Thursday, December 18, 2008

Carl Trueman on “The Case for Gay Marriage”


Wow. Don’t you think that is “there is no truth”? It certainly sounds just like it only in a nicer way that almost sounds like there is truth. As in there is absolute truth…..but it’s subjective. The Scriptures have authority, but don’t really say so since we can’t divine the true will of God. Then again, that’s very -esque.

I know we have to shy away from shutting our ears and running (along the lines of what Nathan said), but that is far from what is going on here. Just as a point, then, following your logic, as a Christian, I can't and shouldn't assert that Christ is the only way, and that he wasn't God’s son and that he wasn’t really God. After all, we don’t really know precisely what the words mean. That’s just what they mean to me right now.

Read actual comments.

Tuesday, December 16, 2008

James Kushiner on Single-Issue Voting


I’ve written and rewritten this. I read your comments and others like it and I am struck with an incredible sense of incredulity (as, I’m sure, you are as well). It saddens me that abortion isn’t seen as the atrocity it is. It saddens me that we can look and with great ease call slavery shameful and an atrocity but then say there are many issues alongside abortion. It’s sad that SD couldn’t get an abortion ban passed. I think it shows how we have devalued innocent lives and how we have desensitized ourselves by myriad excuses and justifications. The SD vote also demonstrated the influence of RvW (one of the major objections was the amount of tax dollars spent fighting against lawsuits to defend it. A defense that would be met with loss given the current (and now future) SC compilation…..). I think it’s also sad that abortion is an industry. It generates money. Much of that under the guise of any ban being government intrusion into the private medical decisions that affect how doctors treat women while no consideration is taken for the life of the child.

At best, I think in the next 4 years we’ll see no changes in the extension of RvW. At worst, we will see FOCA passed, funding cut for crisis pregnancy centers and a roll against the modest gains pro-life has seen in the last decade or so (just under).

Read actual comments.

“Pro-lifers” for Obama

“I do think that a strong argument can be made that abortion is one of, if not the most important moral issue in our nation. That does not make it the most important issue to the election. (Russ)

I think you codify the argument. We minimize abortion below slavery, but (as many have said) we would never vote for a candidate supporting it. The same can be said about any number of other issues. We should fight for life on all battlegrounds, and this was one of the biggest.

FOCA has been mentioned many times by the president elect. That said, I agree that the speech was simply a typical political overspeak. And yes, abortion would not have likely been eliminated with McCain. But the continued (and expansion of) on-access abortion is seen as more than just another issue by the president elect (as he has stated RvW would influence SC nominations and he fully supports FOCA in more than a passing manner, apparently).

And to go with Alando’s statement, yes we should pray as Mohler stated. I hope (pray) that Michelle Obama’s family stance is real. I think that goes many miles for some of the atrocities of our new American families (divorce, dead-beat dads, etc.). Our prayers should be for Obama to have been courting votes with his FOCA comment. They should be for the protection of our president against the idiots who see him as an affront (as a black man). For his decisions to be Kingdom-centered rather than man-centered. But the fact is that the election demonstrated how sidelined the unborn are. And I don’t think it right to join in and ignore it. Hence why it is still discussed.

Read actual comments.

'On Faith’ on Gay ‘Marriage’


Calvinists deny culpability? I kinda short-cut there (ha ha).

The closest I can get is a father-child analogy*. I see my child reaching for the cookie. I tell him don’t, you’ll get a tummy ache. I “know” when I leave the room, he’ll try it again. I could explain how the gastric system performs poorly when too much sugar is consumed, thus causing the ache. But he’s 3 and doesn’t know how to spell “consumed”. Thus a life lesson. He’s responsible that he chose to eat the cookie. He also understands (hopefully) a little better that I was serious. He is culpable (even if he can’t spell it), but I “knew” what he would do. The differences are drastic, of course, but, in the end, similar. God knows the heart and we do have the same opportunity. The end was known before the beginning, but we are no less culpable for our decisions.

* - one which isn’t necessarily true.

PS: Which one is the dog, DJ or Darius? Am I too late to be in the running?

New Comment
As infuriating as it may be, I do enjoy reading the panel (it gives a good sense of how many people actually view their faith as opposed to how they may state it in a crowd). Some interesting quotes:

“The issue is never what the Bible says; it's what the readers say it says.”

“A far better goal is to ask people not to attempt to impose their theology on those who hold a different theological point of view.”

“…the Bible does not anticipate most features of today's debates.”

“If the Qur'an teaches that sexual activity outside of marriage is a sin (and it does), how can I condemn a significant portion of the population to sin or to a life of celibacy (which the Qur'an frowns upon as well)?”

“Gay people prefer people of the same sex, so if God made them that way, then that was God's choice.”

I think Paul’s words on tickling ears definitely come to mind. One distinction that is made and lost is that Christians condemn the sin, not the sinner. The unfortunate thing is that there are plenty of Phelps characters who take the wrong view (Peter’s words on gentleness and reverence come to mind). I think a good essay on the Christian side of the issue that is not just centered on the question of “OK or not?” is on Boundless. Our compassion isn’t demonstrated by embracing the sin, rather, in embracing the sinner (just as we would a repentant adulterer, a spouse-abuser, an embezzler, etc.). The balance and difficulty comes in remaining steadfast in the word (which does include turning out those who remain steadfast in their sin) while showing love (and compassion) for all. Condoning and embracing the sin is far more unloving.

New Comment
Would it be too bombastic to say that I'm a complementarian calvinist who believes Genesis isn't just a borrowed story? I would draw a smiley but I have to use alcohol to get the ink off the screen.

Read actual comments.

Tuesday, December 9, 2008

Ultimate 80’s Medley
We’re Not Gonna Take It in harmony. Uh, wow.

Paul, I think the joke might have been funnier if you weren’t first trying to insult SCC (from the original thread).

New Comment
You guys need to take a breather.

Paul, I'm sure you've already seen it, but here's an interesting blog post related to music.

Read actual comments.

Thursday, December 4, 2008

The Son’s Submission to the Father

My question is about whether “equal in power and glory” conflicts with “the Son is in eternal submission to the authority of the Father.”

It seems that complementarians won't and egalitarians would (almost must). The egalitarian rendering of 1 Peter 3, Col 3, Eph 5, it seems, is submission only comes on my terms (a veiled view of retaining power as authority to egalitarians necessarily means power, but not with a complementarian view as the authority is ordained by God, not our personal views……but I think we disagree on that, as well…..). As Michael said, the issues egalitarians have appear to be with the texts. Then again, I seem to think that we’ve had this discussion before on this site at least in one other post.

Read actual comments.

What comes out when you're squeezed?!
I like your post. While your title is a wee bit disturbing ;-), you also reminded me of a story I heard about Nazi Germany. I will very briefly paraphrase (I don't recall where I read or heard this first). Two women were sent to a concentration camp. They were tired, hungry, beaten, etc. by the time they got there. When they went into the bunks, they laid down for welcomed sleep but were met with stinging and biting. Fleas! One of them looks at the other and says let's pray and thank God for the fleas. We're to give thanks in all circumstances. The other woman said that was insane, but the first insisted. So they knelt down to pray. After a few weeks, the two women discovered that the guards wouldn't come into the barracks because of the fleas. So they were able to hold studies, prayer and whatever worship they could there without fear of reprisal from the guards. Ah, the blessing of fleas.

Read actual comments.

Tuesday, December 2, 2008

Has Obama Betrayed the Left-wing?

And in a similar manner, has Michelle Obama let down the team as well?

Don't know if it's window dressing (though I do think it manifests his dizzying position (over time) on the war). I think it will be something to which he'll point when enacting a spate of his other policies domestically. I think time might show how close he is to rep. on foreign policy but will demonstrate how far apart he is on the socialization of the US (through his domestic policies). Then again, I’m not a political guy. And I agree with Chris and his first guest. We’ll just have to see.

Read actual comments.

LA Times on Women in Ministry
While it might be fun to rehash the comp/egal discussion, I’ll stick with only slightly on subject items:

1) “In terms of political slant, the [Los Angeles Times] has moved to the left of The New York Times…” Now that’s saying something.
2) Am I supposed to refer to myself in third person for this comment?
3) Can CBMW get a blog spell checke ditor?


Read actual comments.