Lexington Herald-Leader | 03/31/2006 | Fulfilling rite of spring Fried Apple Pies. Oh my.

Instead of link what I was going to link cough-garbage-cough, I’m going to say a few things about Thomas Merton, monk of Gethsemani and mentor to many of us who feel called to write and reflect on the Christian life.

I wrote an IM essay about Merton when I first started web authoring. I think it’s a pretty fair treatment of the guy, and I’ll tell you the difference between myself and the utterly ignorant drool you can read on various blogs: I’ve actually read much of the Merton canon; a lot of it twice. If you want to know what was going on with Merton and Buddhism at the end of his life, ask me, not one of the haters. People who assume even serious Christian Catholics are going to hell on a greased rail usually miss some of the subtle aspects of a monastic scholar comparing monastic traditions across cultures. But that’s OK. If TRs started actually reading and understanding people like Merton before they savaged them on the internet, it would be scary.

Anyway, Merton is a great mentor in a couple of ways. He was a writer’s writer: poetry, prose, fiction, journals, history, cheese ads, protest literature, liturgy, etc. He was a great teacher of the Early Church Fathers. (I have a nice collection of Merton tapes from his years as master of novices.) He was humorous, especially about monastic life, which is very helpful to any of us who live in community. He evolved, which is a heck of a scary thing to people who want you to believe that the Christian journey is….well….not actually a journey.

Another thing I like about Merton is that he wasn’t afraid to be wrong. He was wrong quite often, both in his beliefs and his attitudes towards others. Merton has been remarkably helpful to me regarding self-forgiveness. Merton really screwed up, and the great thing is, you know about it because he was such an obsessive journaler. I don’t know of anyone else who chronicled his screw-ups and sins as comprehensively as Merton. And each one led him to grace, grace and more grace.

I like Merton because he was always, in his heart, a traditional Catholic. He never looked twice at Protestantism (though he was very gracious to Southern Seminary students and faculty for many years.) He disliked Vatican II and all the changes it brought to the monastery. He despised the changes in the church itself, particularly the alteration of the interior of the chapel. Even when he was writing about the desert fathers, Zen and Buddhist monks, he was never far from his simple Catholicism.

I love him because he was thoroughly converted. He was really a mess when he was a young man: drink, women, one pregnancy at least. Then the hound of heaven cornered him, and he fell hard for the vision of God that came to him in Jesus. No matter how far he wandered intellectually- which we are allowed to do in this life, and he did with the blessing of his order- he always loved Jesus, the scriptures, the cross, following Christ in the world. He agonized over how monasticism fit into all that, but he was, at his core, a Christian, and that’s been a great blessing to me.

So when you find Merton ripped on TR blogs, come over here and let me buy you one and talk about one of the best friends I ever found. Thank God for Thomas Merton. How about a poem? This is the kind of thing he wrote when he lived in the woods by himself.

O Sweet Irrational Worship

Wind and a bobwhite
And the afternoon sun.

By ceasing to question the sun
I have become light,

Bird and wind.

My leaves sing.

I am earth, earth

All these lighted things
Grow from my heart.

A tall, spare pine
Stands like the initial of my first
Name when I had one.

When I had a spirit,
When I was on fire
When this valley was
Made out of fresh air
You spoke my name
In naming Your silence:
O sweet, irrational worship!

I am earth, earth

My heart’s love
Bursts with hay and flowers.
I am a lake of blue air
In which my own appointed place
Field and valley
Stand reflected.

I am earth, earth

Out of my grass heart
Rises the bobwhite.

Out of my nameless weeds
His foolish worship.

Rachel:

Boss: Jim, have Cody go to the store and pick up some ink cartridges.

Jim: ok

later

Jim: Cody, the boss needs you to drive to the store and get some ink cartridges.

This is neither infallible nor inerrant. Boss made a request without expressing any need. It was simply a directive. Jim implied “need” on the part of Boss and conveyed that. There is no reason for Cody to accept that Jim’s communication is either inerrant or infallible. Jim could be in error about the motivation for the request (Boss may have plenty of cartridges and be hoarding them, or s/he may simply be reacting to a flyer announcing a sale) or infallible (although the statement reflects Boss’s desire accurately, it does not necessarily follow that Jim’s guess on the motivation for the request is true.)

Change Jim’s statement to “Cody, the boss wants you to go to the store and pick up some ink cartridges” and you now have a statement that is inerrant and true. You still don’t know if Jim is “infallible” either in this case or generally. “Infallibility” speaks to the character of the messenger; inerrant speaks to the accuracy of the message.

I’ve also got lurkers telling me that changing the BHT template would be like changing the set in Cheers.

Lurkers note: Cheers was canceled.

“Rachel, I still don’t know where you’re getting “God wrote each word” from. I mean, it’s a nice idea, and I see its advantages, but is it true?”
I didn’t say that did I? if I did it was a mistake, what I was trying to get across was that the Bible says what God wants it to say.
Take this little scenario
Boss: Jim, have Cody go to the store and pick up some ink cartridges.
Jim: ok
later
Jim: Cody, the boss needs you to drive to the store and get some ink cartridges.
Jim is infallibly speaking his boss’s words.
Maybe my definition of infallible is too broad but that is the way I believe about it.

Michael, what I meant but didn’t communicate well was that we’ve been involved in a weekly, intentional fellowship group focused on study, worship and prayer. It is led however by a group of men and we don’t have the sacramental focus you mentioned as our beliefs aren’t so oriented.

I am so far disturbed by the lack of covenental existance demonstrated; Laurie and I have that level of commitment as does another couple. Others are on what we like to call the ‘singles plan’ (after our singles ministry days); IOW: “I’ll be there if nothing better comes along”. But frankly this aspect is not any worse than I’ve experienced in formal church settings that I’ve attended. My work community is much more committed, though we do get paid for showing up so that may be a factor.

I guess that all of this is to say that we are exploring and learning and listening.

OblivionsTouch’s Xanga Site – Eat, Drink, And Just Love Me Clay Spencer, future successor to Donald Miller, showing his writing chops on the subject of love. Free drinks for anyone who can ID all the movie references.

I find it really an odd leap to go from “The Word of the Lord is perfect” to “this book I have in my hand is perfect.” Is there ever a place in the Bible where the idea of perfection is applied to the current Protestant canon? That’s an absurd question, of course, because every book in our Bible predates any idea of a canon. When I hear people say “Paul knew he was writing the Bible,” I want to go take a nap.

Our attempt to assign perfection to something God oversees or creates seems very strange. God looked on sinless, unfallen creation and said it was “very good.” Isn’t that a pretty good compliment? And all of scripture was written by fallible men inspired by a sovereign God. The great New Testament description of the OT scriptures is remarkably pragmatic, focusing on usability, not perfection in their creation:

2 Timothy 3:15-17 15 and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

Kent: I am also part of a faith community, but it is an informal, mission-oriented, organization, and without the church per se, wouldn’t exist. I think the relation between real churches- with intentional, confessional, covenantal existence- and faith communities that in some way and on some level imitate Jesus is significant. We once again have to answer the question: Did Jesus create an intentional, ongoing movement with leadership, boundaries, sacarments/ordinances, etc.? OBI is very much about Jesus, but if someone said to me, “OBI is my church,” I would be concerned on a number of levels….and we are a community with a confession, daily worship, covenantal relations, etc. But we do not exist to consciously be the church. We exist to minister in a Jesus-glorifying way. Without the church, we would be dead in 5 years.

On Text and Story: I’m trying to imagine that with Shakespeare. How long till the un-texted stories became simply a reflection of cultures and not the work of WS at all? Story needs text. Story isn’t merely text, but story without text becomes whatever story one wants to tell. We already have that problem with liberalism’s abandonment of “troublesome texts” in the Bible.

Bill, I’ve heard the statement “I just doubled-up on the word and got through”. Also: “We need to keep confessing the truth.” (Which is a way of saying that our words have power.)

Text: Are we not to tell the Gospel Story rather than transmit the perfect Text? Isn’t this why groups working cross-culturally like Wycliffe pursue dynamically equivalent rather than word-for-word translations?

Christopher,
I did not say they were in inerrant I said they were infallibly the Word of God.
Meaning without fail they are what God said and that we can not say that about any other written item because we can not judge how well the writer heard God.

Take from psalm 19

5which comes out like a bridegroom leaving his chamber, and, like a strong man, runs its course with joy.
6Its rising is from the end of the heavens, and its circuit to the end of them, and there is nothing hidden from its heat

Does the sun make a circuit from one end of the heavens to the other?
Are there things in the universe that are not effected by the suns heat?
Does the sun run or have joy?
Did God make an error in having David write this? Or did he say it this way on purpose?
My vote is for on purpose! He is God and he can use poetic license and metaphors and even leave things out or put in contradictory historical things if he wants to. Sometimes I can guess at the reasons and sometimes I am clueless. But still I believe that what is written is what God meant to be written.

Rachel, have you been reading Chris Tilling’s posts on inerrancy?  He seems to disagree that the “original manuscripts” were perfect as well.  And he brings some strong evidence for that.

I have enough Cavinist leanings to believe that God has a reason for all the translations including the hidious New World Translations that the JW’s use.
God does what he wants (He is no tame lion).
and what His plan is for our good (we that love the lord)
Blessed be His name!!

I said,
” It is the only place we can go to see the written word of God that is not polluted by humans.”
But what I should have said is:
” It is the only place we can go to see the written word of God and know for sure that it is not polluted by humans”
But of course that leaves out purposefull transation errors. soooo this is only valid in the original manuscripts…..

Michael, we’ve been members of a faith community for some time, it’s simply not an ‘officially established church in a building’. My work for the last 1-1/2 years is much the same…work and fellowship centered on Christ. Wonderful stuff.

What my statement was noting was that we are seeing that many agencies are looking for membership in an ‘officially established church in a building’. I’m finding that I’m more and more willing to just do ‘whatever’ it takes to make the agency happy so that I appear to be a standard issue pew sitter. I’m starting to use the adolescent ‘whatever’ more frequently.

And I’m not sure that is a good thing, but it does seem to be part of the price of becoming a father.

“Read your bible more”
“Pray more”

Those are two answers which churchy folks can always give to someone, no matter what the situation. No matter what their situation, what their study habits are, etc, people assume that sheer exposure to the bible will go a long way to solving their problems. Good grief.

Thanks Rachel & Phillip. Phillip I was turning around your approach…instead of saying “Hmmm…the scripture verses they cited must be the root of things” I was saying “Hmmm…they’re saying I need to affirm something above and beyone what I read in those scripture verses.”

My ‘work book’, the book I take to work with me to read during lunch and mental breaks is Father Capon’s first, entitled Bed and Board written in 1965 about marriage. The first chapter is entitled ‘Absurdity’ and this…

I am a priest of the Episcopal Church. This is the first of my absurdities. Absurd in all seriousness, because the Incarnation of God, his Cross, his Resurrection, his high-priestly Intercession, his Church, his grace, and his choosing of men – of me – are all roaringly marvelously absurd; all lavish, fantastic gifts, receivable only by lavish, fantastic givers. But it is my first paradox in a less serious sense, too, for to be an Episcopalian is to pile paradox upon itself. The Episcopal church is the absurdist version of a supremely absurd religion. (I have been her son all my life – I am reveling in my mother’s foibles, not being disrespectful.) Catholic and Protestant, authoritarian and individualistic; believing in bishops but not giving them power, believing in priests but not letting on; stylish in some places and dowdy in others, capable of real prophecy and of double-talk out of both sides of her mouth, she is indeed all things to all men, a measure stretched far out of shape, partly by carelessness but partly by her gallant attempt to encompass the boundless grace of God.

...comment on the absurdity of the Church, particularly the Episcopal Church makes me want to join. It is followed by his thoughts on the absurdity of marriage, which I will try to find time to post later…which makes me glad I’m married and already immersed in that absurdity.

Infallible is a much better word than inerrant, although their definitions can overlap. Infallible generally means incapable of failing, which implies purpose. The scriptures are incapable of failing to accomplish the purpose for which they exist. I like that definition very much. I think many folks who aren’t willing to use the word inerrant would sign on to infallible.

Inerrant carries a different idea, as Michael said. This means the bible becomes the absolute guide for science, theology, history, child rearing, marriage, geneologies, nutrition, and fashion, depending upon how far you take it. People who work on Sunday and those who do not both get their ideas from the inerrant Word. People who wear beards and those who don’t both get their ideas from the inerrant Word. You get the idea.

Touchstone Magazine – Mere Comments: Geoeccentricity

Between Two Worlds: McLaren and Driscoll on the Emerging Church Movement

Thought you would enjoy this from a lurker:

I’ve had all the TR rhetoric I can stand.  When I was going through a
crisis in faith last year, I found some of their blogs, and almost lost
all hope that I was even saved at all.  If it wasn’t for the BHT and IM,
I might have ended up either just like them, or worse, might have
abandoned the faith altogether.

I’ve also got lurkers telling me that changing the BHT template would be like changing the set in Cheers. Hmmmmm. Really?

Kent: I seriously doubt if anyone is going to come and ask you twenty questions about your understanding of the term “infallible.” Don’t sweat it. As to joining a faith community of some kind….a hearty “amen” from me on that one. If you do, please find something very modest (house church maybe) that doesn’t have a building program planned in the near future :-)

I have our big school wide talent show to produce tonight. All looks really good at this point. Best ever. I made every act have to be sponsored by an organization or team. That make it much better.

This weekend I have a group coming that I figure is going to strain my issues with the altar call substantially. We’ve been corresponding, and it doesn’t look good.

Next weekend, I travel across the state to do an evangelism conference session on dealing with other religions. I am really looking forward to that.

Then Sunday April 9, Steve “Reformissionary” McCoy and family come to OBI for most of a week. I want to come up with a way for Steve and I to blog a bit together. Matthew Smith from Indelible Grace will be here Tuesday Night and Wednesday.

Then it’s break, and awards meetings, and then the long run to graduation starts….with inevitable exhaustion at the end.

Somewhere in there I am taking my mom to the hairdresser. Gotta love that small talk in a hairdresser’s place, especially in Clay Co.

Kent, the statement works well enough for me. You will be in my prayers, as Paula and I are starting to research adoption agencies, too.

Something unrelated – Steve McCoy wrote something in response to a Joe Thorn post that I liked enough to share.

“I’m quite certain that nearly no one will disagree with Thorn on this, but in practice most of us are guilty of “closet spirituality.” Too often our pride will keep us from admitting it. I’ve been a member at churches where the first application point every week was, “So first of all we need to read our Bible’s more.” Aren’t we are known by the fruit we produce? It’s very easy to see that the American church looks more like Job’s counselors than justice and mercy workers.“ (emphasis mine)

Kent: I think that using the normal dictionary definitions of each of those words, that statement is a great one. It is only when folks twist words to mean more than they actually do that I start to choke.

To ensure that you’re reading the words with the meaning the adoption agency intends, consider the scripture references supplied to support them: 2 Timothy 3:16; Mark 13:31. I whole-heartedly affirm that those two Bible verses are excellent and reliable and trustworthy, and if those are the support for that theological statement, then I’m completely on-board.

If they’d linked to something by Ken Hamm, then you’d have a different issue.

Kent,
If you phrase it right in your mind it can work.

The Bible is the inspired, only infallible, written word of God.

ie: the Bible is inspired.
It is the only place we can go to see the written word of God that is not polluted by humans. Other texts are not “the WORD of God” but the words of men; even if those men, “heard from God ” we need to realize that they are subject to the human error of them hearing in correctly .

People may claim to have heard somthing from God but we are to look at those “Words” in a different light then the ones written in the Bible.
the Bible is, infallibly, the Words God wanted us have.
That does not have to mean that there are no factual errors in it; but only that these are the Words of God written down.

Thanks Richard. It seems that adoption agencies run by believers require faith statements by at least one prospective parent.

Here you go...

You can BE Joel Osteen!

He MUST be joking But he’s not, is he?... It’s Joel O’s Your Best Life Now – The Game.

Kent: I like the statement (although why it pops up in the course of adoption is a bit beyond my understanding). It says what needs to be said without saying more. So just say “yes” and move on to the next question.

Every blessing on you and Laurie as you work through this.

+ + +

In my experience, infallible is rarely applied outside of faith issues, while inerrant is the word that is explicitly extended into science, etc.

Michael, how are you able to differentiate those two words, aren’t they saying the same thing?

This may also become the process that drives us to official church membership…quite hypocritical of us eh?

I obviously can’t answer for you, but I would have no problem with it, since it doesn’t draw a circle and tell me what exactly is covered by infalllible. Anytime I am not forced to say “inerrant,” I feel fortunate.

We’re tripping over this…

The Bible is the inspired, only infallible, written word of God. 2 Timothy 3:16; Mark 13:31

...line of a statement of faith for an adoption agency we’re looking into.

Should we just say ‘sure – whatever’ and move on?

Despite serious thematic incongruity, the Tavern is welcome to any of my photographs.

OK. At this point, Tommy and I are going to work on banner ideas. That should satisfy my need for change. Pictures of pubs should be sent to him or me, or urls of usable stuff.

Michael, i’m interested.  i haven’t worked with Movable Type, but i just finished my template for WordPress and i’ve done a couple of templates for phpBB…

I have recently developed a slight tic when I come across the name ‘Augustine’, but Cynthia Nielsen’s great post about the Trinity and Augustine’s circumspect reflections about the relation between faith and philosophy is a delightful read and a much-needed reminder of Augustine’s capacious intellect.

T. B. Vick, on his blog Shadows of Divine Things (alas, he has the clocky thing), describes an interesting conversation that erupted amongst a group of fellow students a few years ago when he declared that he was an “evangelical.” He has begun a series of posts now explaining “Why I Don’t Call Myself an Evangelical”. I think it’s time we coin this maneuver. I vote for “The Rigney Strategem” or Ph้nom่ne Rigney.

Ben Myers, on his blog Faith and Theology (he hath not the clocky thing), asks what to make of the idea of “divine intervention” in reaction to this interview with Hans Küng, which appears to determine the science-theology interface in favor of deism. But he raises some good issues, especially with respect to God’s relation to time.

This may not even be possible, but it can’t hurt to ask.

Is there anyone out there who has an interest in and time for the redesign of the BHT template? Top to bottom, but using all the existing links.

Being interested doesn’t mean I will give you the green light, but from the banner on down, I just wonder if anyone has some ideas.

Noel: What? All I heard was an angelic voice and the word “rum.” :-)

On the two natures: Man, this is a tough issue that multiple councils have addressed, and there are abundant heresies on both sides. Of course, it’s easy to just blithely dismiss any discussion of Jesus “growing” or not knowing trigenometry from birth as believing that “Jesus made mistakes,” and mocking it, but what else does it mean to be fully human, if not to grow from incompleteness into something more?

At twelve, Jesus clearly had a pretty amazing understanding of His life and His purpose. He had to be about His Father’s business. Did he have that same understanding at five? At two? I think it’s ludicrous to suggest that he did, but good people have suggested it before. From my perspective in 2006, based on what I think I understand about the human brain, I think that clearly Jesus had to be taught to speak, to read, and so on. I think He lacked selfishness, which strikes as sinful at its root, but does that mean He had an eidetic memory? Or could leap tall buildings, like Superman?

If he was fully human, like the creed says, some of these questions must simply be mystery, since we don’t have any records.

P.S. I meant to post this hours ago, but forgot it was sitting here. Oops!

Moderator Note: It’s Anthony Bradley. Please follow the link.

I think this quote is important and so I am putting it up for all to see again:

“We also don’t love non-Christians. There are actually Christians in
our churches who are in no loving, personal relationships with people
who are not Christians. This is completely foreign to life of the first
Christians we see in the biblical story. We don’t even know how to love
non-Christians. It’s pathetic. We have redefined neighbor love in such
a way that it allows us to live a pathetic existence of comfort and
ease.”

Seriously, iMonk, you hit the nail on the head. I am not in relationship with any non-Christians, except those who I work with, and that doesn’t count for much. Somehow over the years, I have forgotten how to be relational with non-Christians. It’s a very hard task because I want to get to know them, but so often I find their talk boring and their behavior reprehensible. I have a hard time even getting along with Christians, let alone unbelievers. I need some help, as do we all.

I am going to say this once, and if you want to discuss it, use email.

We now have an official troll blog, using our name, and hoping to buy its traffic by whoring itself out to our readers as a home for blogwars. ______________. You can fill in that blank however you want.

The author describes himself as a Reformed Baptist. 90% chance he’s a pastor, which explains a lot.

This blog will not be mentioned, linked, quoted, referred to, complimented, described or otherwise acknowledged in any way on the BHT. Do not mail or AIM me copy from this blog.

I am not a number cruncher, but having compared BHT/IM traffic with our major critics, I understand why they want to hump our leg. It’s the only way they are going to get anywhere. PLEASE understand that this person desperately wants every BHT reader to come to his blog every day, read and leave a comment. DON’T DO IT. Please let this become another TR group hug (or something even more exciting.)

I would be wonderful if all of you who appreciate this blog would simply NEVER EVER go to this troll operation.

That’s that. No more will be said, and I will delete anything approaching commentary on the site in question.

Is it just me, or does my daughter sound like she just turned 21?

Could someone give me an example of a “swarmy-toned” Calvinist?

Why won’t Jason Robertson take on someone who wants to fight? There’s someone calling Calvinists like Jason out, but he can’t write a post on lasagna recipes without sticking my name on it. Jason, if you are such a defender of Calvinism from its enemies, why not take on people like Charles who actually draw lines in the sand and want this fight?

There’s a fine lass. Noel, look for the green and yellow label of Wray & Nephew overproof. Mmmm mmm.

Phillip: Something makes me think that article was written by a man…but I don’t have proof.

A question for the bar: Can anybody recommend a good yet inexpensive rum?

Refiormed Catholicism converses with Josh a bit on the subject of his original post.

A good lurker, commenting on the Carla posse/Keller conversation, said:

If women are not to be ordained, then they should not speak at all to men. And men should not read their blogs, or listen to their wives, or read women spiritual writers or watch their television shows. Am I being extreme here? Am I? Or is women’s ordination just an arbitrary divide that benefits men and forces women to find other outlets for their spiritual service to Christ?

By the way, Bill: I’m listening to the Reds/Red Sox play. I suggest you find another team to follow this year. The Sox appear to be in bad shape. Arroyo threw 7 scoreless innings to let the owners know what they would be missing. Willy Mo did what he does best: ground out a lot.

Any relationship between Bud Selig’s press conference today and the announced loss of MLB sponsors- Home Depot, etc.- if Bonds is celebrated by MLB for breaking HR records is purely coincidence.

I followed the Keller/EmergentNo thread around the ‘sphere a time or two and became convinced that roadrage and blograge are sister diagnoses.

My favorite diagnostic quote was this:

Is there any wonder why most, if not all, of the mystics were Roman Catholic (not biblical Christians) and/or pantheists? Should this not tell us something?

I did find some gems and this is one, but I’m left wondering if most blogging believers suffer from a deficit of relational skills.

Haha, Jeopardy rocks. I’ll have to try that self test sometime.

Weird Al shares the pain of we mundane people, Leif...

Sing it with me now… More »« Less

I am obsessed with getting on Jeopardy (well, moderately so—i won’t pony up the big bucks to fly out there unless I know I have a decent shot). Last night I took the on-line pre-qualifying test (the first of about 50 hoops you have to jump through before ever being face to face with snooty alex). Man, that was humbling. 15 seconds each to answer 50 questions. Some that I knew I didn’t get because of the pressure. Some I simply didn’t know. Others my fat fingers were too clumsy to type correctly.

I don’t know how I did, because they refuse to tell anyone. But i suspect I won’t be getting the call.

Bummer.

Joel: Every man (or woman) and his Bible is a pope defending Christendom against the hordes of barbarians.

The amount of bizarre irony in that whole discussion is enough to kill a large animal.

It seems clear to me that some groups are so invested in seeing themselves as the enforcers of orthodoxy they have forgotten even the rudiments of presuming their own fallibility.

Is there a concensus on what Jesus’ knowledge of Himself and His mission was, from birth onward?

There is agreement that Jesus was a fully human person, but when you start suggesting that means he didn’t know everything about _______________ (name the topic), the fight begins. One of the biggest seminary debates I ever heard was between two professors over this very thing.

I believe that Jesus’ divine insights were progressive, and that his human consciousness was just like yours and mine, except for sin’s effects.

Phillip, I suppose it’s no wonder that the Enterprise was constantly getting red shirts killed and annoying other civilizations since its computer had a female voice. The guys on the bridge were just in a cognitive fog created by the melodious voice and it impaired their judgment. We can relate, right guys? Can I get an “Amen!”?

The Keller-ENo thread. One word: Wow. Keller has a verbal gun put to his head and he responds both gently and firmly. I agree, Michael. I want those meds. To the watchbloggers: when someone of Keller’s stature is treated the same way that we have seen others treated who don’t measure up “biblically” in your eyes, perhaps you can understand why much weaker souls than Tim’s (like me) respond with frustration, ungraciousness and contempt. I do not have that kind of poise. More »« Less

I know that for a few days we have taken a tongue-in-cheek poke at the idea that Jesus was not only perfectly sinless, but perfect in every other way, but that leads me to a serious question.

Is there a concensus on what Jesus’ knowledge of Himself and His mission was, from birth onward? Was He completely, cognitively aware of all these things from the womb? Was His mission progressively revealed to Him as he matured?

What think ye?

Exhibiting The Value of Knowing God: Reformed Tone Vol 3  Tim Keller repsonds in detail to some of Carla R’s posse. A model of graciousness. I want whatever meds he’s on. (HT to a great Lurker)

Hmmmmm …bundamentalism

Amanda, Annie, Ellen, Noel: I’m sorry, I couldn’t understand you. What was that again?

Kent, i’m not sure Christianity has much in common with Jews and Muslims.  Currently, i’m taking a class on bundamentalism (both historic and generic, in both Islam and Christianity).  One thing that was clear is that Islam is a very politically-minded religion.  Fundamentalism arises in political activity (big surprise, i know).  Whereas Christianity has been all about orthodoxy: “right praise.”  Christianity has been about the language used and not the belief or the politics.  Of course, this has changed slightly in the last twenty or so years with the rise of the Religious Right, but not much.
Islam focuses on th umma, the global community of Muslims, and many fundamentalists call for a single Muslim state.  Christians, since 325, have focused on defining orthodoxy and expelling those with the different praise (the heterodox), but opted to use the word heretic (“error”) to explain them. 
Even if we want to say that all three Abrahamic faiths have some common ground (basically Adam to Abraham), we have to realize that each faith looks at these people quite differently.  i’d even say that the three look at their “common ground” so differently that the “common ground” is such in name only.

Finally, more than a year after I called for evangelical bloggers to “out” Osteen, Al Mohler raises questions about Osteen’s message. I’m glad to hear it, and I hope a thousand other Christian leaders join in. Osteen continues to be a secular motivational speaker pretending to be a Christian pastor. Evangelicals should disown him, using his own words as proof.

Kent: At what level do we share G-d with Judaism and Islam? Islam is, from a theological standpoint, basically the same sort of heresy (or perhaps better, “error”) that Mormonism is. I don’t mean to offend any Mormons or Muslims reading this. I don’t mean “heresy” in any pejorative sense, I’m simply using it as a theological category.

Muslims clearly believe that they believe in the God of the OT, at least as they interpret it. We have substantial differences with them over His nature, His will and His personality, but I do think we are talking about the same being – in much the same way that, oh, say, Tony Campolo and Jim Dobson could both talk about Bill Clinton and have vastly different impressions and perceptions of him; no thinking person would say based on this that Dobson met a different person than Campolo simply because of this.

With Jews, of course, there’s both a similarity and a distinction with Islam. I dont’ think any Christian can have the same sort of serious objections to Jewish understanding of the OT in the same sense as they would object to the Muslim understanding. I have had conversations with both Orthodox and observant Reformed Jews, and am convinced that while (from the standpoint of Christian theology) their understanding of God is incomplete, we are definitely speaking about the same God – and I think scripture bears this out.

Tommy: Has this got something to do with the galaxy wide Store Wars?

Just got back from 3 days tent camping with the wife and 3 boys. Very nice. Didn’t miss the web or phone or laptop AT ALL! We camped at beautiful Mount Magazine, where the state of Arkansas is just now completing a $35 million project including an amazing lodge and numerous cabins. http://www.arkansasstateparks.com/parks/mtmag_const.asp?id=41

Richard: Thank you so much for the Bald Eagle web cam link. Truly amazing. That is one of the coolest things I have ever seen on the net. I have been mesmerized by it. Within the first 15 minutes of keeping my eye on her, something caught her attention, she got off the nest to deal with it, and revealed two eggs underneath. Wow!

Speaking of animal drama, The March of the Penguins was one of my favorite movies in years. Did others like it? My first two sons do not share my love for animals, which was even more intense in my childhood. Finally, by the grace of God, my youngest comes close to my enthusiasm. He sat through all of The March of the Penguins with me – and liked it!

I hate to admit I’ve never been to the Grand Canyon, but – before its all said and done – I will walk out on that Grand Canyon Skyway with my boys (and hopefully my wife). That will happen the day before or the day after we complete our hike down to the bottom and then back up! Don’t get me wrong – I’m sure I’ll be a little freaked out by the Skyway, but that’s part of what makes the experience noteworthy, right?

It’s an important battle, too.
;-)

“There’s a battle raging in the world right now over raw milk…” – Annie

#2. And be sure he sits next to an angry Lutheran. It will help him feel at home.

Joel would feel badly if he didn’t move all the furniture himself. I will warn you, though, that he may read you his 200 page Ph.d project as a return favor.

1) Where do I take Joel for lunch on Friday? Choice 1 is Guerra’s, a great tex-mex place in the uber-trendy South Congress area. Choice 2 is the Salt Lick, the best damn bbq on the planet. Number 1 gives a taste of Austin, number 2 a taste of Texas.

2) Is Joel strong enough to help me move three 200 lb pieces of furniture that I built up a flight of stairs, or do I need to call someone else?

Also, coming soon to the BHT: my baseball manifesto, its high time I confess my love of the game.

I have it on good authority that Jesus never cut his fingernails too short, never stubbed His toe, and brushed His teeth after every meal.

He also never had seconds at meals. (clearly not Baptist)

Anthony Bradley at Resurgence

GS: What do you think is the biggest issue the Church is facing today?

AB: Fear, pain, passive men, and love. We fear the
power of the gospel story, we fear the implications of the Missio Dei,
we fear the Enemy, we fear transformation, we fear change, we fear
questions, we fear doubts, we fear new leaders, we fear new realities,
we fear people not already like us, we fear culture, we fear the Truth,
we fear liberation, we fear healing, we fear mission, we fear living
like Jesus lived, we fear being the people of God in a broken world, we
fear facing our fears, we fear the healing of our fears, we fear risks.

Christians can be some of the biggest posers in America. We have
failed to communicate to the world that being a Christian does not mean
that “you have it all together.” We are all broken people following
Jesus on a journey to figure out what it means to live lives that truly
have meaning beyond the mundane. Many traditions have reduced sin to
rebellion and have skipped over the fact that people have been sinned
against in ways that have left people living as the walking wounded
often acting out sinfully as a way to self-medicate pain. As Jesus
does, we need to bring the gospel to both pain and sin. We need the
gospel to heal the whole person. The fact is that, we’re all on a
journey of becoming the kinds of people Jesus is making whole and
living lives that matter in full harmony with God. We need to embrace
the pain of others as if it were our own because Jesus meets people
amidst there pain as well.

We have a crisis in the West of pathetically passive men who are
managing their passivity in ways that are reeking havoc in marriages,
families, work places, neighborhoods, schools, the internet, and so on.
For decades now our church culture has produced a feminized,
emasculated vision of what it means to be a man which has left a huge
vacuum for the kind of missional movement needed for the Kingdom.

Finally, there’s a problem with how we love people. Christians don’t
love people intimately whether they are Christians or not. We don’t
love Christians enough to commit to walking with them no matter what,
challenging them when needed, comforting in times of despair, rejoicing
in the other’s success. We need vulnerable relationships with those
close to us grounded in committed love. The Scriptures call us to live
lives of transparency among those that Jesus loves because God uses
that to continue to transform us into the very image of Christ. So many
people are missing out on a powerful source of transformation, healing
and mission.

We also don’t love non-Christians. There are actually Christians in
our churches who are in no loving, personal relationships with people
who are not Christians. This is completely foreign to life of the first
Christians we see in the biblical story. We don’t even know how to love
non-Christians. It’s pathetic. We have redefined neighbor love in such
a way that it allows us to live a pathetic existence of comfort and
ease.

as a kid was baseball. I was thinking about baseball today and did some reading on the sport at work. At wikipedia I read this quote by George Will that I thought some might find interesting:

“Baseball suits the character of this democratic nation. Democracy is government by persuasion. That means it requires patience. That means it involves a lot of compromise. Democracy is the slow politics of the half loaf. Baseball is the game of the long season where small incremental differences decide who wins and who loses particular games, series, seasons. In baseball, you know going to the ballpark that the chances are you may win, but you also may lose. There is no certainty, no given. You know when the season starts that the best team is going to get beaten a third of the time. The worst team is going to win a third of the time. The argument over 162 games is that middle third. So it’s a game that you can’t like if winning is everything, and democracy is that way, too.”

My apologies if this was posted before. Huzzah for baseball!

Here We Stand: Why I Am Not A Reformed Catholic

2. Limited Atonement is the greatest doctrinal obstacle to Gospel preaching and Christian theology ever devised this side of meritorious good works. No, don’t flood me with e-mails and comments trying to prove the L. I’ve heard it already. What I want to say is that when trying to say what the Gospel is, what Baptism is, what the Supper is, what salvation is, etc, the Reformed constantly must dance around this article to avoid a truly strong affirmation of biblical speech. I can tell some of them would love to just say “God cleanses us and forgives our sins in Baptism,” but the “L” forces them to immediately qualify that statement when they do make it and thus strip it of its weight. After all, some of the baptized apostasize, so Jesus must not have cleansed them of their sins, right? I guess some might say that Jesus atoned for them in a different way or something, which is really lame. The radical insistence that Jesus’ death isn’t really sincerely intended and offered to all who hear the Gospel deep-sixes Gospel preaching before the words have even left your lips. Stop particularizing, qualifying, and otherwise screwing around with the atonement. How hard is it to just say “For God so loved the world” and “Jesus died for all?” You can’t salvage this one (I’ve seen some of the attempts, and they make me embarrassed for the people who so nobly tried), so I advise you to semper reformanda it right out of your theology. Trust me, you’ll feel much better once you do.

Kurt, I do believe that we have a commonality with Muslims and Jews (and Shintoists!) through our common roots that helps to build some bridges of understanding that is not available with Hindus, Buhhdists and of-course atheists. I also agree that Jesus is a big issue to disagree about…the therapist in me is always trying to build bridges of understanding…I’m sort of an evangelist in that way.

Michael, thanks for the clarification. When a bomb explodes nearby it’s easy to take it personally…and I’m a fairly sensitive guy… :-)

Scanners (1981) This could explain so much…. (ht to Joel)

Kent: We can extend just as much table fellowship to Jews and Muslims as we do to Hindus and Atheists. If our mutual claim of worshipping the God of Abraham gives us a discussion point, that’s well and good. It does not, however, impart any sort of kinship. I listened to a Muslim apologist say (essentially) “We’re so much like you Christians, except for the Jesus thing.” Except for the Jesus thing. Jesus IS the whole thing.

Oh, and I’m pretty sure the iMonk’s primal scream was related to an external source. ;)

iMonk: Stop posting that derogatory derogation of the young. It is an affront to teh g05p31, lol.

It had absolutely nothing to do with you…at all. Sorry that your post was in the vicinity. My apologies. I need to look around before I explode.

The great thing about simplistic responses is that they generally indicate that there’s a misunderstanding of some sort. When I say ‘table fellowship’ I don’t mean ‘communion’ I mean ‘hospitality’ which could best be defined as: ‘extending and enjoying relationship around things which we have in common’.

When I connect with those who claim some sort of ‘god-commonality’ with me I spend a lot of time talking about what we hold in common (in order to extend hospitality) without denying our differences (in order to maintain honest boundaries).

Michael, I’m assuming that your post immediately following mine was directed at me. It seemed extreme…help me understand why.

internetmonk.com : Postcards To A Young Theologian 4 I’m up to four of these posts. I think I have one more.

1. Jesus was valedictorian of his class, with a really perfect 4.0.
2. Jesus never mismeasured anything in the carpenter’s shop. Every piece was perfect first time.
3. Jesus won every game he ever played. 300 Bowler. Perfect horseshoes. Killer 3 point shot.
4. Jesus never asked a teacher a question.

These verses need to be footnoted:

Hebrews 5:8-9   8 Although he was a son, he learned obedience through what he suffered.  9 And being made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation to all who obey him,

Hebrews 4:15   15 For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin.

Luke 2:40  40 And the child grew and became strong, filled with wisdom. And the favor of God was upon him.

Since (obviously) all error is sin and Jesus was without sin, we have to conclude that He was without error as well. This would logically cover the typical errors of growth and development. This leads to some fascinating conclusions! – Baby Jesus never cried. He slept through the night perfectly. – Learning to speak involves first spitting out nonsense syllables. That’s obviously error, so we have to conclude that Jesus could talk from birth. – Learning to walk usually involves lots of spills and tumbles. Unacceptable for an inerrant saviour. Jesus could walk from birth. Perfectly. And, since stumbling is error, that means that he never tripped or stumbled while carrying the cross to Golgotha. – Jesus won all of his childhood games, since he executed them flawlessly the first time. Every time. Finding playmates became very difficult. – Potty training was never an issue for Jesus. In fact, his bodily eliminations had no offensive odor! It was literally Holy ___!