me with Your Presence, to remind me of Your strength, provision, and sufficiency. You alone are Lord and You alone are God. You reign on High, and You ordain who will rise and fall as leaders of this Land. We confidently and thankfully trust You in all these matters, and we ask for the resources necessary that today, in whatever the outcome, that praise would indeed be on our lips, and joy would be in our hearts because You alone are King of Kings and Lord of Lords.
Father, grant us that which we need to be faithful witnesses to you in all the affairs of our life. Equip us to love and support our President-elect, and to follow him as he follows You. Lord, convict each of us that as this man struggles as he is sure to do from time to time, that before we would be hyper-criticial, we would intercede on his behalf before You.
Thank you again for hearing our prayer. And thank you Lord Jesus for taking these prayers to the throne of the Father on our behalf. Not because we deserve it, or because we are worth it, but because You are God and Your will is perfect and Your ways are graceful and merciful, we ask You today to show your favor upon us and bless America for Your name's sake.
In the Sufficient and Unmatched Power of the Christ Jesus we pray....
Amen.

Day 39 is at Spare Change.

I managed to forget a Reformation Day post. And it was at Bobby's Blog -- someone who I had just mentioned, and told everyone to go read.

So not ONLY did I goof, I goofed big. So this is Bobby's Post (since I promised). Go read this post, and leave him nice comments about it.

Day 37 is up at Avoiding Evil.
Day 38 is at Spare Change.

Everyone knows what today is -- Reformation Day. The day good little Christians go door to door, nailing tracts to the front of their neighbor's houses.

Ok, not really -- and I've just about run that joke to death this year -- but today is one of those pivotal moments in history. The Reformation has made an impact on every aspect of society -- not just religion.

I really don't have much new to add to the discussion. So I'm going to check out the old blogroll, and show you all the Ref. Day posts that everyone else has made today. You can find the theses at Phil Johnson's place.

• Matt Hall points out that Luther probably wasn't looking for a direct conflict with Rome -- he most likely wanted some dialog on the subject of the theses. He also recommends a couple of books on the Reformation for further reading.
• Tim at Challies Dot Com talks about the lack of awareness among many evangelical churches that today is Reformation Day -- or at least the lack of commemoration. I know that it wasn't mentioned at our church this morning, and there are probably a lot of non-Lutheran churches that pass by the day altogether. I agree with Tim -- this needs to change. We don't have to agree with all of Luther's theology to be thankful that he had the courage to stick with his convictions.
• Sundays at Rebecca Writes are neat anyway -- there's always a sermon and a hymn, but this week is special.
• Semicolon has A Mighty Fortress posted as well, and makes a great point about politics and Christians.

And y'know -- those are the only posts I found on it today -- even on the League of Reformed Bloggers list. Maybe Tim's right. If I missed yours, let me know, and I'll make up for it by giving you a post all to yourself.

Next time you hear about how tolerant the Left is, read this article.

And note -- this wasn't done by National Review, or The American Spectator. It was done by Slate -- not exactly a paragon of conservative reporting. This guy probably went out thinking he'd get a neat story about how conservatives mistreated him when he wore the Kerry/Edwards stuff.

I just appreciate the fact that he wrote the story anyway, since he essentially indicted his readership.

I feel like running through the 'roll this evening. So here we go!!

• Get Religion has a good summary of the whole ECUSA/neopaganism thing, including a few new developments. Fascinating stuff here.
• Matt Hall has a review of the documentary Super Size Me. I'm afraid to watch the thing, even though I don't eat much McDonalds food anymore. I AM worried, though, because my daughter loves their chicken nuggets.
• An oldie but a goodie -- Ian's Messy Desk brings us the King James Version Baseball Classic.
• Wink and Jeremy are debating the election at Parableman. Things are getting good.
• Spare Change links to an annoyingly addictive game. Gee, thanks!
• Eric Cartman sings Come Sail Away, and the Crusty Curmudgeon has it in all it's Real Audio glory.

More later. Hoping I'll get the Mark study for today done pretty soon.

The continuity is a bit messed up right now. I THINK that Songstress7 has it right at News from the Great Beyond, so go over there and get the straight scoop. OR you can go to Spare Change and see the official list. I'll post the next one, when I figure out what it is supposed to be.

That's what happend when you try to write a 15 page paper on middle knowledge and a 15 page paper on Philip Melanchthon at the same time.

And I know of one class I am DEFINATELY taking in the spring. Dr. Nettles and Dr. Haykin are teaching a class on the life and theology of Andrew Fuller. Thursday nights starting at 7:40 pm, at a Southern Baptist Seminary near ... well, you if you're in Louisville, KY.

This is my last on this topic, since I really haven't got a "dog in the fight". I don't want to sound like I'm bashing anyone -- I know several Anglicans, and have had nothing but good, helpful conversations with them -- I've even learned a few things. And you know, they were the ones who translated the KJB, so they can't be all bad ....

What I want to do here is to give everyone access to more information on this, so that they can find out the full story if they're interested.

The original liturgy can be found here. The Midwest Conservative Journal can be found here -- they have some good commentary and resources on the issue. One of the posters on PCCBoard is Anglican (he's the one I got all this info from, and is my source for all things Anglican!), and he posted an email on the subject in this thread.

My prayer is that this will show the Anglican church, and conservative Anglicans here in the US, that the ECUSA is not just wayward, but that it is apostate. My prayer is also that God will be glorified through this, and that people who may not have been aware of the state of things before will now see that they need to get themselves to one of the conservative Anglican churches that are cropping up throughout the US.

I also pray that God will keep those of us in other denominations in a proper spirit throughout this situation. The last thing we need is for a bunch of conservative Baptists or Presbyterians or just general evangelicals to pop up and start yelling "SEE!! THAT IS WHY YOU SHOULD BE IN OUR CHURCH!! WE'RE BETTER THAN THAT!!!". I know a lot of people who are grieved by this situation, and I am sure that God is not pleased at what is happening.

{edit}
Titusonenine has also got an extended discussion of this issue. Boy, there are more Anglican blogs than I thought there were!!

Taking a small break from writing my papers to see what's going on in the blogosphere, and figured I'd ramble a bit about a few things.

• If you have never participated in the Best of Me Symphony, you need to do it. I've gotten a big boost in readership from it -- and I didn't have to come up with anything new!
• People read this blog from all over the place -- including some places that worry me. The Department of Justice has hit my blog in the past few days -- I don't want to know why.
• A lot of Canadians read my blog, a couple of whom I know (as much as you can know someone by talking to them on the computer...)
• LOTS of college hits this time.
• Make sure you pay a visit to Bobby Griffith's Blog. He's purty smart, and stuff like that. lol I've "talked" to Bobby quite a bit at the PCCBoard forums. He's a member of the League of Reformed Bloggers, too -