A La Carte (1/20)

http://www.challies.com/sideblog/archives/2009/01/a_la_carte_120.phpKim: That cracks me up.
Tim: I think you need to do more stumping. You're only 61 GR's from beating out Piper (ha ha.........ha..........). Of course, DG has more authors there........

Read actual comments.

Rick Warren To Pray In Jesus’ Name

http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=3423Russ:

You provoked a few thoughts.

1) What you did was to say, take out the offending ideas and language and the prayer is OK (even, as you say, particularly good). Isn’t that kind of like saying, well, if you substitute “the one true God” for Baal and Ashtaroth and the Israelite’s prayers to those gods were really OK.
2) He called it a prayer and invoked God’s name. Doesn’t that immediately elevate what we say?
3) While you and I “amen” righteous works (such as clothing the poor, seeking equality in human rights…..protecting the unborn……OK, that last one wasn’t mentioned, but still….), when offered to the gods of all, they are offensive. A good speech of what we can do to help humanity, yes. In the remotest consideration of prayer to God, not remotely pleasing.

Or so is my thought, anyway.

Read actual comments.

The Cost of Education

http://www.boundlessline.org/2009/01/the-cost-of-education.htmlYou know, I’m so torn by the education system these days. This discussion has brought several thoughts to my mind.

1) Why do we just “accept” that it’s OK to think well, it’s government, inefficiencies are the norm? Shouldn’t we expect a little more out of those who lead our country?
2) We should care about the education of others.
a. It nearly always leads to better things.
b. It is a great way to get out (of the cycle of poverty) for those who want to put into it.
c. We should care about the education of, but we should never rely on gov’t to be our giving source (Support is fine, I’d say, but never rely). I read it here, I think, that we, as Christians, should be embarrassed by every dollar spent by the government providing for those in need (as we should). While a bit over-the-top, it’s spot on to highlight this fact.
3) Render to Ceasar gives me some comfort here, however, the state of much of the education system is flowing freely against the grain of Christian thought and is growing increasingly hostile towards Christian thought.
4) But that doesn’t matter since we do live in a democratic society (though some of the recent laws (mandating accredited schooling) rendering homeschooling a non-option puts that at odds, too).
5) If the statistics were true (75% of Americans are Christian), it would make sense that their “cheerful giving” (ala 2 Cor 9) would far surpass that and would likely be a more charitable environment to boot.
6) I’ve heard it argued that government programs (public education being one of them in a sense) tend to impart sluggard tendencies. Can it also be said that we (as Christians) also fall into a trap of not giving because “we gave at the office” (through taxes?)?

Even if you don’t agree with Ted, he brings up a thought-provoking subject.

Read actual comments.

The Bishop’s Unchristian Prayer

http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=3401
I suppose he's being biblical. He promised not to pray a Christian prayer and he kept his promise. If he believes what he says (“…that every religion’s [g]od judges us…”), then I suppose he's swearing (to say a non-Christian prayer) to his own (eternal) hurt.

Very sad indeed. I noticed he had to shoehorn in the homosexual slant as well (”Bless us with anger – at discrimination, at home and abroad, against….gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.”). I wonder if Rick Warren will shoehorn in his same view on that subject (my hope is that he wouldn’t as that should not be his agenda for this grand stage.).

---

New Comment:


Don:

There is a difference between not discriminating and standing for your faith. There’s a difference between admitting we are idolaters and saying that idolatry is OK and we should embrace it (spot on that God is an idol-smasher). There is a difference between having different views of God* versus being prepared to present a reason for the hope that we have. Even in the most broad reading, this is non-Christian. I am all for tolerance. I agree that our freedom of speech affords all the right (privilege) of speaking in honor of whatever they want. We can’t say that Robinson doesn’t have a right to be there (that would be discrimination in a negative manner). He clearly does have the right (we don’t live in a Theocracy). However, there should be impassioned responses to this. We should stand for our God. Not doing so behind a veiled let’s-all-be-friends (or log-plank) motif is the lukewarm church. If you’re giving a lecture on religions of the world, great, (we must) include talk of others’ beliefs, if you’re discussing the rights of humans in-totem across the world, again, have at “the god’s of different people” (we should). When you’re a Christian and you begin to pray to God, there is no room for praying to the many gods of others.

To tag onto what Joshua said (and Darius Amen’d), I was reading Philippians the other day and ran across this:

“For, as I have often told you before and now say again even with tears, many live as enemies of the cross of Christ.”

Weeping for those who do not know Christ. There is no justification for idolatry. To attempt to dismiss it is to rejoice in their position. We should be praying and weeping for them. Something that should have been the first words out of my “mouth” (to the joy of those around me, I don’t read my comments aloud ;-).


* - Though anyone calling themselves Christian have a specific view of a singular God who became man and died for our sins....Robinson very clearly does not. I know you didn’t say that specifically as there is a difference between what God wants and who He is.

Read actual comments.

Wright Misrepresents Piper in Interview

http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=3300brian(#11):

At the risk of opening more than is bargained for on this thread, what kind of a comparison are you making? Are you saying that Denny misrepresented the thoughts and views of the manifesto? or the writers? or...? Just thought I'd clarify.

Read actual comments.

More on the Gay Bishop at Inauguration

http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=3340“horrified” at how “specifically and aggressively Christian they were.”

I don't understand why HE would want to be associated with a Christian denomination (other than the fact that if he weren't, no one would even give him the time of day, I suppose). If you want to jettison beliefs, be bold and do so. Go nail your 95 theses on the door and head out preaching your "truth". I suppose I just don't get it.

It's like David says, just the times we live in (it's like everyone does what's right in their own eyes or something....)

Err…..just to clarify, I meant nail his own version of his 95 theses. I am not castigating Luther there.

Read actual comments.

Driscoll and the Calvinist Revival

http://www.dennyburk.com/?p=3288
Good question, Mr. Thomas! I would venture that she is indicating that (taking a shot at) Calvinists believe that they are persecuted and if they are persecuted, they must be going to heaven. It seems like Ms. Worthen wrote her piece on soundbites, wikipedia and attending one Sunday’s services.

While there’s a ton in the article that makes me get a puzzled look, the article says “[t]raditional evangelical theology falls apart in the face of real tragedy…” I think that is sort of true. I think prosperity gospel (prosperity-centered “theology”) does. Evangelicals (those committed to bible doctrine rather than bible guidelines) do not. In many folks’ minds, prosperity = evangelical = business plan-based church.

Funny quote:

“New converts stay in touch via blogs and Facebook groups with names like…‘Calvinism: The Group That Chooses You.’”

Read actual comments.