Social Bookmarks
whose apologetics?
This has been on my mind for a couple weeks now, it was something that Becky and I talked about during one of our somewhat famous Taco Mac conversations (ok, they’re really not that famous, but we love them anyways, if anyone ever wants to join in just tell us, seriously, we’re starved for good conversation at times). We were talking about the upcoming “Truth Project” thing, as well as the previous apologetics lesson we had sat through, and she interposed something that severely bothered me (she has a tendency to do such things).
She stated, essentially, that to grasp a “true” apologetics course, then all sides should be discussed. I think we, at the time, were mostly discussing evolution, so this has some pretty deep ramifications. It would require those hosting said forum on apologetics acknowledge both sides of the argument, at least in their core, legitimate, which either side seems loathe to do.
We were not addressing, by the way, the issue of an atheistic perspective of evolution, but a wholly God inspired vision of evolution.
The question in my mind remains, is it really possible any sort of apologetics forum to host both sides of this particular issue? Would there be any church willing to legitimate both sides of the argument?
** This will seem kind of disjointed, but I began writing this two days ago, and after thinking about it, I’ve picked it back up. **
After giving it some time, I don’t really think it’s possible to really do this sort of things, at least in the normal church setting. I think within a smaller grouping context, IE a cohort, or house church, then such discussion would be possible, but I would seriously doubt both the willingness of any institutionalized church to do so, or the ability even if the desire was there.
So my question is then, would there be any benefit to this sort of thing? I’m really curious as to everyone’s thoughts on apologetics, so lets have it out.
a couple thoughts
You may have missed it, but Bush talked about high prices on both food and oil in a news conference out on the front lawn today. He made a few good points, and a few poor one.
The most striking point he made was that we should buy from LOCAL farmers, I wholly and totally support this idea (but I’ve yet to put it in full practice…).
But he also talked about Ethanol and touted it as a solution to the fuel crisis, but I think that idea has been sufficiently debunked. The usage of corn based Ethanol as an alternative fuel source is, in large part, a cause for the current food problems throughout the world. He also stated that we need to be exploring oil sources at home, or in other words, we need to be drilling for oil in Alaska.
I haven’t really formed a full opinion on drilling in Alaska, I’m leaning against it right now, but I could be swayed the other way if I read a compelling argument for it. I do think that we need to be exploring alternate (alternative) fuel vehicles, not just hybrid vehicles. Drilling for more oil is not going to solve the problem in the end, but lessening our dependence on oil (not just foreign oil) via alternative sources of fuel.
But I’m really only speaking what has already been said, and I’m likely only “preaching to the choir,” I just wanted to give a few quick thoughts on his news conference today.
He did make one other point (just now- the conference is still going on, I wanted to essentially live blog it because I doubt that there will be a full transcript) about how hard it is to fight against men who strap bombs to their chest and blow up innocents to achieve their objectives, I guess there’s a big difference from dropping bombs from the sky that kill innocents.
I might edit this as the conference continues, but as of now… that’s all folks.
Ok, EDIT: Just read that the Indian Taxi Fund is already at $1000 (in less than a week), and there is one more spot available for the free* Red Cowboy Design job. Also, still looking for that donor match if anyone’s willing, contact me via email.
an open letter to my brethren on the right
For some years now you have viewed yourselves as championing the cause of Pro-Marriage legislation, which is more plainly stated: Anti-Homosexual legislation. You have felt the turning tide of public appeal fall favorably on Gay marriage, and see this trend as an affront to your very core being. Your leaders have imposed if Homosexuality were to be found out as a genetic predisposition, they would break their moral and ethical values against abortion to stop a homosexual child from being born. In saying this they have shown that making humanity fit within the narrow confines of their ideal image is more important than the protection of life itself.
For years they have silently encouraged their children to degrade homosexuals by calling them derogatory names, they are complicit in their silence and lack of condemnation for such acts. For years they themselves as well as many of you have even fallen to the levels of using these same derogatory terms to describe homosexuals. You, yourselves, have used the very term “Gay” as a negative word; much the same way that Jews in the day of Jesus used the term Samaritan. You have subjugated homosexuals to a lower level then yourselves by denying them the right of marriage, claiming it a sacred system, which you yourselves have utterly desecrated with your divorces and affairs.
The treatment you have brought upon homosexuals is not the first of its kind, nor will it be the last. Your ancestors have just as vehemently protested causes such as women’s rights, civil rights, and acts against institutions such as apartheid, yet progress persevered. In the end the overwhelming tide of equality has persevered over the diminishing forces of inequity and bigotry.
You cannot claim to be both the protectors of the Bible and deny its very core message of equality. You must see that the God of the Bible is a God of change, a God who loves all, and a God who will not abide such bigotry that has been shown throughout the past decades against homosexuals. Perhaps your most grievous act is this ignorance of this progressive theme that the Bible portrays.
Your misunderstandings have caused immeasurable hurt over the years. Where you should be sowing seeds of Justice, Equality, and Love, you have created a field that is full of the weeds of pain, suffering, and injustice. This act has cast, in the eyes of those who do not hold to the cross, an ill shadow upon the Father who became flesh that all may be reconciled and equal.
My friends, this tide will not be turned back. You may delay it, you may attempt to ignore it, you may fight it will all of your might, but this tide is strengthened by a God who will not be turned back, nor denied. Join us, champion the cause of equality, truly live out a life freed of legalistic oppression, and see true change in the reconciling name of Christ.
the truth project
So I’ve made it no secret that I’m not a big fan of certain things that the college group I’m a part of does. From the “apologetics” to the attempt to mimic the now defunct 7:22, some of the things just don’t sit right with me.
A couple weeks ago I was told that I would really want to attend the summer series that the group is putting on, and then I checked out the video trailer for the DVD series they’re doing. While I wasn’t entirely paying attention, I did see that Ravi Zacharias was one of the speakers, which piqued my curiosity. The last recollection I had of Ravi was in a video where he quips, about Emergent, “Did they get bored with God?” I didn’t really give it all much thought at the time, I think I was working on another project, so it just kind of fell to the back of my mind.
Well, we played the trailer for the college group on Thursday night, and I’m the video guy, so I watched the thing through a couple hours before the service. That’s when I really started to notice things. The video seemed to be set up as a highly (literal six day) Creationistic account of things, which I guess shouldn’t have surprised me. But something else bothered me, their whole “Worldviews” thing, I just hadn’t heard it used and sound like that before. Well, that’s when I saw the biggest key, the big old “Focus on the Family Ministries” blurb right at the end of the video. Oh boy, it’s on.
That’s when I started doing a bit of research into the whole deal. Unfortunately there was not but one “critical” view of the DVD’s, so I had to use other sites, but here’s the essence of what I discovered.
It can be summed up with this blurb, from christianpost.com
Some 700 believers sat in the pews of First Baptist Church Friday night to learn of the “great battle” they are waging in at Focus on the Family’s The Truth Project training session. The cosmos battle: Truth vs. Lies; Christian worldview vs. Postmodern worldview; God is vs. God isn’t.
That’s right ladies and gentlemen; Postmodernists are liars who don’t believe in God. The Truth Project’s own website states that the series was created because of a Barna study that says that only 5% of adults surveyed have a Biblical Worldview. What the hell? Who are they to define Biblical worldview? Barna, by the way, defines biblical worldview thusly;
For the purposes of the research, a biblical worldview was defined as believing that absolute moral truths exist; that such truth is defined by the Bible; and firm belief in six specific religious views. Those views were that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life; God is the all-powerful and all-knowing Creator of the universe and He stills rules it today; salvation is a gift from God and cannot be earned; Satan is real; a Christian has a responsibility to share their faith in Christ with other people; and the Bible is accurate in all of its teachings.
Really? Those are the requirements? And they wonder why only 5% actually hold to them.
So, I’m deciding whether or not to attend at all during this “series” or if I want to boycott it out right, not that boycotting it would make any difference to anyone who propagates this DVD series within the church. We’ll see.
This by the way, all gives me fodder for my next post… stay tuned, there should be some interesting conversation that shoots for that one.
By the way, have you checked out the Indian Taxi Fund?
expose obama
So this website, www.exposeobama.com doesn’t want me to vote for Obama, because he voted not to expand the death penalty while in the Illinois state senate. (Check out the video on the site, or on youtube if you don’t want to provide them any more hits.)
Oh man, I shouldn’t vote for him…. because he doesn’t want more deaths… hmm…
**Authors note. I do NOT support the death penalty.
Oh, and have you checked out the Indian Taxi Fund yet
Indian Taxi Fund
Have you ever taken part in changing the world via Kiva? If you have, then you know what a micro-loan is and how it works, for those of you who don’t heres a quick run down.
It starts with a small business owner in need of money to grow his or her business in some way. With Kiva the loans range from $500 to several thousands of dollars, and the idea is that you can get a group of people together to donate $25 each and all of you collectively can help support the business. It’s a great idea and Kiva has had a large amount of success in helping business owners in third world countries.
But there’s a problem with Kiva, there is really no relationship aspect. You get a short bio of the business owner(s) but you never really get to know them, and this has been a problem for me, I want to work within the confines of relationships to help out.
A solution has come in the form of this Indian Taxi Fund. Let me introduce you to Amit.
Amit is a church planter in India, to help support his calling he has been teaching at a local university, however the university recently closed. After the university closed Amit began working a Taxi business, but he is being severely overcharged by the man he is renting a taxi from, and is not able to really make enough money to support his family and continue to plant churches.
Enter Josh Brown and his blogging cohorts. Josh built a relationship with Amit, Josh brought us this story, and Josh set this plan in motion. Now, we are going to join together to raise $7500 for Amit to purchase a taxi in order to continue his ministry.
Now, this is a loan, which means Amit will be repaying the lenders (no you will not be collecting interest), but it will enable him to continue his ministry.
So here’s what I’m asking. $25 from each reader in my blog, but I’m also looking for anyone willing to match the contributions made via my blog. If you’re interested in donation matching, please contact me via e-mail (mattscott306 at comcast dot net).
Josh Brown is also providing the following for any wishing to take part in the Indian Taxi Fund (cross posted from Josh’s site)
Via Red Cowboy Designs (my graphic design company), I’ll be taking the first 3 clients (new) that contact me for a new project. I will write them a quote as usual offering a 20% discount on what I normally would charge. I will then have them send the money directly to the Indian Taxi Fund PayPal account. I will not take a penny of this money, but it will go directly to Amit’s Indian Taxi Fund. All of the monies will go directly to Amit in India to help pay for his taxi. For example, if I quote you $350 for a rave card and give you a 20% discount, you will be asked to donate $270 directly to the Indian Taxi Fund. That’s a pretty nifty bargain/deal/make the world a better place offer. But it gets better, at the end of the loan when Amit repays the amount, we will give you your money back. So you will technically be getting a design for free. It’s like Oprah’s Big Give. But cooler. I think.
To donate refer to this link for the PayPal information.
If you want more information, please email me at the address above, or head over to this page for further context and background.
UPDATE: This is cross posted from the comment section on Josh’s site, regarding certain logistics of the operation.
i’m planning on the money going to the paypal account. i’ll pay for the money that paypal takes as their cut out of pocket. i’ll then send a lump sum check via western union to amit. and then we’ll set up a payment plan for 24 months. where he sends payment back via western union every month. and i’ll be the last to take the repayment. just because i’m horrible with math. and i want to minimize paypal eating into our chunk of money raised, i’ll pay back individuals with a regular check probably. or just send it paypal. but i’ll do it in a lump sum. so if amit pays us back $1000. i won’t divide that up 30 ways. i’ll just start paying certain people their whole sum. that way we don’t get hit with multiple transaction fees. does that make any sense.
random stuff 4-24
I think I’m going to start a semi-frequent section called “Random stuff,” for usage when I have things I want to talk about, but don’t quite have time or enough information to fully flesh out those thoughts into at least decent posts, as well as interesting things going on with my life. So, without further introduction.
A couple friends and I have begun to lay out the groundwork for an at least week long trip on the Appalachian trail. For those not familiar, it’s a 2500 mile hiking trail that hits seven states from Georgia to Maine. We’ll be hitting up about 80 miles of trail in North Carolina sometime in late July. We’re skipping our home state of Georgia because the heat is suppose to be oppressive in the Georgia parts of the trail during July and August.
An update on one of the items from my last post: I stated that I was having trouble with the fact I was getting money from the church for playing with one of their bands on Sunday mornings. Well one of my buddies who works for the department that pays me told me a couple days ago that they couldn’t afford to pay me. Problem solved. 
I’m reading through “The Powers that Be” by Walter Wink right now, 87 pages in and I have 9 pages marked with brilliant quotes, which I will likely share at some point in time. If you haven’t read through the book, I’m gonna recommend doing so before you pick up anything else. Really, it’s been that powerful thus far.
I had one more thing I wanted to talk about it, but the more I think about it, the more I realize that I’m actually going to have to spend some time on this, but as a small teaser… it’s affiliated with Focus on the Family and it doesn’t like me err…. postmodernists. mmm…. goodness.
when theology and life come into conflict
I guess it’s inevitable, your theology (if it’s “growing”) and your life and lifestyle must at some point come into conflict. I guess the toughest thing to do is to act on whatever revelations have been given to you. But this is difficult for me (and I guess most people) for many reasons, it will likely bring conflict with those you have grown close to, it may make life uncomfortable for you, and if it is going to cut off a financial source, then it will hurt.
But, what do you do when you know that it must be done?
What do you do when you’re teaching and you have something to say, but know that the church you’re teaching at wouldn’t approve out it? Do you drop subtle hints about what your idea is, or do you come out and say it?
What do you do when you give several hours out of every week to support a ministry you don’t agree with? A ministry that, it seems, the further you move one direction tries to pull you harder in the opposite.
What do you do when you disagree with the foundation of the very system you find yourself within? Can you be prophetic from within the system? Will the system even listen to you while you are still within it?
What do you do when you desire conversation that goes deeper than pleasantries, movies, and music, but have friends who refuse, or you have friends who are uncomfortable with ideologies outside their own?
Ok, here’s the setup. All of the things I’ve mentioned above I have run up against in the past month. I could name specifics, but I’m afraid if I do, some of those involved would be hurt by it, so I won’t (the last time I mentioned specifics I hurt someone else, who I would never want to hurt). In regards to each of the above questions, here are my likely responses in the future.
I’ll probably find a new venue for teaching, or if I continue to teach within the same venue, I’ll alert them prior to my speaking of anything I might say that they’d not like. (Knowing full well that it would spell the end of my teaching there).
I’m divided on leaving the ministry that I’m working with but don’t agree with. I could talk to the head of that ministry, but I have a feeling that person wouldn’t quite get my perspective, as it leaves the status quo (and I’m finding that most people are quite uncomfortable with diverging from the norm).
The system I find myself within is coming to a close whether the proprietors know it or not. The post modern era can’t (and won’t) stand for a continuation of it, so I guess I have to decide if I should jump ship now, or wait till the ship has sunk.
The hardest question is of course, my friends. I’m faced with having to drive an hour and a half (to freakin’ Tennessee of all places) to actually have a meaningful conversation with anyone but my wife. Again, I love my friends dearly, but I don’t think some of them are at all open to conversation or viewpoints other than their own, which is frustrating.
So there you have it, theology and life coming at each other full head. Whirlwind experience, but who knows, maybe it will end up being a fun one?
books, beer, and wings
It seems like my wife and I have the most interesting conversations at Taco Mac. For those of you not familiar with the chain it’s a bar with a restaurant attached, with a selection of hundreds of beers, and pretty good wings. But it seems that when we sit down the theology light switch gets flipped and that’s all we really discuss the entire time.
We don’t normally argue or disagree during these conversations, but we tend to build upon each others thoughts, it’s pretty fun. Now, in the case of Saturday we did have one argument going on, in which I was completely, to say it politely, pwned.
We were discussing our reading habits, Becky, an English major, reads through fiction all the time (she’s on a Flannery O’Connor kick if you’re interested), and I spend all of my time reading non-fictions, mostly emergenty stuff. So we we’re discussing who’s form of reading presented a purer form of information and theology.
I could not, for the life of me, see how information could be garnered from a fictional book the way it is from a non-fiction. And the argument continued on for some time that way, she insisting that fiction does indeed provide a purer source of information, because you are not told what to think, you are given various perspectives and gain insight based on those. I didn’t agree with her because most of the books I read don’t tell you what to think, they just give you information on various topics and let you build your own conclusions around them.
But then it happened, in one statement my whole argument was nullified.
My viewpoint on the Bible is such that I don’t feel like it should read like a non-fiction, I feel like it’s the story of a relationship, not basic instructions before… eh you get the point.
So Becky came out with: “For someone who thinks that we can gain insight from understanding the relationship portrayed in the Bible, you sure do loathe to let that happen elsewhere.”
Game, set, match.
Thoughts? Opinions?
house… church
What does it say about me that if my wife and I were to start a house church we’re pretty sure after week one it would just be the two of us?
Or does it say something about my friends more so than myself?
Is it possible to have a house church with a group of friends who don’t agree theologically on a ton of points?
How do you even start a house church?
Am I even ready to start one?
I want to start a house church. The questions are killing me.