Showing posts with label Link Tours. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Link Tours. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 05, 2010

Blog Tour:
Catch-up Part I

A style that I seemed to have settled into is that whenever I have a brief hiatus from blogging (or do not have much to say) I tend to start up again with posts that tour blogs I am interested in.

I had a mini-hiatus and I filled up my Google Reader with literally hundreds of posts that I had not read through. In a smaller group, I had some "starred items" that I had marked with the intent to perhaps blog on myself.

I went through and cleaned out my Reader on Sunday, and thought that I might highlight some posts that I think are interesting - with a strong emphasis on some series and/or topics that I found attractive but have not written on:

Read more!

Monday, October 19, 2009

Vox Day vs Luke:
Nosing into a Discussion

I have quoted The Irrational Atheist by Vox Day in three major posts:

I added Vox Popoli -- Vox Day's blog -- to my reading list and, lo and behold, ran into the 6th letter (3 from each side) in a dialogue between Day and Luke Muehlhauser at Common Sense Atheism. Apparently, Luke requested this dialogue and kicked it off with his first letter at his blog

Read more!

Monday, October 12, 2009

Blog Tour: 10/4 - 10/10

Wherein I look around the web - hopefully once a week - and draw some attention to things I see there that interest me.

If you want to know where I go, look at the links on the left of my blog under "Places I Frequent". From there, I will go places those places may point me. Typically, I will also list up to three of my favorite posts from the current Christian Carnival - and may go somewhere those blogs take me.

Sometimes they will be topically organized, and sometimes just in order of the links I visited. Enjoy:

Read more!

Sunday, October 04, 2009

Blog Tour: 9/27 - 10/3

Wherein I look around the web - hopefully once a week - and draw some attention to things I see there that interest me.

If you want to know where I go, look at the links on the left of my blog under "Places I Frequent". From there, I will go places those places may point me. Typically, I will also list up to three of my favorite posts from the current Christian Carnival - and may go somewhere those blogs take me.

Sometimes they will be topically organized, and sometimes just in order of the links I visited. Enjoy:

Read more!

Monday, September 28, 2009

Blog Tour: 9/20 - 9/26

Wherein I look around the web - hopefully once a week - and draw some attention to things I see there that interest me.

If you want to know where I go, look at the links on the left of my blog under "Places I Frequent". From there, I will go places those places may point me. Typically, I will also list up to three of my favorite posts from the current Christian Carnival - and may go somewhere those blogs take me.

Sometimes they will be topically organized, and sometimes just in order of the links I visited. Enjoy:

Read more!

Sunday, September 20, 2009

Blog Tour: 9/13 - 9/19

Wherein I look around the web - hopefully once a week - and draw some attention to things I see there that interest me.

If you want to know where I go, look at the links on the left of my blog under "Places I Frequent". From there, I will go places those places may point me. Typically, I will also list up to three of my favorite posts from the current Christian Carnival - and may go somewhere those blogs take me.

Sometimes they will be topically organized, and sometimes just in order of the links I visited. Enjoy:

Read more!

Monday, September 14, 2009

Blog Tour: 9/6 - 9/12

[Crossposted to Street Prophets]

Wherein I look around the web - hopefully once a week - and draw some attention to things I see there that interest me.

If you want to know where I go, look at the links on the left of my blog under "Places I Frequent". From there, I will go places those places may point me. Typically, I will also list up to three of my favorite posts from the current Christian Carnival - and may go somewhere those blogs take me.

Sometimes they will be topically organized, and sometimes just in order of the links I visited. Enjoy:

  • Christian Carnival posts:
    • Teresa at the New Mercy blog writes about a family breakup and also being in debt that made her feel embarrassed and unworthy.
      How do you go about cultivating a lifestyle of honesty when you are terribly embarrassed and even ashamed of yourself? I wasn't raised to tell people the truth about my problems or struggles. I wasn't familiar with letting people look into my personal growth or know about my issues. Also, I wasn't at all used to family breakup or creditors calling or choosing which bill to pay.
    • Is someone watching you? Actually, yes. To find out who and what to do about it, read the post entitled, "We're being watched" at the In Him We Live and Move and Have Our Being blog.
      So here we have two men from very different backgrounds – one practicing the Hindu faith throughout his life, the other a fallen-away Christian – both of whom object to Christianity on the basis of the behavior, actions, and appearance of Christians.
    • Tom of Thinking Christian reviews N.T. Wright's book, The Challenge of Jesus: Rediscovering Who Jesus Was and Is in his post, "The Resurrection of Jesus Christ (Part One)"
      Early Christianity was, he writes, a kingdom-of-God movement, a resurrection movement, and a Messianic movement. From our distance these seem commonplace assertions, and if we try we can easily imagine coming up with a set of religious fables to support such thinking. This is why Wright emphasizes the historical setting so strongly, though; for these ways of thinking, in the forms they appeared in early Christianity, were completely foreign to the culture in which Christianity arose.
  • At Sharper Iron, Dr. Kevin Bauder has started a series on Fundamentalism
    The last sustained history of fundamentalism to be published by a fundamentalist was David Beale's In Pursuit of Purity1. Nearly a generation has passed since Beale finished writing his book. During that time the landscape of fundamentalism has altered significantly.
    I read the first four posts, and it seems like a pretty insightful series on the philosophical, theological roots and current state of Fundamentalism [HT: Fundamentally Changed]


  • Last week, I mentioned that Iraq and Syria were at odds, with the President of Iraq calling for international investigation. This week Iraq's Presidency council criticizes Maliki over standoff with Syria
    The Iraqi presidency council called for "containing the situation with neighboring Syria and for cooperation between the two countries to resolve disputes through dialogue and diplomatic channels".A statement released after the council's meeting in Sulaymaniyah stressed the need to do what is in the best interest of both countries and to prevent "enemies" from using one country against the other.
  • Rick Moran at Rightwing Nuthouse thinks, along with Ezra Klein, that "The Baucus Reform Plan has Some Merit"
    Senate Finance chairman Max Baucus has labored long, hard - and in secret - to produce an 18 page summary of what Ezra Klein refers to as a “Not that bad health care bill.” The fact that I agree with Klein shouldn’t worry you. The irony is that he sees fault where I see merit and vice versa.

    That should make both liberals and conservative heads explode.
  • So, "Did Paul Invent Jesus' Deity?" Stand to Reason looks at a new book due to come out:
    Philip Pullman, author of the childrens book series His Dark Materials that arguably portray an atheistic worldview, will release a new book next year recycling an old argument that is contradicted by the majority and most recent scholarship. In a book that appears will be a mix of fiction and non-fiction, Pullman will argue that "St. Paul came up with the 'story' that Jesus had a divine link." He claims that "by the time the gospels were being written, Paul had already begun to transform the story of Jesus into something altogether new and extraordinary, and some of his version influenced what the gospel writers put in theirs." Jesus' divinity is a product of Paul's "fervid imagination."
  • At Street Prophets there is a diary about "How to Build an Atheist in Two Hours". For followers of Christ who seek to evangelize, this (and some of the diaries it links) should be a "how NOT to evangelize" primer - starting with the ambush of a 14 year old boy at a science camp in North Carolina.
    when a guy who’s name is "Scat" puts up a sign up sheet called "Rock and Roll, Funk and Soul: The history of the music we listen to" and specifically invites me to attend, it sounds like it’s going to be a good time. The warning I missed was how precise my invitation was and that I was given a unique responsibility that night:

    "Hey Joe! I’m holding a session tonight about music, man. And I saw that great collection of Rock T-shirts you have. Boy, those are really great. I could use them in my presentation. Would you mind bringing them along?"

    Well, that sounds friendly enough, and at age 14 I had not yet learned to be so suspicious of anyone who’s always that happy and energetic. So, like the clueless fool I was, I showed up looking forward to a great time about music history, and having some part in the story. Little did I know what my part was . . .
    His best comment, to me, was:
    What you should take away from this story, in my opinion, is that if the labels of "faithful", "Christians" – whatever stereotypical name we use to grossly oversimplify and identify one group is offensive to you then I’ve done my job. For the same reason "atheist", "secularists" is injurious to me when it’s used to hold me accountable for individual acts of others that I personally had no part it, I understand your distress. So if you’re tired and indignant of being shouldered with the burden of what "those" Christians do, which of course no Christian as you understand it should ever do, then you need to be talking to those Christians and tell them to cut it out.
    I only partially agree with the last part - it is only my responsibility when I can do so in love in a situation where we are under the same discipline/leadership. However, in posting this I am making it clear that if the reader thinks what the camp counselor did is OK - I think you really need to rethink your concept of personal evangelism.


  • Jan at A View from Her looks at "cows, cars, shoes, relationships":
    So it’s been awhile since we’ve had a frank discussion about sex, and today I find myself “in the mood” (pun intended). To be more specific, rather a discussion about the fine art of not having sex, if you’re a single disciple of Jesus, or just a woman of higher than average intelligence.
  • Heard about this?:
    The furor over President Obama's trillion-dollar restructuring of American health care has left his other trillion-dollar plan starved for attention. That's how much the federal balance sheet will expand over the next decade if Mr. Obama can convince Congress to approve his pending takeover of the student-loan market.

    The Obama plan calls for the U.S. Department of Education to move from its current 20% share of the student-loan origination market to 80% on July 1, 2010, when private lenders will be barred from making government-guaranteed loans. The remaining 20% of the market that is now completely private will likely shrink further as lenders try to comply with regulations Congress created last year. Starting next summer, taxpayers will have to put up roughly $100 billion per year to lend to students.
  • Read more!

    Monday, September 07, 2009

    Blog Tour: 8/30 - 9/5

    This re-initiates my old practice of looking around the web - hopefully once a week - and drawing some attention to things I see there that interest me.

    If you want to know where I go, look at the links on the left under "Places I Frequent". From there, I will go places those places may point me. Typically, I will also list three of my favorite posts from the current Christian Carnival - and may go somewhere those blogs take me.

    Sometimes they will be topically organized, and sometimes just in order of the links I visited. Enjoy:

  • Christian Carnival picks:
    • Shannon at The Minority Thinker examines why they are "Quitting Small Group". After having read it, I have to agree with these two statements:
      Over fifteen years, I have been part of almost a dozen small groups sponsored by three different churches; my husband has joined me in most of them. Never once have I developed a close friendship through one of these groups.
      and
      We are told to confess our sins to each other [I tore a group up doing this], to restore each other, to love each other, to encourage each other, and to serve together as the body of Christ. I have rarely – if ever – seen these things happen in a small group. And if that kind of fellowship isn’t taking place regularly, why do we keep trying the same methods and hoping for different results? It seems to me it’s time for a new approach.
    • Henry at Participatory Bible Study Blog responds to:
      … The problem is this: when one takes a close look at the Bible in its original context, there is no evidence that the Bible is such a historically-situated divine revelation, that it is somehow ontologically different than other texts from antiquity and should be privileged or treated in a special way. …
      with "Indentifying Define Revelation"
  • President Obama's address to school children: I created a category for this expecting to see a bit of stuff on it - but there really wasn't much:
    • Jim at Volokh Conspiracy took a look back at the news articles, etc. connected with President George H.W. Bush's 1991 Speech to Schools.
      On WESTLAW, I looked up other news stories about the speech. It was eported as 10 minutes in some reports and 12 minutes in others. It was carried live on CNN, PBS, and [the NBC] and Mutual radio [networks]. The Secretary of Education sent a letter urging schools to have their students watch, but I didn’t find any evidence of how many schools followed that recommendation. And most striking: Bush laid out goals — to increase the graduation rate, improve student competency and better prepare students for entering school — and said, "Let me know how you're doing. Write me a letter. I'm serious about this one. Write me a letter about ways you can help us achieve our goals." [Written text is here - and wasn't checked against the tapes]
    • John Piper weighed in with "I Hope My Daughter Hears the President’s Speech":
      I am stunned at the outcry against the President of the United States speaking to the youth of this nation about the importance of education.

      I am embarrassed by the governor of my home state saying, that the president’s plan to address them is “disruptive . . . uninvited . . . and number three . . . I don’t think he needs to force it upon the nation’s school children.”

      This speech seems, for me, to be an answer to a prayer that I have prayed for the president repeatedly . . .
  • Jason S at Fundamentally Changed looks at how extreme fundamentalism can be involved in "Transgressing By Traditions":
    Today I call upon all of my fundamentalist brethren to honestly take the time to examine their doctrines and practices and see how they measure up to God’s Word, the five sola’s, and the historic fundamentals. If they don’t fit that, they must be discarded, no matter how old, precious, and dear they are to us.
  • Iraq the Model this week is focusing on the crisis raised by Syria's apparent complicity in the August 19th bombing which killed 95 people and wounded 600. One of the stories began
    Iraq continues to insist on internationalizing the crisis with Syria, which began after Iraq demanded that Syria hands over senior Ba’ath Party members. Iraq now plans to persuade the international community to form an international criminal court, similar to the one investigating the assassination of the late Lebanese premier Rafik Hariri. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki stressed at a meeting with the Turkish FM that Iraq “will move forward to demand that the UN forms an international tribunal to prosecute those who committed ugly crimes that target Iraq’s stability and people and killed many innocent lives”.
  • Scot McKnight at Jesus Creed points to a book by
    David Bentley Hart, a historian of ideas, Atheist Delusions: The Christian Revolution and Its Fashionable Enemies , has been our guide into some of the philosophical and historical issues at work among the new atheists like Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens. One of the implicit and sometimes explicit claims is that we are enlightened and that
    the secular state is safer than a religious-shaped state. To which Hart makes this statement, and he expresses the growing body of literature that both denies the myth of secularization (that all things are becoming more secular) and reveals the profound mischief of the secular state:
    "We live now in the wake of the most monstrously violent century in human history, during which the secular state (on both the political right and the political left), freed from the authority of religion, showed itself willing to kill on an unprecedented scale and with an ease of conscience worse than merely depraved. If ever an age deserved to be thought an age of darkness, it is surely ours. One might almost be tempted to conclude that secular government is the one form of government that has shown itself too violent, capricious, and unprincipled to be trusted" (106)
  • Jeremy at Parableman points to "Obama's Widely-Unpublicized Backtrack on Stem Cells" - belatedly for sure because it occurred a while back:
    2009 -- March 9th: President Obama rescinds Bush’s August 9, 2001 EO with his own EO entitled, “Removing Barriers To Responsible Scientific Research Involving Human Stem Cells.” The revocation of Bush’s EO is heralded as “lifting the ban on federal funding for promising embryonic stem cell research (ESCR).” (this is the event found in the video offered above)

    This EO simultaneously revokes Bush EO # 13435 which has provided federal funding of successful IPSC research. This aspect of the order is not mentioned at the press conference.

    2009 -- March 11th: President Obama signs and renews the Dickey-Wicker Amendment, which continues the ban on federal funding for ESCR that Obama claims to have lifted 2 days earlier. No announcement is made and no press conference is called.
    Notice that now not only is there no federal funding of ESCR - President Obama removed President Bush's mandate of federal funding for IPSC research as well. Incidentally, Jeremy did what anyone should really do when confronted by such a reported contradiction between stated positions of politicians and their actual actions:
    When I first read this, I immediately wanted to find something to verify it. It was incredibly difficult to find an actual news story on it, since the mainstream media either suppressed it or never got the information on it. The one news story I could find was from a partisan organization, but it does give chapter and verse for where to find the language in the bill that does indeed do exactly what the story says it does. It's in Title V, section 509 of the Omnibus spending bill (page 128 of this PDF; it appears in full here). It repeats verbatim exactly the section that since 1996 has appeared in every such spending bill under President Clinton and President Bush.
  • Rick at Rightwing Nuthouse as been writing a whole series of articles about conservative reform - three in the last week. All of them are, to me, important for both folks on the right and the left to read.


  • Orin at Volokh Conspiracy looks at "al-Kidd v. Ashcroft: Is Pretextual Use of the Material Witness Statute Unconstitutional?":
    The Ninth Circuit handed down a fascinating and important case on preventive detention on Friday, and one that I suspect added a new case to the Supreme Court's docket next year: al-Kidd v. Ashcroft. The basic holding of the opinion is that the post-9/11 practice of using the material witness statute to detain suspected terrorists is not only unconstitutional, but clearly unconstitutional, and that former AG Ashcroft can be personally sued for his role in it. The majority opinion was written by Judge Milan Smith and joined by Judge Thompson; Judge Bea wrote a partial concurrence and partial dissent.

    There's a lot of coverage of the case in newspapers and around the web, but nothing that really delves into the legal questions. That's understandable, as the opinions in the case fill about 100 pages. But in this post, I wanted to delve into the legal questions and see if the court's opinion holds up to scrutiny.
    . . .
    Fortunately, this case is perfect for Supreme Court review: If the en banc Ninth Circuit passes on it, this case will give the Supreme Court an ideal opportunity to evaluate the very important question of how the Fourth Amendment applies to preventive detention.
  • Read more!

    Wednesday, March 26, 2008

    Touring the Net

    Here is my (sorta) weekly tour of the internet - and some things that struck me as interesting:

  • Christian Carnival CCXVII (217) is up (or soon will be) on the other side of the Cascade range from me in eastern Oregon at Diary of 1. The three that caught my attention this week:
    1. "Can an Atheist be a good Person". Starving Econ Student researched what atheists mean by "good" in that question, found a couple of examples
      I googled around and saw two atheist answers:
      1. A person who does more good deeds than bad deeds
      2. A person who has empathy and compassion towards others.
      and then he addressed those well.


    2. Translation does some funny things. "Do You Love Jesus?" - well there are some different words for "love" in scripture; and Chad examines the use of two of them in the same passage of scripture:
      John 21:15 Then when they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these do?” He replied, “Yes, Lord, you know I love you.” Jesus told him, “Feed my lambs.” 16 Jesus said a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He replied, “Yes, Lord, you know I love you.” Jesus told him, “Shepherd my sheep.” 17 Jesus said a third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was distressed that Jesus asked him a third time, “Do you love me?” and said, “Lord, you know everything. You know that I love you.” Jesus replied, “Feed my sheep. -- NET
      Read the notes to the NET Bible text - those translators disagree - but I am not sure what I think. How about you?


    3. David at Boomer in the Pew talks about "Growing Up as a Disciple of Jesus Christ":
      Here was our opening question:

      Are you a sinner working on your salvation or are you a child of God (a disciple of Jesus) working on your sin? Talk amongst yourselves!
      and goes on to talk about the concepts of justification, sanctification, and glorification based on passages from Romans and 1 Corinthians


  • At Stand to Reason:
    • As an apologist, I get to deal with the "shellfish" and "mixed fabric" questions with regularity. Here is a great answer to "Why Is It Okay to Wear Mixed Fibers?":
      To believe the Old Testament Law literally is to believe that this was the covenant God made with the ancient nation of Israel--a set of instructions for running their nation. To believe the New Testament literally along with the Old is to believe that when we were joined to Christ, we died with Him and were raised with Him, causing us to be released from the Law.
    • Melinda points to a new book Why We're Not Emergent (by Two Guys Who Should Be) :
      They explain why objective, propositional Truth (not just lower-case t truth) can be taught and preached and still communicate with Gen-Xers. Both speak from their practical ministry experience.
    Last week I pointed to Scot McKnight's multi-part review of The Case for Civility by Os Guinness. This week had:
    • "Civility 4" which
      could be called a “civil screed” against the Religious Right. It is not too harsh; it never falls for the uncivil, but the chp univocally calls the RR to the bar for a civil warning.
    • and "Civility 5":
      If Os Guinness, in his attempt to call the nation to public civility, can call the Religious Right to task for its rhetoric, he can do the same to the Left . . . “We are closer,” Guinness states, “to the wild atheism of Madalyn Murray O’Hair, back to barnyard debating, with ungrounded assertions, irresponsible accusations, ad hominem arguments, and reasoning that repeatedly slumps into ranting”
  • Sarah at Intellectuelle in their "Apologetics 101" series talks about "Faith vs. Values?:
    It's unfortunate that he has come to think of the Bible this way--as merely a handbook for morality. Do unto others should not be approached independently of no one comes to the Father except through me. But is he all that different from many Christians who regard the moral propositions of Scripture above the saving power of the gospel. Perhaps we could helpfully understand the gospel call as one of many moral appeals, yet is the one that lacks political correctness.
    It is also the one theologically conservative Christians can ignore as they preach morality to non-Christians instead of bringing people to salvation in Christ.


  • Joe Carter's "Thirty-three Things (v.55)" series always has interesting stuff. Some highlights this week:
    • "Designed for Sex", by J. Budziszewski:
      I said that we’re not designed for hooking up, that we’re designed for our bodies and hearts to work together. We human beings really do have a design, and I mean that literally—not just a biological design, but an emotional, intellectual, and spiritual design. The human design is the meaning of the ancient expression “human nature.” . . .
    • An attack ad on Thomas Jefferson by the "Re-elect John Adams Committee":
    • D.A. Carson, as quoted by Mark Driscoll in The Supremacy of Christ in a Postmodern World:
      Paul refuses to circumcise Titus, even when it was demanded by many in the Jerusalem crowd, not because it didn’t matter to them, but because it mattered so much that if he acquiesced, he would have been giving the impression that faith in Jesus is not enough for salvation: one has to become a Jew first, before one can become a Christian. That would jeopardize the exclusive sufficiency of Jesus.

      To create a contemporary analogy: If I’m called to preach the gospel among a lot of people who are cultural teetotalers, I’ll give up alcohol for the sake of the gospel. But if they start saying, “You cannot be a Christian and drink alcohol,” I’ll reply, “Pass the port” or “I’ll think I’ll have a glass of Beaujolais with my meal.” Paul is flexible and therefore prepared to circumcise Timothy when the exclusive sufficiency of Christ is not at stake and when a little cultural accommodation will advance the gospel; he is rigidly inflexible and therefore refuses to circumcise Titus when people are saying that Gentiles must be circumcised and become Jews to accept the Jewish Messiah.
  • Jan at The View From Her is one of my favorite bloggers. She is an Evangelical woman who simply writes about some neat things. This week, besides saying nice things about McLaren's Generous Orthodoxy - she adds something to the complementarian vs. egalitarian discussion of men and women's roles in the Body of Christ. She reviews Saving Women From the Church: How Jesus Mends a Divide where she picks the story of the Samaritan woman at the well out to discuss.


  • WorldMagBlog had some interesting stuff:
    • First, they have carved out a respectful community of differing opinions - and so their voting on the community's favorite movies is interesting. They have both top 5 category rankings and a top 25 overall. The top five overall:
      1. Lord of the Rings Trilogy
      2. The Princess Bride
      3. The Sound of Music
      4. Indiana Jones films
      5. The Incredibles
    • "Pronounced dead, man takes ‘miraculous’ turn":
      Just before Thanksgiving, the 21-year-old was pronounced brain-dead following an ATV accident. As family members gathered to say good-bye before his organs were harvested, Dunlap’s grandmother, Naomi, began praying for “a miracle”–and that’s just what she got.
    Jeremy Pierce at Parableman:
    • pointed to a piece written by Kevin Drum at Washington Monthly:
      for now I just want to make one comment: the current attempts to tar Hillary as a racist have gone way, way over the top. before the South Carolina primary, the Clinton campaign and its surrogates really did seem to be making a few too many racially charged comments for it to be just a coincidence (though even then some of the accusations were bogus), but after South Carolina it pretty much stopped. I can't say whether it stopped for reasons of politics or reasons of principle, but it stopped.

      But the accusations of racism haven't. They've just gotten more ridiculous.
    • and deepened the discussion about "Racism Charges and the Clinton Campaign" as well:
      I had to take interest in the first two comments [to Kevin's piece] mentioning Geraldine Ferraro, who didn't come up in the post. What interested me most about their appearance is the assumption that that's a genuine case of racism that they must be taking to undermine his whole argument. First of all, if it's genuine racism that doesn't undermine his argument. His point is that many of the accusations of racism are going way too far. One case that is racism doesn't undermine that claim.

      Second, I don't think it's fair to describe that as racist.
    Enjoy

    Read more!

    Wednesday, March 19, 2008

    Touring the Net

    What did I find interesting in my normal haunts this week?

  • "Christian Carnival CCXVI (216)" is up at Crossroads: Where Faith and Inquiry Meet.


  • Different views on Obama's "Race in America" speech:
    • Rick Moran at Rightwing Nut House with "Rethinking 'The Speech'":
      Take an issue that Obama did not specifically confront yesterday. In a 2003 sermon, Wright claimed, “The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color.”

      This accusation does not make Wright, as Obama would have it, an “occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy.” It makes Wright a dangerous man. He has casually accused America of one of the most monstrous crimes in history, perpetrated by a conspiracy of medical Mengeles. If Wright believes what he said, he should urge the overthrow of the U.S. government, which he views as guilty of unspeakable evil. If I believed Wright were correct, I would join him in that cause . . . The remarks in question were not “controversial” which implies that there is room for disagreement contained in Wright’s arguments. Only a loon believes the US government created the AIDS virus to kill Black people.
    • WorldMagBlog looks at the responses/reactions to Wright's statements in "Blacks’ dilemma with Wright and wrong":
      In a Rasmussen poll released Monday, 29 percent of blacks said Wright’s comments “made them more likely to support Obama.” . . . Slate posted a MediaCurves.com survey where respondents’ reactions were charted in real time as they watched snippets of Wright’s inflammatory sermons. When sorted into different groups, respondents all reacted negatively in varying degrees — except for blacks, whose responses hovered around at least 20 percent positive (sometimes as high as 60 percent), even after the reverend said, “God damn America.”
      and, again, the HIV comment is mentioned.
  • Scot McKnight examines conservative Evangelicalism and post-conservative Evangelicalism in a series titled "Reforming"


  • Letitia at Intellecuelle responds to this inquiry
    "Christians always say that it's important to follow the 10 Commandments! But you don't observe the Sabbath. Sabbath is from Friday night to Saturday night. You still think 'Do not murder' is nonnegotiable, don't you? Jesus never told anyone that they could change the day of Sabbath. He never did. Paul never did. Then why don't you follow the fourth commandment? Why don't you eat kosher?"
    with "Christianity is Incomprehensible"


  • Edward C. Green and Allison Herling Ruark
    Green is the director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project at the Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, where Ruark is a research fellow.
    write "AIDS and the Churches: Getting the Story Right" at First Things
    The list of countries that have seen both changes in sexual behaviors and declining HIV prevalence is growing and now includes Uganda, Kenya, Haiti, Zimbabwe, Thailand, and Cambodia, as well as urban areas of Ivory Coast, Ethiopia, Zambia, and Malawi. Many countries that have not seen declines in HIV have seen increases in condom use, but in every country worldwide in which HIV has declined there have been increases in levels of faithfulness and usually abstinence as well.
    [HT: WorldMagBlog]


  • Rick Moran tries to come to grips with "Is Capitalism and the Conservative Rationale For it Dead". He admits his ignorance of economics, but follows are very good article in trying to come to grips with the government bailout of the financial markets.
    Rewarding stupidity or ignorance is not the way of capitalism. In a perfect capitalistic society, those who make their own bed should lie in it – even if it means a company goes belly up or people have their houses foreclosed on.

    But what kind of capitalistic society would allow a multi-gazillion dollar corporation who may have overextended itself because its risk assessors got it wrong, collapse and take the entire financial system with it?
  • A few people reported on this story in the Times Online: "Royal college warns abortions can lead to mental illness".
    The Royal College of Psychiatrists recommends updating abortion information leaflets to include details of the risks of depression. “Consent cannot be informed without the provision of adequate and appropriate information,” it says.
  • Joe Carter at Evangelical Outpost points out Cracked's "7 Insane Conspiracies That Actually Happened"
    People love a good conspiracy theory. The JFK assassination plot, aliens crash landing at Roswell, the 9/11 truth movement and charges of government surveillance are all an indelible part of our pop culture landscape and are by and large, total bullshit.

    So where does your average conspiracy buff go to learn about shadowy plots that aren't pure tinfoil hattery?

    Look no further

  • Iraq at Five Years: Rick Moran with "Iraq 5 Years Gone":
    There’s no other way to say it except Bush blew it. And his incomprehensible decision not to change strategy sooner while sticking with a secretary of defense whose lies about how well things were going in Iraq echoed the worst of what the government was telling the American people during the Viet Nam war was a monumental error in judgment.
  • Read more!

    Wednesday, March 12, 2008

    Touring the Net

    I am not going to call this a "weekly" tour because I haven't been too good about doing it weekly.

    • First, the 215th Christian Carnival is up at Fish and Cans. A sample of three posts:

      • A fellow Oregonian posts "My Testimony" as a meme. My contribution starts here. Go look at her questions, answer at your blog, and link in her comments.


      • Politicians say some interesting things about scripture. Jeremy Pierce at Parableman looks at a recent comment by Barack Obama:
        I want to delve a little bit into the contrast he draws between the Sermon on the Mount and Romans 1. The gist of his statement is (1) the Sermon on the Mount is more central to Christian faith than an "obscure" passage in Romans, and (2) the Sermon on the Mount should influence our attitudes toward civil unions in some positive way.
        The conversation in the comments between two of the "parablemen" is a really good launch for this discussion.


      • Speaking of that obscure passage in Romans, Chris at The Bible Study Podcast begins a podcast series on Romans:
        This is the introductory episode for a new series studying the book of Romans. This episode will provide an overview of why we will be studying the book of Roman. It also starts to look at the introduction to this letter. Romans is the only one of Paul’s letters written to a church that he has not previously preached to. Because it is written to a new audience it is the most complete of the New Testament letters theologically.
    • Another meme caught by eye at Parableman: "Bible Meme". I am putting this on my list to do - and you can consider yourself tagged if you like (but since I haven't yet (and may never) done it - my tag doesn't really count since I am not yet "it")


    • Joe at Evangelical Outpost looks at "Prostitution and the Pollution of Moral Ecology":
      The news of New York Governor Eliot Spitzer's dalliances with high-priced prostitutes fills me with sadness, regret, and dread. Sadness over the Governor's shaming his family in such a public way, regret at having to listen to the smirking schadenfreude of his political enemies, and dread that we'll have to suffer the tedious and inevitable articles and blog posts asking, "What's the problem with prostitution?"
    • Bonnie at Intellectuelle examines "The Exclusive Nature of Religious Pluralism":
      To look at RP [religious pluralism] more closely, one has to admit that it cannot really exist because religious pluralism cannot embrace historic Christianity, it rejects it. Historic Christianity teaches that it is only through faith in Jesus can anyone be saved, and RP rejects this claim. Therefore, all roads do not lead to God, rather any road other than historic Christianity leads to God.
    • Scot at The Jesus Creed has a series on Os Guinness' The Case for Civility. See "Civility 1" (it has reached "Civility 3")
      Some of my finest moments of exhilaration in study have emerged out of visions for what public discourse has been and could be. But we are presently mired, largely in the wake of America’s culture wars, in bombastic and apocalyptic ruts. We have Bill O’Reilly and Rush Limbaugh and Anne Coulter and Sean Hannity and Michael Moore and Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens, and just naming them embarrasses public discourse. I despise TV news talk shows where folks talk over one another.
    • Two folks pointed to a new CDC report that 1 out of 4 teenage girls have a sexually transmitted disease - with two diametrically opposed conclusions:

      • Rain at Street Prophets believes this shows a lack of eduction of our children - particularly because of "abstinence only" sex education:
        My sister and I discussed this briefly this morning and she made the point that teenagers are not stupid. They need information so that they can protect themselves – and abstinence only programs of sex education are likely to blame for some – if not a lot -- of this. Add to this the fact that health care is not easily available to many American families and the problem is compounded.
      • Melinda at the Stand to Reason Blog points out the obvious:
        Some people scoff that "abstinence doesn't work." Yet, I guarantee you that all of the girls who practice abstinence are in the disease-free group. Abstinence works every time it's tried. No one said it was easy, only that it is right and it works. More than 3 millions girls lives are devastated because they bought the cultural lie perpetuated by the sexual revolution.
      My 14 year old daughter's response: her classmates are NOT ignorant that unprotected sex can cause pregnancy or STD's - and they can be very stupid when it comes to sex. She proceeded to tell me some horror stories she has overheard at school which I will not repeat here.

      We are failing our children - but the failure is in the lack of moral and ethical grounding about sex - both culturely and in our families; and not because they lack information about the negative outcomes of sex: they know them and ignore them in the moment.

      • Should sex education by "abstinence only"? No.

      • Should it be morality and ethics free? No - it needs to include abstinence (my daughter's health classes do not).

      • Can our schools handle the ethics and moral education necessary? No.

      Parents: teach your children well. [Incidentally, for anyone who says my daughter's opinion is anecdotal - she is an expert on everything: just ask her :-)


    • Jan at The View from Her has something to say "Re: The Apologists":
      I have two observations that cause me to re-think apologetics as a positional framework for faith. First, the desire to be "right" can sometimes get tangled up in the lust for power that goes all the way back to the Garden. Armed with all the "right answers" we are ready for battle, to attack and demolish another's arguments so we can conquer them with The Truth. Do we really think adversarial war metaphors will help us win anyone to Christ? Really? I remember hiking in the mountains, and crossing a stream from rock to rock. A friend stretched out his hand to help me make a particularly slippery jump. This is a better metaphor, I think - helping people cross over to faith from rock to rock, and extending well-thought-out answers to help them over the places where they may have the most fear.
      This is primarily about folks thinking Anne Rice the artist should adhere to reality in her Christ the Lord series


    • In the "you cannot make this stuff up" department, Save the Humans [HT: The Volokh Conspiracy] reports [please tell me this is a spoof]:
      In a surprising turn of events, NY Governor Eliot Spitzer has filed a lawsuit against “Kristen”, a prostitute for the Emperor’s Club prostitution ring. Spitzer’s complaint alleges that “Kristen’s” refusal to allow him to sleep with her bareback, while allegedly knowing of his sexual addiction, constituted unfair exploitation of an ADA-protected disability.
      There . are . no . words.


    • Finally, back to those schools teaching sexual morals and ethics: WorldMagBlog reports on a school in Illinois that assigned Angels in America: A Gay Fantasia on National Themes as required reading:
      "The book is replete with profanity, overt racism through multiple uses of the N-word, an explicit description of a sex act involving Mother Theresa and some of the most graphic, vile and vivid depictions of homosexual anal sodomy every put in print." -- Concerned Women for America
      Lynn at WorldMagBlog challenges folks to google this if they think it "case of straight-laced Christian schoolmarms with their knickers in knots." She asks the question I would ask:
      But can not even our gay and lesbian friends on this blog agree that it is not appropriate to assign sexually graphic/pornographic literature to high school students? And, if a teacher is going to assign gay-themed literature, aren’t there more age-appropriate, less sexualized, polarizing choices? Gay activists are constantly arguing that the gay lifestyle isn’t just about sex. Why then assign Angels in America and reinforce the opposite opinion?
    Enjoy.

    Read more!

    Tuesday, May 15, 2007

    Weekly Tour: 5/15/07

    Ah, the problems of a blogger. I haven't been making enough money; so I have had to take a second job. Also, my DSL got turned off (that money thing again) - so I am surfing on dial-up. However, there are many things I want to write about - and I need to get started. So, I will do a tour.

    The Christian Carnival

    The latest Christian Carnival is up (and the next one is forming) - go to Light Along the Journey and check it out. Three posts that struck me from this Carnival were:
    • As the parent of a thirteen-year old daughter, how to get her to view sex responsibly is important to me - and to Jan. Read The View from Her "about not having sex".


    • At Street Prophets I got into a short conversation about prayer inspired by a press release by an atheist organization
      an act that has been scientifically proven to be ineffective . . . "We know that prayer does not work--but medical science does." . . . we want to let America know that there are millions of us who know that praying is nothing more than talking to yourself. So on that day, we atheists will be engaging in action that we can prove scientifically has real-life impact on our fellow citizens . . . we hope will point out that there are alternatives to silently beseeching a deity to perform miracles.
      My comment was that it would help if the folks writing the press release knew what prayer was actually for. I was asked what I thought it was for, and you can read my answer here. However, for what I think is a really good answer read Henry's "Praying, Being Heard, and Not Getting It" where he cites a really famous example of prayer not answered:
      But the text [Hebrews 5:7-10 ] explicitly says that Jesus was heard. And there is what’s hard for us to get hold of. Praying is not about getting stuff. Praying is about our communion with God. That’s why all these scientific tests about prayer and healing largely miss the mark. They’re interesting, but they can’t test prayer because prayer is not a means of getting things.

      What if the prayer of Jesus was counted in a scientific test? It would certainly go into the “failed” column. He didn’t get what he asked for. And yet he was heard, and what actually happened was better–in the end–than what he had requested. It happens that way because there’s a lot more knowledge on God’s end of the prayer than on mine.
    • Going along with that prayer post, is Bryan on "Prosperity Theology"
      To pastors who tell their flock that God desires that all of them be rich enough to have their own jets what do they say to verses where Christ tells a rich man to sell all his positions in order to follow Him? Instead of promising us wealth and fame, Christ says that we will be hated and that we will suffer; but we are storing up treasures in Heaven. Our Father will provide for us, but that does not necessarily mean that we will be rich in things; rather when we truly depend on God we will be rich spiritually.
      He calls it "old and pernicious" heresy, and I think that is right.

    Parental Notification

    Parental notification is a big issue. I think, as a parent, that I should be notified if my child is going to have an operation - in this case an abortion. As someone who believes in parental notification, I realize that it may have a chilling effect on a scared young girl's actions when she discovers she is pregnant. I am sorry for that; and on principle I have to accept whatever bad outcomes come from what I believe.

    Planned Parenthood has the opposite problem. They believe, on principle, that a pregnant girl is by definition now a responsible party for their own health issues; and wish to keep that girl's decisions private to that girl: a woman's (or girl's) right to choose and to have that choice be a private decision is at the core of their philosophy and ethics. Further, as a medical provider, they have a reason - a good one - to want to protect the privacy of their clients (whatever their age): young girls will not come to them for help if they feel they will get "ratted out" to the powers that be. However,
    In all 50 states, sexual activity with underage children is illegal. Also, every state mandates that if a healthcare worker has reason to suspect that an underage girl is being sexually abused, they are required by law to report that information to a designated law enforcement or child protective services agency. That agency is then responsible to investigate the possibility that the child may be the victim of sexual abuse or statutory rape.

    Because the pregnancy of an underage girl is evidence that she is the victim of sexual abuse, any healthcare worker who has contact with a pregnant underage girl has an obligation to initiate a report to the state.
    That is how it should be. Of course, Planned Parenthood, like me, also has to realize the bad outcomes that will come from protecting the privacy of children who should not really be pregnant: they seem to be systematically (I didn’t say intentionally - I think it just comes with their philosophy) covering up statutory rape and incest:
    • They are being sued by a young women who endured another one and a half years of incest by her father after telling her Planned Parenthood worker in Ohio that she was being raped by her father, who had brought her to Planned Parenthood for an abortion. The worker did not report the incest to authorities.


    • They are threatening to sue an 18 year old who caught one of their workers on video conspiring to cover-up statutory rape in California


    • Planned Parenthood's defense that they are being picked on by anti-abortion activists for isolated mistakes by bad employees is kind of smashed by 800 different tape recordings secured by Life Dynamics in 2002 as they investigated child sexual predation:
      To test this conclusion we conducted a covert survey in which we called over 800 Planned Parenthood and National Abortion Federation facilities across the country. Our caller portrayed a 13-year-old girl who was pregnant by her 22-year-old boyfriend. Her story was that she wanted an abortion because she and her boyfriend did not want her parents to find out about the sexual relationship. In every call the ages of the girl and her boyfriend were made perfectly clear. It was also made clear that the motivation for the abortion was to conceal this illicit sexual activity from the girl's parents and the authorities. Additionally, our caller never said a single thing that might suggest that her parents would become abusive if they discovered her sexual activity.

      The results of this survey were appalling. Even though many of these clinic workers openly acknowledged to our caller that this situation was illegal and that they were required to report it to the state, the overwhelming majority readily agreed to conceal this illegal sexual activity.

      Some employees of these organizations even coached our caller on how to avoid detection, how to circumvent parental involvement laws and what to say or not say when she came to the clinic. In a significant number of instances she was encouraged to lie about - or conceal - her age or her boyfriend's age or to give false names.
    So, just like me, Planned Parenthood is going to have to come to grips with the logical outcome of their position on parental notification: the ability of children to get pregnant at the hands of adults and their own family members; and have no one know that the child was ever pregnant except the rapist/abuser and the girl. The same child, scared to death her parents might find out, isn't going to be any happier at child welfare authorities or the police finding out. I, as you might guess, prefer my bad outcomes to theirs.

    Other Stuff

  • Joe Carter re-posts (with revisions) his "Fads and Fixtures: Ten Deadly Trappings of Evangelism". Considering that I came to a real decision for Christ at an altar call I am not sure that I entirely agree with his list; but his point is correct: we are supposed to be about gaining disciples for Christ - it is God's job to bring them to us for that purpose. We have to be available when folks are ready; but it is God that softens their heart.


  • Iraq the Model looks at two sets of political forces in Iraq that point to "It's a rough time but I wouldn't panic"


  • "The Ring Thing: We Must Have Marriage" reports on "Why Marriage Matters: Twenty-Six Conclusions of the Social Sciences"


  • As an Evangelical with a Catholic MIL living in the house, the agreements and/or disagreements we have on religious matters is evident to me often. So, when Francis Beckwith resigned from the Evangelical Theological Society (as its President) because he decided to join the Roman Catholic Church - it is of some interest. It was also of interest to Scot McKnight at Jesus Creed and to Bonnie at Intellectuelle. For some background (at least for me) I think it is important to understand (as someone talked about in the Jesus Creed comment thread) the difference between the Evangelical movement and being an evangelical Christian. Perhaps reading the "Lausanne Covenant" and the "Manila Manifesto" will help - even though these are not completely accepted by all "big E" Evangelicals. Perhaps even my own church's "Statement of Faith" is of interest. So, do these generally represent the types of Statements of Faith "big E" Evangelicals agree on? If so, do they keep me from being a creedal Roman Catholic?


  • That is it for this week

    Read more!

    Monday, March 26, 2007

    Weekly Tour: 3/26/07

    As I cruised some favorite places on my first day off - what did I find interesting:

    • At Evangelical Outpost is "Thirty-three Things (v.4)" with these individual items that caught my eye:

      • "Why and How to Debate Charitably"
        … when things really break down, it’s when the respondent sees possible implications and assigns them too-high probabilities and then fails to give the speaker the benefit of the doubt when they disclaim those assertions. Often, it’s because the respondent is unaware that the implied assertion is not actually explicit in the speaker’s words. The respondent is so ideologically separated from the speaker, and often unfamiliar with (or, worse, dismissive of) of the subtleties and variations of different positions similar to the speaker’s that they’re not familiar with, that they’ll obstinately group the speaker’s explicit positions with a wide array of other positions perceived to be similar, but that the speaker never explicitly stated (or even implied with a probability higher than 60%). And when this happens, communication becomes much more difficult.
        A very big - and personality experienced - "Yep". His rules:

        1. The Golden rule. He says this is the central rule that sums up the rest:
          Treat the person’s position as if it were your own. First, make sure you understand the argument. Then go about trying to see how you would disprove it to yourself. Then, walk step by step with the person through your rebuttal, and see where the arguments you use against their position fail to have the same effect on them (and why). Charity is about empathy
          That is a great process.


        2. You cannot read minds.
        3. People are not evil.
        4. Debates are not for winning.
        5. You make mistakes.
        6. Not everyone cares as much as you.
        7. Engaging is hard work.
        8. Differences can be subtle.
        9. Give up quietly.

      • A must read for parents: "How to Raise a Pharisee"


      • Tired of the partisanship of the early 21st century? Family-friendly? Look into the family-friendly agenda of the radical middle, with folks from the Left (Matthew Miller, Michael Lind, Phillip Longman) and the Right (Ross Douthat, Ramesh Ponnuru, David Brooks) finding common ground.
      • A nice interview with N.T. Wright: "Mere Mission":
        CT: One of Lewis's classic maneuvers is this: Jesus said he was God, and you either believe that or that he was a madman on the level of someone who thinks he is a poached egg. It's a powerful argument that has had a strong effect on a lot of people, but modern source criticism of the Bible has undermined the idea that Jesus claimed to be God.

        Wright: My major work has been designed to refute the wilder claims made by some so-called historical critical scholarship. Because now we see only too clearly that the whole historical critical movement was not, as it tried to claim, a neutral, objective, scientific account of the Gospels. It had its own agendas that were heavily driven by the philosophy of the Enlightenment. The movement really started out with the assumption that if there is a God, this God does not intervene in human affairs. In other words, the Enlightenment has already settled Lewis's question one way. It has decided that any Jesus who said John 14:6, "I am the way, the truth, and the life," would be completely out of his skull. Therefore, Jesus couldn't have said it, because we know he was a good man and we want to follow him for other reasons. It becomes a circular argument. Lewis breaks into the circle by simply ignoring the critical possibility.
      • Please read "Conscience, Calling, and the Christian Conservative Agenda". Incidentally, while I agree with almost all of the article - and especially it's core message about calling - this I do not agree with (re: gay marriage)
        Additionally, if we fail in our efforts to preserve marriage, society will unravel.
        Now, I am assuming that the author believes that opposing gay marriage is necessary to preserve non-gay marriage. If so, I think that this is wrong. What will preserve marriage (and keep society from unraveling) is for men and women to submit to God in their marriages: let's worry about adultery and pornography (which is adultery), selfishness, and rejection of biblical teaching on how husbands and wives should treat each other as a starting point. Whether one part of 10% (max) of the population marries another part of that 10% is not nearly as important as the 50% of married Christian men who struggle with pornography - an issue that not nearly enough of our churches are providing support for and healing from.

    • Mohammed at Iraq the Model makes a case for Iraq being "The Real Front in the War on Terror"
      I wanted to talk about this because recently we've been watching the debate in America about redeployment of troops and identifying the real front we must focus on. I see that al-Qaeda and terrorists in general didn't hide their position in this respect—despite the fact that they still operate in many parts of the world, they are clearly redirecting most effort and resources to the war in Iraq. The war here has a lot that to do with drawing the future prospects of spreading religious extremism and this in turn is connected to the agendas of countries that have mutual goals with al-Qaeda in spite of the difference in ideology. This collaboration is complex but it clearly shows the priorities of the terrorists and rogue regimes and in turn suggests what our strategic priorities should be … Al-Qaeda and its supporters are using most of the capabilities of their propaganda machine to cover their effort in Iraq, and so is the case with financial resources. All evidences indicate that most of the money is used to support the terror activity in Iraq … But why Iraq became the main front?
      Go and read on


    • Jeremy Pierce is discussing the (philosophical) issues of "Freedom and Determinism: Possible Views" - the 40th post in his "Theories of Knowledge and Reality Series"


    • WorldMagBlog:

      • points out the discussion of John Edwards staying in the Presidential race despite the return of his wife's incurable cancer. I am not so much interested from a politics standpoint: read this interview, and tell me what you think. Myself: if Elizabeth Edwards believes that this is an important way for her to spend what may be the last of her life and believes her husband should run - I have no problem. My regret is that this decision is going to become political fodder on both sides of the campaign.


      • I have a brother in Christ in this position; but luckily he isn't "Struggling Alone":
        Is there any student more alienated or marginalized on campus than one who experiences same-sex attractions but who doesn’t embrace them? Silence is forced upon him, and his entire life experience is discounted: He suffers same-sex attractions, he doesn’t want to, and he seeks to be made whole again. This doesn’t seem so extreme a narrative, and yet there are very few, if any, campus groups devoted to supporting these students.

        While listening to Chris, I grew angrier and angrier about our troubled culture, the sexual chaos our parents’ generation bequeathed us, the lack of support the Church provides, and the hostile environment the university maintains. Gradually, however, my anger gave way to sadness. A sadness that Chris struggles almost alone. A sadness that others like him have no one to turn to. A sadness that universities deliberately reject chaste students with same-sex attractions. In the end, though, I found myself feeling grateful. Grateful for knowing Chris. Grateful for the chance to see him carry a cross he did not choose. Offering up his daily struggles, he strives for holiness, refuses surrender, and resists temptations. He labors to remedy the unwanted causes and side effects of attractions he never desired, aware all the while that a cure isn’t certain, that in this fallen world some disorders may always be with us.

        I am witnessing my friend’s unique path to holiness: a remarkable instance of grace working through a broken earthly vessel, making all things new, and leading to fullness of life. I think how blessed I am that I’ve been fortunate enough to witness it and find inspiration for my life in his struggles. How sad, though, that the rest of the world will never know.
        I am not going to get into the "nuture vs nature" debate here; but there are folks who have same-sex attractions who honestly and deeply do not want them (think Ted Haggard as well). It seems that they are often caught between a condemning church (for having the attraction) and a large chunk of society condemning them for not just going with the attractions


      • "Free speech" (or not!) on campuses:
        Much campus censorship rests on philosophical underpinnings that go back to social theorist Herbert Marcuse, a hero to sixties radicals. Marcuse argued that traditional tolerance is repressive—it wards off reform by making the status quo...well, tolerable. Marcuse favored intolerance of established and conservative views, with tolerance offered only to the opinions of the oppressed, radicals, subversives, and other outsiders. Indoctrination of students and “deeply pervasive” censorship of others would be necessary, starting on the campuses and fanning out from there.
        Whether this view is that philosophically organized, or can be traced to Marcuse, I cannot affirm or deny - but that there is intolerance among those that consider themselves "progressive" to "established and conservative views" is undoubted by me.

    Read more!

    Tuesday, March 20, 2007

    Back to Touring

    What did I find fascinating at my "usual haunts" this week:

    Iraq
    • While I did not support the invasion of Iraq four years ago (and really still do not believe it was just), much of the argument about the war ignores the real history. Joe Carter brings us back to the beginning on this anniversary with "Ten Things We've Forgotten About the Iraq War". Point one of the ten are the official reasons for the war, according to H.J.Res.114:
      Continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability (false); actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability (true); supporting and harboring terrorist organizations (true); continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population (true); refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq (true); failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait (true); demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people (true); attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush (true); firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces (true); harbored members of al-Qaeda (true); continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations (true).
      The rest of Joe's post is important for those who really want to work through an understanding of the war; and while some of the comments to the post show that desire, most do not.

    • However, I do not think we can leave until there is a stable government, and a capable army - or it is obvious there will not be one. The first part is still more likely, in my opinion, than the last:

    • A few places are talking about the al-Qaeda chlorine gas suicide bombing in Anbar province against the Sunni tribal chiefs, and the war that just broke out. One of those is Iraq the Model with

    • The "surge" seems to be going well: "Why it's Working ..."
      What tactics are working? "We got down at the people level and are staying," he said flatly. "Once the people know we are going to be around, then all kinds of things start to happen."

      More intelligence, for example. Where once tactical units were "scraping" for intelligence information, they now have "information overload," the general said. "After our guys are in the neighborhood for four or five days, the people realize they're not going to just leave them like we did in the past. Then they begin to come in with so much information on the enemy that we can't process it fast enough."
    Actually, I will leave it at Iraq. If someone wants to go read three weeks of Christian Carnival links, and some of my stuff from Street Prophets, that should keep folks busy.

    Read more!

    Monday, March 19, 2007

    OK, Back to Blogging Here

    I have spent a lot of time at Street Prophets being the fringe evangelical in the community; and that has affected by writing here:

    • First, since almost everything I posted here was cross-posted to there (or vice-versa) - there were topics I avoided entirely since they were not appropriate there. There were also things that were posted there that never made it here.

    • Second, I spent a lot of time in comments sections chatting over there. That is not a bad thing, but it was time-intensive.
    I do not have the time to post and chat here and there, help plant my church, and participate in my FMO group and my church community group - while working and being a husband/father. While I enjoyed the online community at Street Prophets I have to narrow my focus somewhat.

    The good, or bad, news is that I am going to focus here. I want to post more often, and complete some series that I started and have never finished. I also intend to start some new ones. Right now, I am going to do some catch-up:
    I plan to now focus here. Some upcoming stuff:
    • I am going to keep posting the questions from The Life You Always Wanted and maybe get them journaled online
    • I may actually finish the last post in the "The Natural Law Series"
    • I recieved my first free book as a blogger - The Listening Heart, by A.J. Conyers - and I am going to do a review/series on this book. I can tell you now that I recommend reading it:
      In a stunning insight, Conyers shows that the quintessential institution of modernity is slavery, for the slave is the ultimate autonomous individual. Stripped of every human tie, he belongs to no community but to a stranger. It is no accident, then, that the rise of modern slavery coincided with the Enlightenment itself.
      It has been a fascinating, and difficult, book for me - and I may have to read it twice before I can speak rationally about it.
    Anyway, I am going to focus here now.

    Read more!

    Tuesday, December 26, 2006

    Christmas Vacation Tour

    This is the last day of my vacation from work; and since I didn't go anywhere - I will instead tour some websites I frequent often to see how they spent the last week:

    • Christian Carnival CLIII (153):
      • Jan at The View from Her is "Not So Literal"
        Ask me if I take the Bible literally, and I'll ask you, "Well, do you take the newspaper literally?" The answer is probably yes, because of course, the newspaper is filled with news, written by professional journalists and is nothing like the Bible … we read the newspaper according to its sections. We take the news pages literally. We know editorials express opinions. We understand sports metaphors. Opinions and metaphors are not literal. Christians read the Bible the same way. . .
      • Bonnie at Intellectuelle examines the "The ubiquitously deceitful heart"

      • Tom at Thinking Christian looks at "Miracles and Science":
        It's just about Christmas, time to celebrate the miracle of the Incarnation--God becoming man, born of a virgin. It's an obvious opportunity to consider whether the Christian claims of miracles are still credible in light of modern science. Christianity without the Virgin Birth is about as meaningful as Christianity without the Resurrection; both miracles were necessary for God to have conquered sin and death as a man. But what about scientific objections to miracles?

        These objections fall into three main versions: (1) Miracles can't happen, (2) Miracles shouldn't happen, (3) Miracles never have happened. The second of these will make more sense as I proceed. We'll start with the first, though.
      • Andre at Every Square Inch is "Deconstructing Racism"
        Few topics evoke as much emotion in our national conversation as the topic of race. In the wake of the Michael Richards episode, renown author Malcolm Gladwell writes about racism in his post "Defining a Racist". He proposes that a racist may be defined on the basis of three criteria: content, intention and conviction. Here are snippets of what he says with regard to each criteria.
    • A Kurd's opinion of the Iraq Study Group's recommendations in the Washington Post: "For Iraqis, A Promise Is in Peril". [HT: All Things Conservative]

    • Maureen Condic gives her perspective on "What We Know About Embryonic Stem Cells" at First Things. [HT: Stand to Reason Blog]

    • WorldMagBlog (and others) looks at the blasphemy challenge in which
      You record a short message damning yourself to Hell, you upload it to YouTube, and then the Rational Response Squad will send you a free The God Who Wasn't There DVD. It's that easy.

      INSTRUCTIONS:
      You may damn yourself to Hell however you would like, but somewhere in your video you must say this phrase: "I deny the Holy Spirit."

      Why? Because, according to Mark 3:29 in the Holy Bible, "Whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin." Jesus will forgive you for just about anything, but he won't forgive you for denying the existence of the Holy Spirit. Ever. This is a one-way road you're taking here.
      I was hesitant to bring this up even for fear of helping someone to a hell I believe in; but luckily the site shows that scripture is "spiritually discerned" - what they consider to be "blasphemy of the spirit" isn't by my reading of this passage or its parallel in Matthew. Vincent at WorldMagBlog asks this question: Does This Site Matter?

    • In a victory for moderation (as mentioned in a few places), the President of Iran got embarrassed in the Tehran municipal elections:
      According to final results announced by the Interior Ministry, moderate conservatives opposed to Ahmadinejad won a majority of the seats, followed by reformists, who favor closer ties with the West. Analysts said Ahmadinejad supporters won less than 20 percent of local council seats nationwide. "People's vote means they don't support Ahmadinejad's policies and want change," Shariati, a leader of the Islamic Iran Participation Front, Iran's largest reformist party, told the Associated Press. "We consider this government's policy to be against Iran's national interests and security. It is simply acting against Iran's interests."
    • Finally, Bonnie at Intellectuelle looks at Peter Yancey's article on Bonhoeffer in Christianity Today (Bonnie's link didn't work for me):
      "Nothing that we despise in the other man is entirely absent from ourselves," wrote Dietrich Bonhoeffer while awaiting execution in a Nazi prison. "We must learn to regard people less in the light of what they do or omit to do, and more in the light of what they suffer."
      and Bonnie points out
      I think people err by over-correcting error in both directions -- people try to cope with a lack of compassion by insisting that sin is not really sin. (And they also try to cope with sin by insisting that it's not really sin, or by blaming others.) People also try to cope with the first error by insisting, in a judgmental manner, that sin really is sin.

    Read more!