May 31, 2005
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:
May 30, 2005
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.
May 28, 2005
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.
May 27, 2005
May 26, 2005
May 25, 2005
May 24, 2005
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!
May 23, 2005
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
(both now overdue from the library at Southern)
So what books are on YOUR desk?
May 21, 2005
(Mark 7:24-30 ESV)
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?
May 20, 2005
May 18, 2005
|What military aircraft are you?|
You are an F/A-22. You are technologically inclined, and though you've never been tested in combat, your very name is feared. You like noise, but prefer not to pollute any more than you have to. And you can move with the best.
|Click Here to Take This Quiz|
Brought to you by YouThink.com quizzes and personality tests.
Hat tip to Scott at The Crusty Curmudgeon
May 16, 2005
Thanks to Bryan at Spare Change.
In his attempt to reimagine Christianity, Kristof has engaged the arch-heretic John Shelby Spong. Paul was a gay man who attacked homosexuality to keep his own desires in check. Judas didn't betray Christ, because Paul (as well as the ever-elusive Q source) doesn't mention the betrayal at all. Never mind that Paul doesn't attempt to give an account of the life of Christ, and the betrayal never really factored into his ministry or teachings. If Paul didn't mention it, then it didn't happen. And Q seems to be the last refuge of doubt -- if we see something that all three Synoptics have in common, it has to be from Q (rather than it having to do with the common inspiration of God that the writers labored under).
Kristof comes short of actually agreeing with Spong, but he does say "at least he's engaged in the debate," and encourages liberals to engage conservative Christians on their own turf, on their own terms. If Spong is the best they have, I think they're better off with their current strategy of ridicule and ignore.
69 queries taking 0.7278 seconds, 233 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.