If A Quote Seems Crazy . . .

[Now that the political season is upon us (is it ever off) I thought I would bring this post over from Street Prophets]

. . . it just might be.

I find myself combating a lot of what I consider craziness about conservative evangelicals, and fundamentalists, especially lately about those that believe in a pre-tribulation rapture of the church [I do not know what I think about this] and their supposed disdain for the ecology, etc.

In fact, some of them [in most comments this feels like "all" - but isn't] are attributed with desiring death, destruction, and ecological disaster to speed on the coming return of Christ. This is something I have never heard out of the mouth, or seen in the writings, of a theologically conservative Christian. I see it stated about conservative Christians by liberal Christians, and liberals in general - but really have no clue where it comes from.

In the diary "Religious Groups Want... Apocalypse Now!" another example of the spread of "urban legends" and flatout falsehoods reared its head.

Since we [Street Prophets] are a website about "faith and politics" we seem to have a desire among ourselves to avoid attributing to people we are around here ideas and beliefs they do not hold. That is a good thing.

Now, when I challenged a quoted Moyer speech because the end-times scenario he quoted was held by no group I can imagine - it illicited these comments:

Because he's actually done research and investigated these cultural groups in-depth and you haven't?

and

Bill Moyers is an ordained minister who was educated at seminary, I do believe. He knows theology -- and is an able critic.

and finally, the one one that sent me to a search engine:

But with all due respect, I don't think you read carefully -- because the information is there. Did you see the quote from James Watt in one of my own blockquoted comments? . . .

Ah, the James Watt quote from 1981:

"after the last tree is felled, Christ will come back."

Watt never said it, Grist and Moyers both apologized for it - over a year ago - but here it is again.

Look at the search I linked: In the summary of the fourth 5th link down it says Watt never said it.

So, I invite folks who believe that any significant number of Christians of any type believe this - pardon my french - shit to read what James Watt had to say as part of this, and this, comment in the . . . Apocalypse Now! diary:

If such a body of belief exists, I would totally reject it, as would all of my friends. When asked who believed such error, where adherents to this "false gospel" might be found, the NCC turned to its theological sources, Moyers and a magazine called Grist, which had also apologized to me. I then contacted the chairman of the NCC task force and asked him about the "some people" who believe this false gospel and the "proud preachers" advancing this false gospel. He could not name such persons.

Bill Moyers, in the speech in question:

warned his audience about people blinded by their ideology and religious beliefs. The combination, he said, can make one "oblivious to the facts."

And, it can make us not realize that if a quote is too crazy to be true, it might not be.

Read more!

Christian Carnivals CXXXI (131) - CXXXIII (133)

My bad:

CXXXI (131) is up at the Evangelical Ecologist
CXXXII (132) is up at the Faith at Work Blog
CXXXIII (133) is up at Anchor Hold

About Christian Carnival:

Contributing a Post to the Christian Carnival

The Christian Carnival is open to Christians of Protestant, Orthodox, and Roman Catholic convictions. One of the goals of this Carnival is to offer our readers to a broad range of Christian thought.

Posts need not be of a theological topic. Posts about home life, politics, or current events, for example, written from a Christian worldview are welcome.

Update: As the goal of this Carnival is to highlight Christian thought in the blogosphere, entries will be limited to blogs that share that goal. Blogs with content that is focused on a business, that has potentially offensive material Christians may not want to link to on their sites, or has no reference to distinctively Christian thought may not be included in this Carnival. There are other Carnivals that would be a more appropriate venue for that material. I realize that this will be a judgment call on the part of the Carnival administrator, and being human she may make mistakes. However, as the Christian Carnival is getting quite large, and it is sometimes questionable whether the entrants are seeking to promote Christian thought, I find this necessary.

Update: We also expect a level of discourse that is suitable for a Christian showcase. Thus entries may be refused if they engage in name-calling, ad hominem attacks, offensive language, or for any similar reason as judged by the administrator.

So, if you have a post in this framework - go here to find out more: Christian Carnival Participation Instructions.

Read more!

The Bible: Inspired and Inerrant?

[Third in a series after "SHEEP! WE ARE ALL SHEEP!" and "Robbers and Thieves and Wolves - Oh My!"]
[Crossposted at Street Prophets - where the comments are]

This has turned into a series on my views of the inspiration and inerrancy of the Bible. What does it mean: Inspired and Inerrant? Inspired is really captured by this famous passage:

2 Timothy 3:16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

The word "inspired" is translated from the Greek word qeopneustoß which comes from the roots qeoß

a deity, especially (with 3588) the supreme Divinity

and pneo:

to breathe, to blow

The traditional definition of inspiration is "God breathed". One description of that is:

What it says of Scripture is not that it is "breathed into by God" or is the product of divine "inbreatheing" into the human authors, but that it "breathed out by God" or "God-breathed." In a word, what is being declared by this fundamental passage is simply that the Scriptures are a divine product, without any indication of how God has operated in producing them.

This comes from a pretty academic look at the Greek: "Inspiration & Inerrancy". This is a thorough conservative look at the inspiration of scripture and inerrancy, which is:

"a theological deduction from inspiration"; and
"not demonstrable empirically because of:"

• Human finitude
• Human sinfulness
• lack of complete data

Therefore

Inerrancy applies to the autographa, not to copies or translations of Scripture. This qualification is made because we realize that errors have crept into the text during the transmission process. It is not an appeal to a "Bible which no one has ever seen or can see." Such a charge fails to take into account the nature of textual criticism and the very high degree of certainty we possess concerning the original text of Scripture.

Read the article.

Now, at one time (Brain Cramps and Street Prophets) I gave a list of 6 books offered by my pastor, Carl Palmer. Norman Geisler, in When Skeptics Ask, talks about a Bible student's attitude to the Bible:

There are real problems in the Bible, but there are also real answers to those difficult passages [see When Critics Ask, by Geisler]. The burden of proof rests with the critics . . . As long as we can show there is a possible solution - that their objection "ain't necessarily so" - then the conflict has been resolved. Like any American citizen, the Bible should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Like a reliable friend, it should be given the benefit of the doubt. A scientist always assumes that there is an explanation when faced with some unexpected and unexplained anomaly. In the same way, a Bible student assumes there is a harmony in the Bible in light of what appears to be contradictions. The pressure of these types of problems motivates the student to dig deeper and find information that otherwise he may never have come across

One of the books gives these principles for approaching apparent difficulties and discrepancies in the Bible:

1. The unexplained is not necessarily unexplainable
2. Fallible interpretations do not necessarily mean fallible revelation
3. Understand the context of the passage
4. Interpret difficult passages in light of clear ones
5. Don't base teaching on obscure passages
6. The Bible is a human book with human characteristics
7. Just because a report is incomplete doesn't mean that a report is false
8. New Testament citations of the Old Testament need not always be exact
9. The Bible does not necessarily approve of all it records
10. The Bible uses everyday, non-technical language
11. The Bible may use round numbers as well as exact numbers
12. Note when the Bible uses different literary devices
13. An error in a copy doesn't equate to an error in the original
14. General statements do not necessarily mean universal promises
15. Later revelation supersedes previous revelation

Read more!

Robbers and Thieves and Wolves - Oh My!

[Second in a series including "SHEEP! WE ARE ALL SHEEP!" and "The Bible: Inspired and Inerrant?"]
[Crossposted at Street Prophets - where the comments are]

In a comment to "SHEEP! WE ARE ALL SHEEP!" (see Brain Cramps or Street Prophets) tobendaro asked some (to me) rich, rich questions - which I hope to do some justice too. This post started as one of my typical long-winded comments until it got too long-winded for even me.

A couple of things before that:

• Since it is becoming less and less common for folks to capitalize pronouns and words connected to God, Christ and the Holy Spirit (and I do) - it should be said that the Shepherd in that other post (and any capitalized Shepherds in this post) are about the Good Shepherd of John 10: Jesus Christ. I know pastors are considered to be the shepherds of their flocks, and refer to themselves that way at times - but to me, theologically, they are not. They are the hired hands of the real Owner (God) who try to keep our eyes on the real Shepherd - Christ. When they forget that . . .
• That brings us to the verses in John 10 I left out because I didn't think they were on point in the other post; and I wanted to save space. That was a mistake, and I apologize. I think this covers those who approach us sheep outside the person and teachings of Christ. [Karmakin: Please note this places your wolf analogy in very good company]

  1 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter by the door into the fold of the sheep, but climbs up some other way, he is a thief and a robber. 2 "But he who enters by the door is a shepherd of the sheep . . . 5 "A stranger they simply will not follow, but will flee from him, because they do not know the voice of strangers." 6 This figure of speech Jesus spoke to them, but they did not understand what those things were which He had been saying to them. 7 So Jesus said to them again, "Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 "All who came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. 9 "I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. 10 "The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly. 11 "I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep. 12 "He who is a hired hand, and not a shepherd, who is not the owner of the sheep, sees the wolf coming, and leaves the sheep and flees, and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. 13 "He flees because he is a hired hand and is not concerned about the sheep.

My placement of pastors as the hired hands, and not the Shepherd, of this passage is intentional: pastors are not our shepherds. Our elders are not our shepherds - nor our Bishops, Archbishops, Cardinals, and yes, the Pope. If they teach us poorly and turn our eyes and ears off the person and voice of our True Shepherd where our trust must be placed - then they are leaving us for the thieves, robbers, and wolves of this passage. I at first thought Christ a little harsh here - surely some hired hands would fight off the wolves. Ultimately though, it is not true. If we place our trust in people, even our religious leaders (even the best of our religious leaders), we will eventually be let down. Our ears must always be turned, and continually tuned, to the voice of our Good Shepherd. The good hired hands do that, and never allow the trust of the flock to be placed in them so that when (not if) they become weak and flee, the wolves do not tear the sheep apart. Now to tobenaro:

As with everything, there are two sides to sheep. The fact that they follow a leader (shepherd) blindly and the nice feeling of being in a similar group of like thinkers who do things as a unit to produce comfort. Sorry if the metaphor of following bothers you but we have all experienced many people who follow blindly and that is not a good thing. I have no problem with people who want authority (shepherd) to tell them where to go, when and how to think. I realize the comfort and security that provides. They are welcome to that way and God Bless the simplicity.

God does bless the simplicity - remember "becoming as little children"; or "Blessed are the poor in spirit". Little children follow blindly and the poor in spirit seek the voice of God. The key to me here is that all people desire a source of wisdom that they can trust 100% of the time in all circumstances for the right answer. That is that God-shaped hole in each of our hearts. All humans are sheep; and frankly anyone that disagrees with that is intellectually dishonest - and I am sure they will quote some philosopher or other spiritual source, or themselves, to show me I am wrong. The difficulty is having a source for that knowledge; having certainty it is right; and then having it available all the time. Followers of Christ would love to have our savior at our elbow to give us the answers:

• "Give him two dollars - he will use it on food";
• "Don't give him two dollars he will use it on booze";
• "Give him two dollars - he will use it on booze but you should have seen his morning";
• "Don't pick up that hitchhiker, he will kill you";
• "Pick up that hitchhiker, he is the reason I had you drive down this road"

My contention then is that we all seek someone who loves us, who is wise at all times, and that we trust so we can indeed follow blindly as children - we are all wired that way by God. The question has always been "who?" or "what?" we place in that position. Our wiring has been screwed up by the fall and our sin nature; our treatment by other humans; the philosophies of the world; and, of course, Satan - to name a few; but we are all wired to seek the voice of a shepherd.

I don't quite understand your defense of sheepish behavior. You are obviously not a sheep. You have educated yourself; you have searched and found a way comfortable and compatible with your personality. You have found your truth and you believe. Sheep leaders do not want that for their flock. They want to tell you what to believe and what to do . . . My thought on shepherds is they are not concerned of their flock but on their own ego's.

I hope I covered all this already. The core answer: the Good Shepherd is of course not concerned about His ego. His hired hands will of course struggle with their egos every day of their lives and all will fail at times in that struggle.

Is the crux of it that many do not take the Bible as literally as you do? Why does that bother you? If one is coming to God, what does it matter what path or beliefs he uses to do that.

This is the best of the good questions here. Do I care how you come to the Word of God; or God Himself? Yeah, but it's not a huge deal. Do I care if you follow the right Shepherd? Of course I do, I believe in eternal consequences (very good and very bad) for our good and bad decisions in how we relate to God. Again though, ultimately you, personally, will sort this all out - if I can influence that for the good great, but it is not under my control - and I am not your shepherd for sure.

Now, are you a hired hand in charge of part of the Good Shepherd's flock? That is a whole other story. Then we are talking about millstones and leading children astray; and hired hands leaving the flock for the wolves, thieves, and robbers. Since I am a minister of reconciliation (another hired hand, bought at a price) for God, seeing one of the Good Shepherd's hired hands pointing the sheep to the wrong voice is a definite issue. Also, what I say here makes this post not just about me; but about whether I am leading the sheep to the Shepherd's voice; or away from it - and that means it is no longer just about my personal walk. This is Karmakin's point that once I open my mouth in public I am fair game - and I cannot say "Gee, that is my walk and you cannot criticize it". If I am attempting to influence other sheep, I have responsibility to the rest of the flock - and certainly to the owner (God) and His Good Shepherd (Christ) for whether my din helps the sheep hear Their voices better or not.

How do we discern the real Shepherd's voice? Really only two ways:

1. We know part of what He said; at least the part His direct followers and their companions (first split) were inspired (second split) to write about (third split?). Since we do not get to have Jesus following us around telling us which hitchhikers to pick up and which panhandlers to give money too - we first have to rely on His words and act in faith. The only words we have are in the Bible. That is just it.

   I personally believe any follower of Christ (Jesus Seminar, the 1800's and after German school of text criticism, etc.) publicly undermining the authority and inspiration of scripture is leading the sheep (intentionally or unintentionally) to a different shepherd than Jesus - and Jesus is the only Good Shepherd. These are hired hands leading you to the wolves; or leaving you to the robbers and thieves. Ponder why the German church of the 20th century was left, as Bonheoffer pointed out, with no Truth to stand on in facing the rise of Hitler. It was left that way because of the German theology of the 19th century which bowed to modernism - theology that is still cited today and continues in the "critical" schools. And folks ask why the US church seems to have no Truth to stand on in facing the actions of its government - while liberal theologians take jack-hammers to the foundation of the Truth and inspiration of scripture. This is, primarily, a mistake of liberal Christian theology (but not all liberal theologians of course)

2. The second way we discern the Shepherd's voice is the ministry of the Holy Spirit. Jesus recognized He couldn't be at each of our elbows physically:

   John 14:16 "I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever; 17 that is the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, but you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.
   
   John 16:7 "But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you.

   The Bible is not living - the Holy Spirit is the Good Shepherd's voice and it is living - in us. It will lead us to the truth of a passage in whatever context we are in. It shows us what is history, parable, directive, precept, etc because scripture is spiritually discerned - without the Holy Spirit to "read it to you" you will not "get it".

   Reading the scripture without the leading of the Holy Spirit leads to legalism; and the mistake of the Pharisees in turning the truth and love of God into the restrictions and rules of men. This is a primary mistake of conservative theologians (although, again, not all of them). As Carl Palmer pointed out:

   . . . Many in our church come from conservative backgrounds where talk of the Holy Spirit was divisive . . . These were arguments over what the Holy Spirit did; what gifts it gave; and did all of this pass-away in the time of the Apostles. There were seminars and teachings over all the things the Holy Spirit no longer does - and we divided up - and the evil one just cackled. He cackled because he got Christians to divide up over God's Spirit, which is one of the stupidest things imaginable. Instead of being the source of loving one another, Christians were divided and angry with one another over the Spirit of God . . . The Holy Spirit is the thing that unites us together. We are baptized together into Jesus Christ through the Spirit. The Spirit is what makes the Body of Christ one . . . We need figure out what the Holy Spirit does do; and what He does for us; and His purpose for us; and what His gifts are and how we receive them; and how do we get the filling of God? We need to be powerful, spiritual people the way Jesus intended us to be.

This is not an "either/or" but a "both". Scripture gives us grounding to know whether the "voice" in our heart, or head, is the Holy Spirit or not - because the Holy Spirit will not contradict scripture. The Holy Spirit gives us God's love to apply God's word to our lives; and allows us to understand, as sheep, where we are to follow.

That is why I am a "Biblicist". And, that is why I will get irritated when the authority, power, and truth of scripture is attacked by Christians. I think they are dulling the voice of the Shepherd and allowing the wolves into the flock.

As Paul said, what non-Christians do about the Bible is not my concern.

Read more!

SHEEP! WE ARE SHEEP!

[First in a series including "Robbers and Thieves and Wolves - Oh My!" and "The Bible: Inspired and Inerrant?"]
[Crossposted at Street Prophets - where the comments are]

When my wife's brother was about 19 or so, he and she were at a shopping center at Christmas time. They were crossing a bridge over an ice rink pushing against the mad rush - when her brother stood on the railing and shouted at the top of his lungs: "SHEEP! SHEEP! YOU ARE ALL G-D- SHEEP!"

This brother is the most secular of the siblings and certainly a hard agnostic. He probably still thinks people are sheep (he is so much wiser); and my guess is he thinks the religious are sheep particularly. In my normal stream of consciousness mode, I thought of this story when I was reading a post and its comments at Street Prophets. The front page post by Pastordan was "53% of Churchgoers say Attendance is Growing". The poll PD was referring too was in an article by the same name at Rasmussen Reports. The part that Pastordan stressed to launch the discussion was this:

Fifty-three percent (53%) of American churchgoers say that attendance at their Church is growing. A Rasmussen Reports survey found that 11% say attendance is declining while 33% see little change. Evangelical Christians are more likely to see growing attendance than other Protestant Churchgoers or Catholics.

Among those who believe the Bible is literally true, 57% say that attendance is growing at their Church. Among other churchgoers, just 44% see growth.

Fifty-four percent (54%) of all Americans believe the Bible is literally true while 32% disagree and 13% are not sure. Among those who attend Church at least once a week, 74% believe it is literally true. At the other extreme, 29% of those who rarely or never attend Church believe the Bible is literally true.

Now Street Prophet's followers of Christ are heavily in the group of the 46% of Christians who do not believe in the "literalness" and inspiration of scripture. Folks recommend Marcus Borg and many speak kindly of the Jesus Seminar. Many folks will argue that whether Christ actually lived; actually died; and was actually risen from the dead is irrelevant - it is the mythos and meaning around the story, and not its historical accuracy, that matters. I have heard it argued that the insistence on the actual occurance of supernatural events drives modern seekers away from God because they cannot buy faith that reason cannot test. Most are part of churches that are not evangelical, conservative, fundamentalist, etc.

The comments should be read. Pastordan was smart enough to not say what this poll meant; but the commenters were unafraid - and I am admittedly never "smart": B . . . (oops sorry). My little chat here was primarily driven by a couple of comments. I am linking the full comments because I have pulled out just that which is thematic to this post:

• here:

  Literal truth??? . . . The Bible in the hands of the ignorant may not be a good thing. How do they deal with the question of translation? Oh--sorry, I forgot--that would involve thought.

  I have read statistics that church attendance is falling--are they delusional about that too? [actually, it is pretty well accepted that theologically conservative churches have shown growth]

• and the key one that drove this:

  I think "evangelical" churches are growing faster than "mainstreams" because it's an uncertain world out there, and the evangelical/fundy groups offer a lot more black and white answers. The entire program for your life, from repentance to salvation to discipleship, is all laid out for you -- all you have to do is follow. You don't need to question or to think, and you get a large group of people providing emotional encouragement and support -- plus, of course, the certainty of eternal life in heaven. It's pretty attractive for people who are scared (most of us) and who would also prefer not to have to work out our own paths to enlightenment/salvation (more and more of us).

For me, this is "bible believers as sheep" meme: we mindlessly, ignorantly (and really foolishly) follow leadership that doesn't understand the Bible for what it really is - and probably had poor training (or poor understanding of that training) to get to the point of being bad leaders. In fact, for nearly 2000 years generations of followers of Christ have willfully or ignorantly just gotten the message of scripture wrong - or the message itself is wrong. It has taken the last 200 years for modern scholars to be able to correct the mistakes that 1st and 2nd century church leaders made in their understanding of their own primary written language; and those scholars have corrected the mistaken ideas about the Bible's authorship by folks who knew the alledged authors personally. I have had conversations about what "real" scholars believe about the Bible; what "real" seminaries teach about the Bible; and what the "real" Jesus "really" did and "really" said.

Of course this irritates me. It is insulting; and it is meant to be insulting. There is no respect for what we believe, or the intellectual capacities of us who believe it. It is an insult to graduates of Moody, Dallas, Denver, and Multnomah seminaries and other fine conservative bible schools and seminaries around the country. I am getting used to this from secular and religious liberals - but it is still an insult and, from Christians, the type of division of the Body that John talks about in 1 John.

I was about to "go off" in this comment section. However, I remembered my wife's brother. And, I remember one of those parables which I am, in the spirit of the conversation, going to use literally:

John 10: 3 "To him the doorkeeper opens, and the sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. 4 "When he puts forth all his own, he goes ahead of them, and the sheep follow him because they know his voice . . . 14 "I am the good shepherd, and I know My own and My own know Me, 15 even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. 16 "I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd. 17 "For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again. 18 "No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father."

S--t, we ARE sheep. Certainly, we are not to check our minds at the door, but we are to "Love God With All Our Minds", transforming ourselves by "renewing our minds" (making them young again - make them new) while "taking every thought captive for God". 1 Corinthians 2:16 says that the Holy Spirit gives us the "mind of Christ" - so that our shepherd can lead us. There is certainly no basis in scripture for us "working out our own paths to enlightenment/salvation" - we are to hear the shepherd's voice, recognize it, and follow it. We are sheep after all. We are to work out our salvation with fear and trembling (sheep do fear and tremble after all) - but this is on a narrow path (not our own) where we need to be led safely by the voice of our shepherd because we are sheep. When we wander our own way (as I have often) we find ourselves at the bottom of ravines with broken legs surrounded by wolves. Luckily, the good shepherd comes and kills the wolves, carries us out of the ravine, binds our wounds, and patiently waits for us to fall into the next ditch.

For people in the thread on the poll there is no hint that many of the sheep just do not hear the shepherd's voice in theologically liberal churches. I think the comment is correct that, to some degree, we do not want to "question or think" but desire a God of authority and power; a shepherd who will lead us out on that narrow path; and lay down His life to keep us safe. We seek, as I once said in Al-Anon - and on my knees 11 years ago in Spokane, a higher power because we know we are incapable of controlling our lives - and that our concepts of right and wrong are "filthy rags". We know that our wisdom is foolishness, and that God's foolishness is wisdom. We seek power and authority and a sure shepherd because we are sheep.

Maybe the 57% who believe and teach the power and authority of scripture and see their churches growing are not delusional and/or overly optomistic - maybe their churches are growing because we are sheep and we at least think we hear our shepherd's voice there. They are growing too because people are not seeking their own God's and their own understanding - they are seeking power, wisdom, and authority for their lives. Liberal theology may tell them to seek their own way; but they do not need a pastor to tell them that and they may know their own way stinks and hasn't worked.

On reflection then, I can really only answer the charges that those that see authority in scripture must be avoiding the scriptural problems "that require thought" and/or that we need a program laid out that only requires obedience and "not the need to question or think" one way:

Baaaaaaaaaaaa

Read more!

The Monday Tour: Appendix

A couple of things missed my attention yesterday - and I didn't want to wait another week.

• At my FMO group last night I watched James Dobson's last interview with Ted Bundy before his execution. The text is here but you should try to find a copy of the video
• Read "The Catholic Court Appeal" which examines the interesting fact that while 5 of the current 9 justices are Catholic (all appointed in last 20 years) - prior to that only 7 Catholics served on the Supreme Court in 200 years. It examines natural law, subsidiarity, and religious freedom as explanations for this phenomena
• Finally, my email to President Bush on the stem cell bill:

  Subject: Please do not veto stem cell bill

  July 18, 2006

  Sir,

  As an evangelical, pro-life Republican I urge you not to veto the stem cell bill if passed.

  First, I think the United States should take action like Italy to prevent IVF lab wastage: 3 eggs harvested and fertilized and all fertilized eggs re-implanted.

  Second, I think umbilical stem cells offer a much greater hope - and should be funded to a higher degree.

  Lastly, parents allowing their currently frozen embryos due for destruction to donate their "bodies to science" is giving the possibility of good coming from this unneccessary waste. Frankly, I see no more ethical problem than bodies being donated to medical schools and medical research.

  I admire your stand on this issue - but the problem is the creation of surplus embryos in fertility clinics to begin with; and not what to do with those embryos when they are slated to die anyway.

  This was sent today through a really interesting site: PoliticsOL.com which will link you to the email addresses of all your federal representatives from the President on down by zip code - and give you the tools to compose a letter or email. Also, you can post what you sent on site to be read by others.

Read more!

The Monday Tour: 7/17/06

It's been awhile; but I am touring again
----------
Normally I start with the current Christian Carnival and highlight a few of my favorite posts. Since I was the host this week I will tell my favorites. Just read a bunch of them.
----------
Michael at Boundless tells Christian men (and by implication women) to "Stop Test-driving Your Girlfriend" (HT: The Evangelical Outpost.)

Joe at Evangelical Outpost has a couple of essays on embryonic stem cell research this week also. I think there needs to be an Italian-type system for restricting the creation of embryos in IVF labs; but I do not have Joe's problem with (given parental permission) using IVF embryos (that would be flushed down a toilet anyway) for research. I consider it analogous to organ donation when we die. Of course, I do have a problem with creating embryos for the purpose of research - ever. Joe Carter will always present a coherent argument that will make you examine your assumptions - if you want to examine your assumptions that is.
----------
Mohammed at Iraq the Model asks for "No More Half-Solutions" in Lebanon - with some analysis of the similarities to the situation in Iraq.
----------
Bonnie at Intellectuelle goes where Michael went above at Boundless with a "Follow-up to 'Thoughts on Christian Singleness'". The post being "follow-upped" on is here.
----------
WorldMagBlog tat tips:

• Ah, a counter to the vast right-wing conspiracy: ". . . Great Left-wing Conspiracy". Now the left can line up for their secret millions from liberal financiers too.
• ProgressiveU's "The Evil of Christianity". Pretty good example of insult to Christianity from a secular "progressive" (sorry, no tolerance in this post - hence not a real progressive)
• Someone at Street Prophets thought women who were pro-life had adopted chattledom due to the influence of the religious right. For anyone confused, this is really slavery of women: "Flesh For Sale"
• The "Religious Right" supposedly hates immigrants and immigration reform: Chuck Colson supports a proposal by Mike Pence (R) from Indiana which may be a basis for "An Immigration Compromise".

----------
Ah: another American reporter embedded in a military unit in Iraq; but the wrong one: "The New York Times - Enemy of the People". Joao Silva is rightfully bashed by Rick Moran

Rick has also returned the "The Carnival of the Clueless"

Finally, Rick has a number of pieces on Lebanon - including tearing up a guy from the Weekly Standard who thinks the US should enter the current conflict in Lebanon on the side of Israel.
----------
That is good for now. Next week?

Read more!

Christian Carnival CXXX (130)

I am going to list the posts in the order they were received, with mine last. I had a plan for structure but those reading my post at the end will see why this Carnival is going to be a brick shy of a full load.

In Galatians, Paul talks about the fruit of the spirit:

Galatians 5:22 . . . the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. 24 Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25 If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit.

These were going to be the divisions this week, and I was going to extend it some. It is not that we walk in a vacuum or we walk in the Light: we either walk in the dark or walk in the Light - as I have discovered in the last two weeks. Above this point in Galatians are some "bad fruit" we can see when we walk in the flesh:

immorality, impurity, sensuality, 20 idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, 21 envying, drunkenness, carousing, and things like these

Imagine I have counter posed the good and bad fruit and then divided the posts into the sections.

Some of these are obviously ugly; and some of these are all too common, and perhaps excused, in the Body of Christ: ". . . enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions . . ."

Anyway, on to the Light of this weeks posts:

* * * * * * * * * *

Ruth at Journal of Ruth writes on "Why Do We Stay Away From Church?"

Buzz Brockway at The Buzz Blog thinks that "Sometimes Life is Hard"

Michael at Tantalizing if True wonders if calmness is a "fruit of the spirit" while making "The Case Against Calmness".

Jack Yoest tells us that the "GodBlogCon is Coming Soon" (and about his wife Charmaine's involvement).

Dave Lorenzo at The Career Intensity Blog examines what we must do when asked to make "Bricks Without Straw"

Veracity at The Way thinks we need to get away from this "anything goes" notion and emphasize that how we "Dress" matters to Him.

Martin at Sun and Shield presents "Thoughts on Submission and Slavery, Part 1"

John at Part-Time Pundit hears "Hollywood to America: You Must Watch Our Smut"

Barbara at Tidbits and Treasures believes we must, as Christians, learn "Forgiveness" as Jesus taught through His example.

John at Light Along the Journey explores what does it mean to be like God, and why do humans desire it in "Of Eve and X-Men"

Eric "Funky Dung" Williams at Alex Rarus starts "An Exchange on Gay Christians (Part I)" - the first of four posts on his half of an open debate on whether there is room for gay marriage in orthodox Christianity.

Chris at Welcome to the Fallout has a humorous courtship-themed rap parody: "Eminem on Courtship"

Anthony at Fides et Veritas thinks we ought to be wondering "What Would Jesus Say" when talking to others in "Stay, Tongue, Stay"

Polly at Life is a Buffet says to "Clean Up Your Act" so that people can really see what is important in your life.

Lisa at Crossblogging learned from the "Esther" veggie tale movie something about "Women in the Church"

Leslie at Lux Venit is discovering that "You Can't Judge a Church by its Sign"

Katy at Fallible asks: Can you "Imagine" how wonderful it must be to throw a cautious brand of generosity to the wind and have its place taken up by a radical life of giving?

Jeremy at Parableman reviews a number of "Leviticus Commentaries". Considering how often I end up picking this book "out of my teeth" after someone has thrown it at me - it is nice to have a list of Christian views of the book.

Penitens at Penitent Blogger looks at the insidious phenomenon of "Self-made Religion"

And I examine Ephesians 4:17-32 in the light (or dark) of my "Moving Back to the Hovel"

* * * * * * * * * *

Hope you enjoyed the rides. For past Carnivals see the links on the bottom left

Read more!

Moving Back to the Hovel

This is going to be a tough post. It has been a tough week.

I am a sexual addict; and am involved in a ministry called For Men Only (FMO) because of that. My MSM account is parentally controlled with reports sent to my wife's email address. The defenses are pretty strong; but so is my will so I found a way through last week and have been wallowing in internet pornography - and got caught by my wife (not, incidentally, because of the email reports). While she said that she felt violated and unloved, she showed me grace in saying that she was sorry I had to struggle through this. That came to a head Saturday night.

Sunday morning came my pastor, Jeff Bell, teaching through:

Ephesians 4:17 So this I say, and affirm together with the Lord, that you walk no longer just as the Gentiles also walk, in the futility of their mind, 18 being darkened in their understanding, excluded from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hardness of their heart; 19 and they, having become callous, have given themselves over to sensuality for the practice of every kind of impurity with greediness. 20 But you did not learn Christ in this way, 21 if indeed you have heard Him and have been taught in Him, just as truth is in Jesus, 22 that, in reference to your former manner of life, you lay aside the old self, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit, 23 and that you be renewed in the spirit of your mind, 24 and put on the new self, which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth. 25 Therefore, laying aside falsehood, SPEAK TRUTH EACH ONE of you WITH HIS NEIGHBOR, for we are members of one another. 26 BE ANGRY, AND yet DO NOT SIN; do not let the sun go down on your anger, 27 and do not give the devil an opportunity. 28 He who steals must steal no longer; but rather he must labor, performing with his own hands what is good, so that he will have something to share with one who has need. 29 Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear. 30 Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. 31 Let all bitterness and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all malice. 32 Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you.

I am not going to try to cover the teaching - you can listen here (and you should - it was a great job). Since the teaching performed a 2x4 operation to the center of my forehead, I thought I would talk about that.

The word teaches that we can go to God when we sin and ask for forgiveness and be forgiven. James (5:16) teaches that we should confess to one another, and pray for one another, to be healed. Forgiveness from God, but it is confession to one another that brings healing. Now, I have FMO to go through that process in; but I feel like confession is necessary on a wider level - because pornography and sexual addiction are a huge issue among men, and women, who follow Christ: one that not enough churches are taking seriously and providing support and counseling for. People need to break the silence on this within the Body of Christ.

The analogy Jeff used to thread his teaching together was the TV show Extreme Makeover: The Home Edition on CBS ABC. For those unfamiliar, a home is picked for some reason - one that is usually unfit for a family to live in anymore for some reason. It could be mold, water damage, pestilence, etc. Usually the house is bulldozed or gutted while the family is away, and completely rebuilt or remodeled in order to make it a decent place to live. Jeff posited the idea that suppose instead of bulldozing the house, a new one was built next door. How many people would leave the new, clean residence with adequate space and facilities and move back into the squalor, filth, and lack of facilities next door.

I did that this week: moved right out of the light of God's grace and right back into the squalor of my sin nature and lusts. I damaged my marriage and hurt one of God's daughters - my wife. I believe my daughter knows; and therefore I have given a horrible example to my 13 year old child. For two weeks I have ignored other Kingdom, family, and work responsibilities to focus on viewing pornography.

I have repented (turned from) this activity; closed the holes and hopefully sealed the cracks. God has forgiven me; and I ask you who read this to pray for me so that I will be healed as James promised. I also ask you to press for FMO-type programs for your churches if you do not already have them: this is a critical issue standing between followers of Christ and their walk in the Light.

Resources:

• Sex, Men and God, by Douglas Weiss;
• Pure Desire ministries, and the book Pure Desire, by Ted Roberts;
• At the Altar of Sexual Idolatry, by Steve Gallagher;
• Every Man's Battle, by Steve Arturburn and Fred Stoeker

Please feel free to add your own resources in the comment section.

Read more!

Who Do You Get Your SAS From?

In a very good post at Street Prophets, Rabbi Brian challenged folks:

It often feels easier to be a caretaker for others than to take a good, hard look at myself, acknowledge what it is that I want, and then do it. Also, being "selfless" looks good.

But, to be healthy, functioning adults, we need to put ourselves first. If not we are willingly -- and often unwittingly -- committing violence against ourselves. Putting others first is both exhausting and unfair.

Now, this of course started a very good discussion about the balance in loving ourselves and loving others.

Read more!

The Monday Tour: 6/05/06

"Is There Historical Evidence for the Resurrection of Jesus?", a debate between William Craig and Bart Ehrman (HT: Stand to Reason Blog)

Two folks took on this Washington Post story of a women blaming the politics of the Bush administration for her having an abortion. The first is Melinda with "Bush Made Me Do It" at Stand to Reason Blog
----------
Kyle at Habakkuk's Watchpost is fascinated by this index on the rapture. Hope springs eternal - but I would start writing my papers.
----------
Omar at Iraq the Model looks at the "Rumor of the Day" with interesting thoughts on conspiracy theories and new democratic thought.
----------
Scot McKnight at Jesus Creed in "The Apostle of Grace", his introduction to a summer bible study on Romans, quotes N.T. Wright:

“Romans is neither a systematic theology nor a summary of Paul’s lifework, but it is by common consent his masterpiece.”

Scot is working through Romans this summer. Up to now he has had (after the introduction):

• "The Gospel of Grace"
• "Paul's Prayers for Rome"
• "The Gospel That Makes Things Right"
• "Wrath"

are the 1st five. You can pick up on the series and keep track of it under the Bible Studies category.
----------
"Christian Carnival CXXIV" highlights:

• Ray at The Bible Archive looks at the "The Condition of Man"
• For those with a philosophic bent, Brian at ChristianThinker.net recommends "The Analytic Theist: An Alvin Plantinga Reader"
• Funky Dung at Ales Rarus is "Investigating NFP [Natural Family Planning]: The Great Embryo Killer?"
• Brendt from Musings of Two-Sheds Gomer continues his "Lies That Will Kill You" series with "Only One Flavor of Fear"
• Dave Taylor looks at the difference between a believer and a disciple in "Second Thoughts on Making Disciples: What Difference Does it Make". In case you haven't read it (I haven't) Dave links the "Lausanne Covenant (1974)" which seems to be the Nicene Creed of evangelicals. Five evangelical churches and I have never seen it though. Huh. Also linked here, "The Manila Manifesto (1989)"
• Wow, what a useful list of Christian definitions (HT: Nerd Family)
• Lingamish wants you to know "The Bible Wasn't Written to You"
• Leslie examines the death of David Sharp on Mount Everest after being declared "Effectively Dead"
• David, the JollyBlogger, examines "Women in Church and the Power Paradigm"

----------
Rick is the second blogger I ran into on the women that George Bush made have sex
----------
Next Week?

Read more!

50 Ways to Leave Your Lover

The title has little to do with the post - it is just I think of the Paul Simon song every time I read the title of the book my community group is reading. Community Group is the name for an adult Bible study at my new church - and it is a good name. Small groups within a church are where the real community occurs.

The book is John Piper's Fifty Reasons Why Jesus Came to Die. Posting the reasons here was inspired by a discussion at Street Prophets that ended up revolving around atonement and the various views of whether it happened (or not) and what it meant (or not). Before that discussion I had thought about posting about the book; and had been mulling over how to do a single post, or a series - and how in-depth I would get. After the discussion, I knew I would - because humans always try to find the main reason - the proper theology - when all of the reasons matter..

The "donut theology" discussion - I think the largest number of comments at Street Prophets yet - highlighted this point linked above:

The death of Jesus is of foremost importance for the world. And the central issue of Jesus’ death is not the cause, but the meaning—God’s meaning . . . John Piper has gathered from the New Testament fifty reasons behind the crucifixion of the Christ. Not fifty causes, but fifty purposes—in answer to the most important question facing us in the twenty-first century:

Why did Jesus suffer and die?
A book review/bible study

These are the chapter titles, and the key verses.

1. To absorb the wrath of God: Galatians 3:13; Romans 3:25; 1 John 4:10
2. To please His heavenly Father: Isaiah 53:10; Ephesians 5:2
3. To learn obedience and be perfected: Hebrews 5:8; Hebrews 2:10
4. To achieve His own resurrection from the dead: Hebrews 13:20-21
5. To show the wealth of God's love and grace for sinners: Romans 5:7-8; John 3:16; Ephesians 1:7
6. To show His own love for us: Galatians 5:2; Ephesians 5:25; Galatians 2:20
7. To cancel the legal demands of the law against us: Colossians 2:13-14
8. To become a ransom for many: Mark 10:45
9. For the forgiveness of our sins: Ephesians 1:7; Matthew 26:28
10. To provide the basis for our justification: Romans 5:9; Romans 3:24; Romans 3:28
11. To complete the obedience that becomes our righteousness: Philippians 2:8; Romans 5:19; 2 Corinthians 5:21; Philippians 3:9
12. To take away our condemnation: Romans 8:34
13. To abolish circumcision and all rituals as the basis of salvation: Galatians 5:11; Galatians 6:12
14. To bring us to faith and keep us faithful: Mark 14:24; Jeremiah 32:40
15. To make us holy, blameless and perfect: Hebrews 10:14; Colossians 1:22; 1 Corinthians 5:7
16. To give us a clear conscience: Hebrews 9:14
17. To obtain for us all things that are good for us: Romans 8:32
18. To heal us from moral and physical sickness: Isaiah 53:5; Matthew 8:16-17
19. To give eternal life to all who believe on Him: John 3:16
20. To deliver us from the present evil age: Galatians 1:4
21. To reconcile us to God: Romans 5:10
22. To bring us to God: 1 Peter 3:18; Ephesians 2:13
23. So that we might belong to Him: Romans 7:4; 1 Corinthians 6:19-20; Acts 20:28
24. To give us confident access to the Holiest place: Hebrews 10:19
25. To become for us the place where we meet God: John 2:19-21
26. To bring the Old Testament priesthood to an end and become the eternal High Priest: Hebrews 7:23-27; Hebrews 9:24-26; Hebrews 10:11-12
27. To become a sympathetic and helpful priest: Hebrews 4:15-16
28. To free us from the futility of our ancestry: 1 Peter 1:18-19
29. To free us from the slavery of sin: Revelation 1:5-6; Hebrews 13:12
30. That we might die to sin and live to righteousness: 1 Peter 2:24
31. That we would die to the law and bear fruit for God: Romans 7:4
32. To enable us to live for Christ and not ourselves: Hebrews 7:23-27; Hebrews 9:24-26; 2 Corinthians 5:15
33. To make His cross the ground of all our boasting: Galatians 6:14
34. To enable us to live by faith in Him: Galatians 2:20
35. To give marriage its deepest meaning: Ephesians 5:25
36. To create a people passionate for good works: Titus 2:14
37. To call us to follow His example of lowliness and costly love: 1 Peter 2:19-21; Hebrews 12:3-4; Philippians 2:5-8
38. To create a band of crucified followers: Luke 9:23; Matthew 10:38
39. To free us from bondage to the fear of death: Hebrews 2:14-15
40. So that we would be with Him immediately after death: 1 Thessalonians 5:10; Philippians 1:21,23; 2 Corinthians 5:8
41. To secure our resurrection from the dead: Romans 6:5; Romans 8:11; 2 Timothy 2:11
42. To disarm the rulers and authorities: Colossians 2:14-15; 1 John 3:8
43. To unleash the power of God in the gospel: 1 Corinthians 1:18; Romans 1:16
44. To destroy the hostility between races: Ephesians 2:14-16
45. To ransom people from every tribe and language and people and nation: Revelation 5:9
46. To gather all his sheep from around the world: John 11:51-52
47. To rescue us from final judgment: Hebrews 9:28
48. To gain his joy and ours: Hebrews 12:2
49. So that He would be crowned with glory and honor: Hebrews 2:9; Philippians 2:7-9; Revelation 5:12
50. To show that the worst evil is meant by God for good: Acts 4:27-28

Again, these are the chapter titles in the book, and the key verses for each chapter. The book has two pages for each chapter heading; and much more discussion and analysis. Pick up a copy and enjoy.

Read more!

Christian Carnival CXXIV (124) is up

The introduction from Jeremy Pierce at Parableman:

This week's carnival progresses through the scriptures, with each post assigned to a different book of the Bible. In some cases, the choice was obvious. In others it might be more of a stretch, or it may be one out of several possible choices. I didn't want to repeat any so as to use as many books as I could, which means some posts may not be with their most obvious pick. Some posts didn't have any obvious choice, so I tried to find the closest I could. With a few I just chose a book actually mentioned in the post, even if that book wasn't central. So on to our tour through the scriptures . . .

About Christian Carnival:

Contributing a Post to the Christian Carnival

The Christian Carnival is open to Christians of Protestant, Orthodox, and Roman Catholic convictions. One of the goals of this Carnival is to offer our readers to a broad range of Christian thought.

Posts need not be of a theological topic. Posts about home life, politics, or current events, for example, written from a Christian worldview are welcome.

Update: As the goal of this Carnival is to highlight Christian thought in the blogosphere, entries will be limited to blogs that share that goal. Blogs with content that is focused on a business, that has potentially offensive material Christians may not want to link to on their sites, or has no reference to distinctively Christian thought may not be included in this Carnival. There are other Carnivals that would be a more appropriate venue for that material. I realize that this will be a judgment call on the part of the Carnival administrator, and being human she may make mistakes. However, as the Christian Carnival is getting quite large, and it is sometimes questionable whether the entrants are seeking to promote Christian thought, I find this necessary.

Update: We also expect a level of discourse that is suitable for a Christian showcase. Thus entries may be refused if they engage in name-calling, ad hominem attacks, offensive language, or for any similar reason as judged by the administrator.

So, if you have a post in this framework - go here to find out more: Christian Carnival Participation Instructions.

Read more!