Always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason

June 03, 2005

My Blogroll

This isn't a true Blogroll Cruise -- it's more me talking about WHY these people are in my blogroll. If I can't justify it, I'm getting rid of it. That doesn't mean I don't LIKE it -- it just means that I'm trying to get down to 20 or so blogs (which I said I was going to do a month or so ago).

Al Mohler's blog: DUH! It's AL MOHLER!!! I think a link to his site is a requirement for attending Southern.
Antioch Road: Jason hits a lot of topics that I don't cover, especially political topics.
Back of the Envelope: Even if this wasn't a great all around blog -- the Weekly Webcomic Review is worth a read. He's a Sluggy fan, guys -- 'nuff said!!
Mind and Media: For some reason, I've got this listed as Blog for Books (which I am now changing). Everyone who likes to read should be involved in this -- you get free books!!
Blogcritics: I'm a member, it's worth reading. That covers it all, I think.
Blogs4God: With all the aggregators out there, it's nice to remember the original. It's still worth a read, too.
Bobby's Blog: Read the "Wha' Happened?" post there, and you'll understand. I like the way Bobby writes. He's one of the hidden gems in the Christian blogosphere.

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 11:25 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 226 words, total size 2 kb.

Been There, Done That

Last year, I wrote about a resolution that was sent before the Southern Baptist Convention that advocated the withdrawl of all children of SBC church members from public schools.

This year, they're doing it again.

The Arnold-Scarbrough Resolution: (a) applauds Christians working in the government schools as missionaries, (b) calls on churches to warn their members of the devastating effects of sending their children to a totally secular institution for their education, (c) calls on churches to become aggressive and pro-active in starting Christian schools and in supporting homeschooling.

I still think it's a bad idea.

more...

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 09:26 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 709 words, total size 4 kb.

1 I'm a Southern Baptist pastor whose wife is registrar at one of our two local high schools. The athletic director of the other high school, as well as many other public school educators, are active members of our church. We are able to have a positive impact in the public schools, truly "salt and light," because we are involved, not isolated. Our music minister's wife homeschools their children, and does a great job. I'm all for that if people feel it is best for their children. But the idea that all Christians should be called to withdraw from the public schools is a backing off of our evangelistic calling.

Posted by: Bob at June 04, 2005 08:53 PM (XRjNc)

2 Thanks for your comments, pastor! We fought a resolution like this this past year at the Kentucky Convention (there was so little support for it that it died in committee), and I was hoping that we'd get on with more important business at the Convention this summer, but I guess people want to fight the old battles rather than fighting the new ones.

Posted by: Warren at June 04, 2005 10:46 PM (a64K1)

3 I'm also a Southern Baptist pastor. I agree with your take and had hoped we seen the last of such a resolution. I'm glad you brought it up and let people know that all Souther Baptists don't think that way. Thanks!

Posted by: Tommy Ham at June 05, 2005 12:27 AM (LJbki)

4 Now there are TWO Southern Baptist pastors who agree with me. And I always thought it was hard for Southern Baptists to agree on ANYTHING (lol -- just kidding, guys). Wish I was headed to the convention this year, but I have to actually work this summer, or I won't be taking Systematic III with Dr. Moore in the fall (via the Internet, not live, unfortunately).

Posted by: Warren at June 06, 2005 11:28 PM (a64K1)

5 I appreciate the comments about the resolution. But wondering, where does it call for the educators to leave? I believe it is asking Southern Baptist parents to question what their children are being taught and also questioning whether or not children are spiritually prepared to be "salt & light".

Posted by: Suzanne at June 07, 2005 12:23 AM (cYlkM)

6 Thanks for your comment, Suzanne. They aren't asking for educators to leave -- they are questioning the ability of those educators to effect real change by giving up on public education. They are also questioning the church's ability to prepare kids for school, and parent's ability to effect change in schools. I think a much better strategy is to be supportive of parents' decsisions no matter what -- and provide a ministry for kids who are in public education, rather than throwing our hands in the air and saying "we're done with this." I don't even want to think what will happen to public education if "they" don't have to worry about what the Christian parents will say about what they're doing.

Posted by: Warren at June 07, 2005 12:41 PM (a64K1)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Bush and Abortion: The Truth Comes Out

Hat-tip to Christianity Today on this one -- let's see if anyone else picks it up.

"Abortions have increased during the Bush administration." How often have we been told that? Howard Dean said so. John Kerry said so during the campaign. Sojourners magazine reported it. And, though I've heard some people who were shocked, and some who didn't WANT to believe it, I haven't heard much refuting it.

Until now.

Politicians from Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to Howard Dean have recently contended that abortions have increased since George W. Bush took office in 2001.
This claim is false. It's based on an an opinion piece that used data from only 16 states. A study by the Alan Guttmacher Institute of 43 states found that abortions have actually decreased. Update, May 26: The author of the original claim now concedes that the Guttmacher study is "significantly better" than his own.

What motivation could people have had to spread this kind of story? Obviously, to break the evangelical block that was supporting Bush. MY question is why didn't anyone check into the allegations?

We have a "Christian blogosphere" that includes some talented people. Did we all miss this? Were we so invloved in damage control, making excuses for the President, that we took it for granted that the data was accurate? I admit, I was disturbed by this "fact" -- though I questioned how the President was going to do something about a "private decision between a woman and her doctor." Abortion is still legal. It is OUR responsibility to make sure that it doesn't have to happen.

Our responsibility NOW is to make sure, whenever someone spouts the "abortion has increased under Bush" line, that they learn the truth. Keep the link above handy -- they have background data there as well. Now that we have the facts, it's time to start letting people know about it.

{UPDATE: Jonathan Bunch over at In the Agora posted this two days ago. Joe Carter at The Evangelical Outpost made mention of this in yesterday's outtakes.

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 08:32 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 356 words, total size 2 kb.

June 02, 2005

The Latest Pewie!

Who will it be???

more...

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 05:33 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 362 words, total size 2 kb.

June 01, 2005

I Have Returned!

...to the Christian Carnival, that is!

With the move, and some of the really bad posts I wrote back at the old place, I haven't been in the Christian Carnival. Then I had time issues because of school, papers, and procrastination, so I couldn't get anything sent in.

I'm back.

The Carnival is up -- go there and read. There's some great stuff there.

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 01:45 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 70 words, total size 1 kb.

Total Truth: Part 1 -- What's in a Worldview?

{NOTE: This is the first part of my blogging review of the book Total Truth by Nancy Pearcey. I received this book through Mind and Media as a gift from the publisher (Crossway), who donated the books for the reviewers.}

If you've read any of Francis Schaeffer's books, especially Escape from Reason, the first section of Pearcey's book will seem very familiar. If you aren't familiar with Schaeffer's work, this section serves as an excellent summary (but you STILL need to read Schaeffer!). This shouldn't surprise anyone -- after all, Pearcey studied under Schaeffer at L'Abri, and is the Francis Schaeffer scholar at the World Journalism Institute. This section, and it's explanation of the dualistic nature of much of modern thought, is the foundation of the rest of the book.
more...

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 01:28 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 572 words, total size 4 kb.

May 31, 2005

Does Western Christendom Still Believe in God?

{This is a repost of one of my favorite posts at the old place. I'm gradually moving the best stuff over here -- eventually, I'll have everything in it's proper chronological order, but I want to put these first so that new readers can enjoy these "historic" posts. This is originally from November 21, 2004}

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

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

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 02:10 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1221 words, total size 7 kb.

Test

No Need to Click Here - I'm just claiming my feed at Feedster feedster:6cc11305b505f02aa713eacf602cf99e

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 01:54 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 16 words, total size 1 kb.

May 30, 2005

What IS Fundamentalism?

I'm reposting this from several posts I made on the old blog. I'm not reposting the whole thing -- just some parts, so you might want to head over there and read the full posts I made a little over a year ago. I just finished reading this piece by Frank Schaeffer. I like Frank -- I've read his books about his son in the Marines (Keepin Faith and Faith of Our Sons) and enjoyed them immensely. I've read his father's works, and been blessed by them. But I'm not sure that Frank "gets Fundamentalism" as well as he thinks he does. What is needed is a good definition of what fundamentalism is, and what it isn't. more...

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 02:43 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 725 words, total size 5 kb.

1 I like the term "historic fundamentalist". But I still would prefer a substitute for fundamentalist, even when used with historic. My earliest recollection of the use of the term fundamentalist was when, as a teenager, I was dragged to a youth conference at Jack Hyles church. Almost in the same sentence that he called himself a fundamentalist, he was asking a young man with long hair to leave the building. Then he proceded to pick on The Imperials. (my favorite group at the time) So even by putting "historic" in front, I get squeemish about being identified as a fundamentalist of any kind, when in fact....I am.

Posted by: Terry McCann at May 31, 2005 03:22 PM (g/EAS)

2 I'm finding a lot of people calling themselves 'Biblicists' -- that might be the way to go, I don't know. Labels are difficult things -- even the term "Christian" was coined by our enemies. I went to a Hyles youth conference when I was 16. Heard all about how you shouldn't kiss a girl until you marry her. That never took (and I know some guys who were VERY disappointed when some of the girls mentioned how much they LIKED that idea).

Posted by: Warren at June 01, 2005 12:36 PM (a64K1)

3 I'm a little surprised to find Frank Schaeffer (whose work I've enjoyed over the years - even the Calvin Becker books) calling his father a fundamentalist with all of the overtones that that word carries in the Protestant world. Schaeffer himself used the label Bible believing Christian and was certainly embraced far more readily by those who considered themselves evangelical than by those who styled themselves fundamentalists (at least that was the case in my neck of the woods). Most of the fundamentalists I knew considered Schaeffer to be too intellectual and too worldly (after all he listened to the Mother's of Invention, watched Satyricon and actually knew who Picasso and Dali were). In Sham Pearls For Real Swine Frank makes some valid points about American fundamentalism/evangelicalism. None of that book seemed to be pointed at his parents, both of whom in their published works disassociated themselves from the sort of high culture denying/pop culture embracing that he was critiqueing. It seems strange that he now uses the word fundamentalist to identify both of his parents. Francis Schaeffer towards the end of his life obviously had problems even with evangelicalism (The Great Evangelical Disaster deals with that). I suspect (as does Frank himself) that had his father lived longer he might have found himself in one of the historic branches of Christendom. Frank moved to Greek Orthodoxy, in large part because he was rejecting the logical rational thought of Western Christianity. After reading Sham Pearls and at least one book that he referred to in it, I ended up ultimately becoming a Roman Catholic. Greek Orthodoxy would have been a less painful move (although not a very realistic one in my area), but my study of Church history led me home to Rome. I understand why Frank rejected Protestantism, I even understand why he became Orthodox. What I have difficulty understanding is why he now identifies his parents with a branch of Protestantism that they conciously chose to not identify themselves with. Perhaps he is only using the historic definition of fundamentalism, but the word is so loaded at this point, and he knows that, that it seems like a slur to use it in reference to his parents. A lot of people have assumed that the Becker books are thinly veiled pictures of the Schaeffers. While there are details that obviously come from real life (the pot throwing and Calvin's lack of education) as detailed by Edith and by Susan Macaulay, it seems to me that much of what Frank is caricaturing is the lives that people who came to L'Abri described. I suspect that he has combined the worst parts of his parents with the worst parts of the true fundamentalists he was exposed to as he wrote the Becker books. The admiration that he clearly had for his father and the love he has for his mother has come through even in these post Becker years. When you read about their reaction to his getting Genie pregnant when he was 17 you do not see the reaction of the Beckers. You see the reaction of the Schaeffer's as Edith portrays them in What is A Family. Both Francis and Edith made it clear over the years that when you expect perfection or nothing you will get nothing. The problem in fundamentalist circles was and is so often that perfection is what is expected. That is why it is so disturbing to see Frank identifying his parents with something that they clearly (at least in their published work and audio tapes) rejected. I continue to be enriched by much of what the Schaeffers wrote, even while my conclusions have led me to a place they would not have intended. I do not consider Dr. Schaeffer's word the final authority, but I do consider that he raised questions that Christians need to consider in our post-modern world. Many people have come along since Dr. Schaeffer's death to grapple with these questions, some in response to Dr. Schaeffer, others because they in their own study began to realize the importance of the issues. I rarely look at my Schaeffer books anymore, but I will freely admit the intellectual debt that I owe him. I never would have dared to ask the questions, read the books, watch the films had he not challenged me to move beyond the fundamentalism of my youth. I suspect that Frank would not be Orthodox today if his father had been a typical fundamentalist. I suspect that all of the high art to which he was exposed played a part in where he ended up.

Posted by: Liz at September 13, 2005 02:52 PM (4S/Vw)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Judge Tells Parents what Religion to Teach

Ok, now I may be in disagreement with everyone who reads this blog on this issue. But that's never stopped me from shooting off my mouth before.

A judge in Indianapolis has decreed that a set of divorced parents can't teach their kid their religion. Because that religion is Wicca.

I disagree with pretty much everything Wicca teaches. I think they are totally wrong, and deceived, concerning the nature of the supernatural world. I sometimes wish that Christians had as much of an appreciation for the spiritual forces that are out there, though -- we tend to separate things into "God did it" and "Not real at all" and reject the whole "Satan did it" category out of hand. But I don't believe that everything supernatural is essentially good, or should be harnessed.

BUT -- last time I checked, the Constitution prohibited government interference in religion, including the religious instruction of children by their parents. As far as I can tell, the parents are in agreement about the religious training that their kids should have -- it may be the only thing they agree on, I don't know. The judge has prohibited the teaching of "non-mainstream religious beliefs and rituals." No definition of what "mainstream religious beliefs and rituals" actually ARE.

THAT'S a problem area. Evangelicalism is often considered non-mainstream. So the parents can't teach their kids evangelical Christianity? Never says that specifically, but it could be interpreted that way.

I hate to use the phrase "slippery slope" here, but it seems to fit. A dangerous precident has been established if this decision holds up. The government, or at least a representative of the government, is dictating to parents what type of religious training and education that their child can have. That is simply wrong.

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 10:53 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 309 words, total size 2 kb.

1 I agree with you, Warren. The parents are wrong, dead wrong, in my opinion, but the judge's ruling is unconstitutional. I would support those parents' legal battle in the same way as I support free speech for all points of view. No matter how wrong I think they are, when the government starts judging what you can and can't say (or teach your children) based on what THEY think is acceptable speech or religious beliefs, that's when Christians need to start worrying. Because it will only be a matter of time - and not long at all based on what I've seen - before OUR beliefs are judged to be intolerant and unacceptable.

Posted by: songstress7 at May 30, 2005 12:13 PM (ie93s)

2 I think that's what worries me the most about a lot of things that Cristians are trying to get passed into law -- there is a LOT of stuff that could come back to haunt us, in the not-too-distant future.

Posted by: Warren at May 30, 2005 02:15 PM (a64K1)

3 Wow. I can't believe the nerve of that judge! I agree that Wicca is not a good religion to teach children, but that is their right as parents and no judge should ever be allowed to interfere in that decision. I hope that judge faces disciplinary action. Who's to say that children can't be "rescued" from such religions anyway? I know people who've been saved from atheism, Catholicism, and Judaism. Why can't God save the child from Wiccanism? You know, some people could make the same argument against Catholicism being harmful or Islam being harmful, if they really wanted to stretch the limits of truth. This is so wrong. I sure hope this judge is not allowed to continue this way. I'm simply appalled.

Posted by: Kelly Miller at May 30, 2005 04:10 PM (weNac)

4 As a Pagan and a former Wiccan, I have to agree here. I don't like all of the things that Wicca teaches, but then I don't like a lot of the things that Satanism, many occult orders like the Golden Dawn, Buddhism, (to be perfectly honest) Christianity, Islam and even Hinduism teach, either. That's beside the point. What's PERFECTLY on-topic is that *no one* in the government has the right to interfere with the teaching and dissemination of *any* religion. You can worship the Megalomaniacal Star Goat, whatever. The government should have nothing to do with it. While I may not believe that Jesus is the one true way, I will stand up and openly declare that it is your right - given by your God, my Gods and everyone else's too - to believe, teach and practice that, and to worship as you so choose. End of rant. ~May you never thirst, Anja

Posted by: Anja Flower at November 04, 2005 09:57 PM (jhSHN)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

May 28, 2005

New Feature

Yes, I have succumbed. If you haven't noticed yet, there is a flickr box on the right sidebar. Right now, you can see pictures of my daughter's first dance recital, my daughter and me playing the guitar together, and my wife and daughter on the way to this year's prom (we chaperoned).

You won't see many shots of me, because I take most of the pictures. You WILL see lots of pictures of my daughter, because ... I take most of the pictures.

I'll add to it as I feel inclined.

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 10:53 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 95 words, total size 1 kb.

May 27, 2005

How then shall we Blog?

This is one of those posts that is hard to categorize, so I've dumped it into everything else. It's a little bit Intolerant Tolerance, but it's also a little bit Theology, but it doesn't really fit into those categories at all.

A bunch of us from Mind and Media have joined Blogcritics. Seems to be a perfect fit -- they review books, so do we. Match made in Heaven, right?
more...

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 10:31 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 521 words, total size 3 kb.

1 For what it's worth, Warren, I think you're taking the right approach. Obviously engaging in a flame-war is going to be a bad witness, and just leaving accomplishes nothing. Staying, and hopefully becoming a member of the community and allowing them to see other facets of your personality, looks like the best course of action, if you can develop a thick enough skin to take the insults that will surely still find you every so often.

Posted by: songstress7 at May 28, 2005 12:45 AM (ie93s)

2 I've heard that at least one person left because of the mistreatment -- and I don't want to knock that person's decision. It's a personal choice, and I'm sure they didn't do it lightly, or without a lot of thought. But whatever the reason for leaving, it gives "the other side" a victory, at least in theor perception. In reading some of the reaction to some other folks' offerings at the site, I wonder if I would have stuck around if my post had been similarly attacked. At least most of my commentors were targeting specific issues, and not just insulting my intelligence (or lack thereof). Ad hominem is tough to combat, and I have seen a lot of that exhibited. I'll probably post a review of Total Truth there when I finish it, just to irritate some people (lol). But I'll probably do some other reviews first.

Posted by: Warren at May 28, 2005 12:41 PM (a64K1)

3 Great, I can type ad hominem with no problem, but I mistype things like their (in my comment) and high (in the post). Sad thing is, two years ago I taught keyboarding to junior high school kids. How's THAT for "those who can't do, teach?"

Posted by: Warren at May 31, 2005 01:47 PM (a64K1)

4 You mean as a Christian we are not to blast them into submission. Now that is a novel concept. lol Keep up the great work!

Posted by: Wayne M at June 02, 2005 06:39 AM (y/2WM)

5 lol, Wayne. The sad thing is, a LOT of people haven't figured that out yet.

Posted by: Warren at June 02, 2005 09:12 AM (a64K1)

6 Total Truth!! Now that WILL be interesting! Love that book. Thanks for the experiential advice. I am new at this. Hopefully, God helps us to be gracious. You say yelling doesn't change minds but truthfully, I have never witnessed s changing of minds. I'd love to hear about a bending of the minds, rather than blending. Let us know if some lightbulbs go on, k?

Posted by: cwv warrior at June 02, 2005 12:59 PM (yP3uI)

7 I do think there are times to respond in kind. After all, there are two parts to the double proverb: Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself. Answer a fool according to his folly, lest he be wise in his own eyes. (Proverbs 26:4-5, ESV) Some people need to be put in their place, and only sarcasm or telling it like it is about downright awful reasoning will do it. Other people need to experience other kinds of responses. The trick is knowing when each is appropriate.

Posted by: Jeremy Pierce at June 25, 2005 07:39 PM (Ihkjb)

8 I agree, Jeremy. The problem is that I don't always know when each is appropriate. I tend to shy away from nailing people to the wall until it's the last resort -- which is probably not the best way to do things.

Posted by: Warren at June 25, 2005 08:03 PM (iJfPJ)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

May 26, 2005

Is the Reformation Over?

Mark Noll has co-written a new book with Carolyn Nystrom called Is the Reformation Over? An Evangelical Asessment of Contemporary Roman Catholicism that attempts to answer just this question. I just found out that the book is scheduled to be out in July, and it's on my reading list (now WAY too long).
more...

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 08:28 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 530 words, total size 3 kb.

1 The last paragraph reminded me of Mark 9:39-41 "...for whoever is not against us is for us." Good post.

Posted by: kyer at May 27, 2005 01:25 AM (oY0vI)

2 What unites us is greater than what divides us. While many Evangelicals (like me) had the greatest respect and admiration for Pope John Paul II, there were some things that troubled us about him. The depth of his Marian devotion led some to question his salvation. Praise God that the burden of judging such a great man as Karol Wojtyla belongs to Him alone. Pope Benedict XVI appears to be poised to move towards greater Christian unity. In "Dominie Iesus", which was widely considered to have been authored largely by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, the "filique" was dropped from a restatement of the Nicene Creed. Also Ratzinger was very prominent in outreach to Evangelicals and Protestants during John Paul II's papacy. The new Pope has made Christian unity a priority for his Papacy.

Posted by: William C. Fisher at May 30, 2005 04:33 PM (GBA+6)

3 I applaud the positive attitude of the authors of the book, who emphasize that Christians, if they are indeed Christians of the faith preached by Christ, must emphasize what they have in common, not what divides them. To answer the question, however, IS the reformation over, I have to believe that no, it continues, it multiplies, it dissents, argues and splinters. To follow just one branch, we see that the Methodists begat the Pentecosals, who begat the Assembly of God, who begat Jimmy Swaggart, who begat TBN and Benny Hinn. Somewhere down the road Joel Olsteen popped up. If you are a masochist, you can detour to Ken Copeland. One splinter of the gospel taken from the previous splinter becomes the basis for a whole new megachurch. Who dares guess what their descendants and offshoots will preach in 20 years time? Sadly, the reformation continues. Those who value the faith of Christ will try to brake that development. Izydor

Posted by: Izydor at August 20, 2005 10:31 PM (RQis0)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Blogroll Cruise: 5/26/2005

This is my very first Blogroll Cruise at the new site. So let's get started!! For those who aren't familiar, this is just a look at posts that have caught my attention while surfing through my blogroll. I do this every so often, supposedly as a service to my readers, but actually because I can't think of anything original to write ... more...

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 10:21 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 301 words, total size 2 kb.

May 25, 2005

Pagan Roots?

I'm writing this in response to some reactions to my review of James White's The King James Only Controversy over at Blogcritics. Most of the comments on the review have little to do with the actual subject of the book (the controversy over modern translations of the Bible), but rather toiuch on the roots of Christianity itself. more...

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 10:06 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 780 words, total size 5 kb.

May 24, 2005

One Year Ago Today ...

I have no idea what to write today, other than to let you know that I've got another review (actually two) at Blogcritics. And the KJVO review has generated a little bit of discussion (more than most of my posts at my own blog -- hmmm). So go over there and read -- and respond!

The real reason for this post is to take a trip back in time. One year ago today, what was I writing about? I was trying to refute the whole "all evangelicals are Reconstructionists" insanity (and probably doing a bad job of it), and I was confounded by the insanity of Christian secessionists who wanted to spark secession by one or two states. I had made a minor change to the blog template (not many people noticed...). But I was also busy wishing Nick Queen a happy birthday. Hmmm. If that was a year ago today -- that means it's Nick's birthday again!!!

Head over to his blog and wish him a happy birthday. Tell him I sent you!

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 08:11 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 184 words, total size 1 kb.

May 23, 2005

What's on YOUR Desk?

From Rebecca Writes, via Challies.com.

What books are on my desk? Well, my desk is almost too small for the computer I have on it, so I'm including what's stacked up next to it:

The Historical Evidence for the Virgin Birth by Vincent Taylor

Honor, Patronage, Kinship and Purity by David de Silva

At the Pure Fountain of Thy Word: Andrew Fuller as an Apologist edited by Michael A.G. Haykin

The Holy Bible: New American Standard Version

The Holy Bible: English Standard Version

Total Truth by Nancy Pearcey

God's Bestsellerby Bryan Moynahan

So what books are on YOUR desk?

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 09:57 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 115 words, total size 1 kb.

May 21, 2005

Mark Study: Mark 7:24-30

And from there he arose and went away to the region of Tyre and Sidon. And he entered a house and did not want anyone to know, yet he could not be hidden. But immediately a woman whose little daughter was possessed by an unclean spirit heard of him and came and fell down at his feet. Now the woman was a Gentile, a Syrophoenician by birth. And she begged him to cast the demon out of her daughter. And he said to her, "Let the children be fed first, for it is not right to take the children's bread and throw it to the dogs." But she answered him, "Yes, Lord; yet even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs." And he said to her, "For this statement you may go your way; the demon has left your daughter." And she went home and found the child lying in bed and the demon gone.
(Mark 7:24-30 ESV)
more...

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 10:30 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 531 words, total size 3 kb.

Blog Critics

I am now a part of the vast cabal known as Blogcritics. My first post is right here, so go over there and read it, and comment!!

If you blog, and you review things like books or music, or even movies, Blogcritics is the place YOU need to be. Why not apply?

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 01:52 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 56 words, total size 1 kb.

May 20, 2005

More on the Qu'ran Desecrations

Found this interesting article at the Wall Street Journal (registration required). Since you have to register for it, I'll quote the relevant section here.
more...

Posted by: Warren Kelly at 04:49 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 376 words, total size 2 kb.

73kb generated in CPU 0.0368, elapsed 0.3586 seconds.
68 queries taking 0.3427 seconds, 239 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Search Thingy

Monthly Traffic

Pages: 48273
Files: 715
Bytes: 258.7M
CPU Time: 18:55
Queries: 1755336

Content

Posts: 1039
Comments: 3758

Feeds

June 03, 2005

June 02, 2005

June 01, 2005

May 31, 2005

May 30, 2005

May 28, 2005

May 27, 2005

May 26, 2005

May 25, 2005

May 24, 2005

May 23, 2005

May 21, 2005

May 20, 2005

Search Thingy

Recent Comments

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

Monthly Traffic

Content

Feeds