After a year and a half of doing other things and ignoring this place I am finally back. I thought I was done with this but I decided I missed it.So, I’m back!
I am a little confused by Rick Warren’s involvement in growing Mega-Synagogues. Not sure what to think actually.
The idea of mega-synagogues with yoga workshops, banjo-playing Jewish rock stars leading mussaf service, and Rick Warren-styled rabbis preaching to 10,000 overworked, overeducated, and over-purpose-driven Jews would sure be a sight to see.Virtual Talmud: Rick Warren’s Mega-Synagogue
Help me out here.Anybody know where this mine in Tasmania is?‘Fossil’ hat
Should churches discipline members because of their politics?Actually, I am inclined to agree with Albert Mohler on this. Churches probably should draw the lines in extreme cases like with Hitler.Of course, we all know Hitler was more like a republican than a democrat.Interesting.
I remember seeing this debate on PBS in 1997. I taped it and watched it with my students. Mr. William F. Buckley, Mr. Philip Johnson, Dr. Micheal Behe, and Dr. David Berlinski argued that schools should point out that Darwinian evolution is not the only plausible theory for explaining the origin of life. We enjoyed the debate, but decided the solution was not clear. It is obvious to me that Darwinian evolution does a poor job of explaining the origin of life, but whether public school should present ‘alternate’ theories is not clear to me.One of my favorite parts of the debate was when a presenter from the con side began to confront Mr. Johnson about books written by ICR. In either case, Mr. Johnson was noticeably conflicted. No doubt, he wanted to distance himself from a radical ‘creationist’ organization without compromising his strong faith. When challenged to respond to questions on the ’silliness’ of books depicting dinosaurs roaming the earth with men, he finally responded by saying
It is silly. Just almost as silly as the work of Richard Dawkins.
Saying this turned the tables. It was evident that the con side wanted to treat Dawkins just as the pro side wanted to treat organizations like ICR.This is the light in which I’ve always seen Dawkins. He can resort to philosophical games regarding the ‘problems’ with Darwinism. He can talk in terms of generalizations. Why? He doesn’t have to worry about the science. He is not a scientist. He can spout generalizations and grandiose verbiage. No need to support it with facts. I’ve read Dawkins’ books and I enjoyed them, but I see him for what he is. He is a militant atheist who believes he has found in Darwinism a tool which he can use to demolish theism. He is not a scientist. He writes popular books in order to persuade his readers that Darwinism can be applied to other areas of life.Albert Mohler correctly points out that Dawkins has is a committed atheist with an aggressive and undisguised secularism, but misses the point that this irrational behavior stems from his mixture of science and philosophy. I pray that proponents of Intelligent Design do not become known for the same.
Frankly, this kind of thing doesn’t surprise me. I know it should, but it doesn’t.I saw a report on ESPN that these guys believe they need to get out there and win. They believe that is the only way to redeem themselves. You know the sad thing is that they are right. People will forgive them as long as they win.Vikings Face Boat-Load of New ProblemsSome people never learn.
I am very tired of the evolution/creation debate for a lot of reasons, but here is quick glimpse at my real problem.This post was written in reaction to this post. I have read both of these posts and I cannot help think that the authors actually agree.You should read both posts and see for yourself, but the following quotes illustrate what I mean.
“Evolution in the sense of common ancestry might be true, but evolution in the neo-Darwinian sense — an unguided, unplanned process of random variation and natural selection — is not. Any system of thought that denies or seeks to explain away the overwhelming evidence for design in biology is ideology, not science.”Finding Design in Nature by Christoph Schonborn July 7, 2005
“The theory of evolution can be disturbing to Christians because it seems to clash with the idea of divine creation,” said Nicola Cabibbo, president of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, a 78-member body of academics who advise the pope on scientific matters. Cabibbo is a professor of particle physics at Rome’s La Sapienza University.”However, this clash is false. What clashes with divine creation is an extension of the theory of evolution into materialistic interpretations, so-called ‘evolutionism,’ ” Cabbibo told NCR July 18. “That’s not science, it’s metaphysics.”Catholic experts urge caution in evolution debate by John L. Allen Jr.
Late in July, I caught this post at Christian Conservative. My first reaction was anger. I thought it was inappropriate and very much out of context. My plan was to re-read and thoughfully mark it up with comments, but when I returned to it I was pset once again.Now that I return to my blog after a brief vacation, I would like to get this finished. Problem is - I no longer feel like expending the effort. I read through it again, but all I have to say is the obvious. President Truman’s comments were not in reference to our current war and I find it disrespectful to presume what Truman would say about this ‘war.’One of the comments to this post is worth quoting too:
For now, I’ll just point out that Harry Truman was the originator of the phrase “The Buck stops here.”So there’s no way I see him allowing people as genuinely and arrogantly incompetent as Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, et al, bungle something as important as managing a conquered country.– jim b
BTW, does anyone else think that asking if Truman would approve of dropping bombs is begging the question.
Just finished watching a piece on ABC’s NightLine about lobbyists Jack Abramoff and Michael Scanlone. Abramoff was paid millions of dollars by one native american tribe to protect its interests in DC. He used some of that money to hire Ralph Reed to stop a native american casino in Texas. Then when the casino was shut down, he moves in at the last minute to offer his ’services’ to them.Am I the only one who thinks this a classic technique of organized crime? This is despicable.Follow the story at Indianz.com
I’v seen a few posts, including this one, regarding the results of Terri Schiavo’s autopsy and the appropriateness of an apology to her husband.This was a sensitive issue and I don’t pretend to know what the right things to do and say are, BUT I think many people owe this man an apology regardless of what the autopsy ‘proves.’Am I the only one to think this way?
In 1999, I was all excited about using online tools to read and study the Scriptures. It was part of my daily routine. I quickly gave up on this for the convenience of using ‘a real Bible.’ In the last couple years I have shown my students where these tools are and how to find them, but I don’t really use them myself. Another teacher (who is not a hacker by any means) shared during devotions one day about how she uses her WebTV to hear the scriptures read to her, but it didn’t really push me to get back into it.My father-in-law was here about ten days ago and he asked me what I knew about online Bibles and bible study. I told him what little I knew, but had to admit that I know very little.His question nudged me to look into this again for a couple of reasons.
Anyway, I found these to start with.
I found this belief quiz very interesting. Twenty multiple choice question you can answer and rank importance for.The first time I took the quiz, I scored a follows:
This seemed about right, although I consider myself leaning toward the liberal more than conservative.Then I had an idea. Answer the questions the same but click High for importance on all issues. I had a suspicion this would raise my score as a conservative, and I was correct.Then another idea. Answer the questions about creation/evolution in a more liberal fashion. Sure enough, that raised my liberal score, dropped my conservative score and my quaker score dove.One more thing. Change my answers on questions 13 - 16. These are the questions about abortion, gay rights, gender roles, and divorce. I found it very interesting that this had a large impact on my scores. (It brought my conservative score to 100%.) I’m not sure that should be.
When I heard about “Justice Sunday” I didn’t know what to think. Frankly I am tired of talking about this whole issue. I wish I could get more Christians to understand my point of view. If you’ve been reading my blog since the old days, you no doubt have read more than one post on faith in politics. I lost all of the posts from my old blosxom blog, but I still have some from the Blogger days. Maybe someday I’ll move them over.While I am just too tired to put my thoughts on this matter into writing one more time, I wanted to post a link to this article by Jim Wallis. I don’t agree with Wallis on every issue, but I think he’s right on with this.
I have no objection to Christian leaders expressing their faith in the public arena - it’s a good thing that I do all the time. The question is not whether to do so, but how. As I heard more and more about “Justice Sunday,” it felt to me like it was crossing an important line - saying that a political issue was a test of faith.–Jim Wallis
Couldn’t agree more, Jim!
I’ve really been thinking about the pastor’s messages from the last two Sundays.I realized today that Mom’s conversion is a testimony to the things I’ve been thinking about.When I was very young we moved to Atlantic City so Dad could get to work without a car. Not long after we moved just outside the city. I’m not sure if we had a car by then, but that is not important right now. Anyway, Brian was very young and Mom knew she wanted to have him baptized. She looked in the phone book for a church. She had two “needs” at that time. One, she wanted a Methodist church. Two, she wanted a church with air conditioning. She found such a place and went to visit.The pastor’s message was exactly what she needed to hear. Paul was in prison. An earthquake came and Paul was released. A prison guard asked Paul, “What must I do to be saved?” The pastor pointed out that Sunday morning that this guard may not have been asking how to be “saved,” but rather how to be saved from the earthquake. BUT, the answer is the same either way. “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you shall be saved.”It doesn’t matter what we think we need. We need Jesus.
[powered by WordPress.]
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Mar | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | 30 | |||||
23 queries. 3.150 seconds
