.jpg)
Posts
Great interview on church's involvement in politics
Christian sent me this a while ago. It's a great video with Chuck Colson, Greg Boyd and Shane Claiborne talking God and politics. If you know me I lean heavily on the Boyd, Claiborne side but there is some great discussion. Love to hear your thoughts.
38 comments:
Great stuff... just finished a whole course on this stuff last Spring... my dissertation will be dealing with it to some extent.
Krista Tippett's podcast from NPR often has some interesting stuff.
I saw this video awhile back. I enjoyed how Colson brings perspective that we so lack as young followers of Christ.
We seem to have abandoned the raw truth of history and at the same time even scripture. He has written many amazing books that are far more challenging than the new misleading books of today. He's written books that parallel the Bible rather than change it into some new idea. We've let go of amazing leaders/writers like Dietrich Bonhoeffer and have traded this and the word of God for a counterfeit Gospel.
Greg Boyd being one of those writers that contributes to this type of counterfeit Gospel and is robbing Jesus of his purpose and plan.He is a writer that loves to disregard points in scripture that speak towards these issues, and embraces them completely aside from the true meaning. Basically putting a spin on things and trapping Christians into believing we haven't figured it out. Writers like Rob Bell, Brian McLaren have spoke lots and lots of real truth but at the same time miss huge marks of basic scripture. Turning and spinning things into some great mystery that we have missed out on for the last 2000 years.
I agree with Shane Claiborne a little, although I'm very careful to listen to the words of someone that is highly involved with such a radical like Tony Campolo.
All these men have great things to say. Again, I believe we as young followers of Christ have disconnected ourselves from the wise. Look how Colson repeatably reminds us of perspective. Boyd lacks what I believe to be a true sense of the simple message of Christ. He promotes "Cheap Grace" at the same time, that same message coming from what seems to be his counterpart Shane Claiborne.
Coming from a person that has had to fight for his own return into the Church. Which in and of itself is something that goes against the tradition we have seen. This new movement in promoting the mystery message and reformation of basic biblical theology has been something my heart has wanted to speak to for a long time.
So, I guess I will. I will become who I am in Christ.
Wow. You must have been watching a different video. I saw a great discussion with great thinkers and Boyd and Claiborne soaked everything they said in scripture and history. I don't see how that's abandoning anything. Send me the link to the video you were watching...sounds interesting!
Our links are the same. I watched the video from the original site.
Claiborne had much more insight than Boyd's anti-American anti-politic rhetoric. But he still follows close behind to the teachings of Tony Campolo and that has to go into question.
here is a quote from Tony Campolo interviewed by Claiborne
"...what can I say to an Islamic brother who has fed the hungry, and clothed the naked? You say, "But he hasn't a personal relationship with Christ." I would argue with that. And I would say from a Christian perspective, in as much as you did it to the least of these you did it unto Christ. You did have a personal relationship with Christ, you just didn't know it."
-Tony Campolo
emphasize on that last statement "you just didn't know it."
I know you probably know far more than I do when it comes to scripture and great books.But God is telling me we've missed it. I'll probably be viewed as an arrogant and senseless hypocrite that is coming against you, and that is not the case.
I'm not saying I don't trust you as follower of Christ but at the same time we are both called to test things. And that is all that I'm doing.
I'm sure you'll delete all my comments.. because challenging this is not allowed... embracing it is really what you want to see. And I'm not going to compete with that..
My first comment was satire.
This comment is more to your point.
I have a no whining policy on my blog. You've gotta drop this everybody is against me nonsense. Sorry...it's just the rules!
I forgot to ask this question.. Claiborne makes a statement having to do with the attempt to assasinate Hitler was the "Cross" losing.
Where in scripture or in any idea are we told that the "Cross" better known as "Jesus" also known as "Salvation" and mostly known as "God" etc..etc has the capability of winning and losing?
also,
It's interesting when Claiborne speaks of the account of the Clinton Prayer Breakfast and then we learn later that Colson was actually there. I'm sure you appreciate his statement rebuttal to Boyd about what Mother Teressa says....
I never said anyone is against.. and by no means am I whining, If anything I'm prophesying.. haha...
I'll take it back though..
I love the word Satire.. great word... better known as Condemn, Scorn and Ridicule.... In which I hadn't a clue you supported...
Changes everything.....
This was a very interesting video. I found myself agreeing with both Colson and Claiborne. However, that tool in the middle has got to go. What the heck did he even say and did he just check logic at the door and load up on catch phrases and emotionalism...oh, I digress.
Anyway, the way to transform a culture, a country, a political system is to transform hearts by the GOSPEL of Jesus Christ. Morality cannot be legislated. However, we should not as Christians throw in the towel for a moral society. When Calvin was at Geneva it was known in all of Europe as "Christ's City" and a haven for women(men were punished for abusing their wives) and the church was very much politically active...but I know, those evil reformers we don't want to give them any credit. :-) Christianity can affect a culture and a political system in a positive way.
Here is where I disagree with Claiborne...he says he is not political, yet he makes a sly political statement by saying that his hope is that all Christians would be driving vegetable-oil fueled cars. It reeks of environmentalism which as we all know is a hot political topic.
I also took issue with his stance on marriage. I do think it is of the utmost importance. (here is where I am going to get all reformed again....) Christians should be getting married and having or adopting children and raising more Christians. They should be baptizing these children and rearing them to be covenant keepers who really do go out and change the world. RAise your family right and let your grandkids march on WAshington...we do need to get our stuff in order here Christians!!!
Claiborne also said that because Hitler did not die in a bomb attack that "the cross lost". I seriously almost crapped myself. ARe you kidding me????? The CROSS CANNOT LOSE! JESUS DOESN'T LOSE! He is eternally victorious. Come on Claiborne...was not the Sovereign God in charge that day when that bombing took place. Perhaps that extra time added to Hitler's existence was for him to REPENT!!! Who are we to know or question the ways of Almighty God and then have the audacity to say "he lost".
I think Claiborne was right on with how we should be practically living out our "Pro-life" convictions and that the church should not be endorsing candidates or military actions or have flags at the altar. I guess I would have to agree with Boyd to this end as well. Nationalism and Christianity have no business together.
HEre is where I disagree with all of them...the KINGDOM IS NOW!!!! Christ is reigning right now in 2008, the year of OUR LORD. Not one thing that is happening in this world is out of his control. And, he and his church will be triumphant. We may not understand how he will work out every detail, but we know the end and he wins.
I think we can look at our society (even with it's problems) and see the awesome effect of the Gospel. The way we treat our handicapped citizens (a movement started by Christian concientious objectors in WW2), schooling and education(in general a Christian movement), civil rights movement, tolerance (no heretics being killed lately), public welfare (hello, we have poor people that are overweight...seriously, that is probably unheard of in all of history!!) and the list goes on.
Colson schooled both of those guys with history and scripture and just plain ol' oratory skills and LOGIC. He was so right when he said that even though we have had failings and continue to, Christians should not just check out of the political process.
My hope is that I will teach my children to become righteous thinking and acting Christian adults. I want them to love the Lord with all their heart soul and strength and their neighbor as themselves. I hope they are edcuated with Logic, Rhetoric and Dialectic with a distinctly Christian and Biblical World View and will be thinking citizens and in turn, produce more wonderful citizens that hopefully run for president or congress! :-) We need more people with a moral conscience in WAshington. We don't need more politicians. We need more Wilberforces. Let us train up who we want to run the country instead of having to pick for the least evil.
Leslie,
Great response, However in referring to Calvin and reformed theology (Calvinism) I think we need to be careful. I see it better to keep it Biblical and not a perspective of different denominations.
Also the term "Nationalism" is used loosely. People have coined that here in America and love to use that word in comparison to Communism. Basically Nationalism is the American way of Communism.
I guess if you use the word Patriotism it would be the same. Not to me, but for those that are opposing the war of today and the history of our country such as Boyd.
The point I'm making really is there isn't anything wrong with a Church displaying the Flag that represents the freedom that we have to Praise our Lord without getting our heads cut off.. Or rather closes the gap of the possibility.
Juan-
Respectfully...Dan asked for our thoughts. My thoughts are that a REformed theology is entirely biblical. And, Calvinism is respected amongst many a denomination.
I think as Christians, we can look back at history (Elizabethean or the King James eras for example) and see how many good things can come from an state endorsed religion like Bible translations, moral laws, etc. However, there is much evil such as cutting off a Roman Catholic brother's head. I don't think we want to return to that type of NATIONAL RELIGION...right???
Jesus Christ came and flew in the face of over-reaching government. Ceaser himself declared that he was "king of kings and Lord of lords". Jesus must of really ticked those guys off. But, I think what is so radical is that he is saying that he wants to be king of kings and lord of lords in the individual heart, not of a government. So, when we go to worship this king and lord on Sunday, this king who came to call people from every tribe and nation, this king who commands that we get on our knees and confess him as lord....what business do we have putting a symbol of government at the altar. That is just wrong. There should definitely be a seperation of church and state.
We don't take God out of the state; no way. But, we glorify him alone on Sunday. No one and nothing else. It is less about Nationalism or Patriotism and more about giving ulimate respect and honor where it is due.
I am an extremely patriotic and proud American. I love our country, I love capitalism. Why? Because this country was founded on God's commandments and on Gospel principles. You can go nowhere else and experience such freedom and opportunity.
However, we are slowly reliquinshing our freedoms to a nanny-state that is very Anti-Gospel, Anti-freedom. Our freedoms, though based on Biblical standards, are not given to us by a government. They are given to us by God Almighty. So, we need no flag to tell us that is why we can worship. We can be thankful for the land that provides such freedom, strive to preserve it and pray that our Christian bretheren across the world may enjoy it, but we cannot give credit to America alone.
To me it is more about respect and honor for God Almighty than an issue of national pride or appreciation.
i don't have a problem with a flag being in a church...the only problem i have is when the political realm is discussed from the pulpit. the pulpit is where the gospel is preached, not where voting guides turn into a "sermon".
btw, off topic :) "the cost of discipleship" by bonhoeffer is an incredible book. i love this quote from his book:
"cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline, Communion without confession, absolution without personal confession. Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate"
good stuff.
Josh,
Whats up brother. how have you been. I'm working on a book right now to rival Bonhoeffer's called "Expensive Grace: When Gas prices rise, so does the cost of Grace".
Heard your working in Carlsbad, Ca. Home town of Troy Glaus (St. louis cardinals) and me.
Glad to see your doing well
Peace
When we, the people and more specifically Christians, relinquish the power to change society and culture to a centralized govt, we let the world down. This video debate/sharing of ideas contextually is under the assumption that the government is the main force that effects the direction and moral compass of a society. I disagree with that assumption. I believe God utilizing the church as a whole is that force that changes society ultimately back to Eden.
It seems as though we have forgotten that this country is ours. Abraham Lincoln ends his Gettysburg Address ends with: …”that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” Three things can be said from this statement.
1. Our nation and govt is under God. God is not a lobbyist trying to get His way, bending the ear and offering incentives to politicians. Instead, our Govt is subject to the rule of Jesus Christ sitting at the right hand of God the Father Almighty. We should be pleading that God would be merciful to us through our govt and withhold His just wrath on a nation that has replaced the Gospel of Jesus Christ with the Gospel of The Almighty Government.
2. Our nation was built as a govt of the people, by the people, for the people. We feel like this is still the case since we still vote for our leaders, and citizens become local, state, and national representatives. But on a practical level it seems as though we view society as “us and them”. Regular citizens and the government. For instance, anyone I’ve talked to recently has been disappointed with the selection of presidential nominees that were paraded before us. So we say, oh well that’s what they gave us now we have to vote for someone who vaguely resembles our values.
3. Much can be said with clear, concise words, said with conviction. ( I’ll come back to this when I critique Boyd)
So I think that our govt itself needs to be brought back to the people. If a certain rule/law is voted on by the people and struck down by a judge and the judge’s interpretation of the law, we should be up in arms as citizens. The judge has taken away the power of the people to decide for themselves the type of county/state/country the people want.
So do I agree with any of them? No. I think what the church has done is mistakenly taken cues from Anabaptists i.e. Mennonites, Amish, Brethren In Christ, etc. and have separated themselves from the world. Us Good, World Bad. We have our own music, our own art, our own cafés. (typically all much poorer in quality) Further distancing ourselves from this so-called evil world. Over time this separation, I think, relinquished power to shape culture to the government. Now, we’re like, wait a minute, govt is full of back room deals, and money, power, greed. We are aghast at gay marriage and abortion. The current reaction is to “vote your conscience” for someone who may value one of your issues. Or protest, or lobby, or some reaction to the hot water we have found ourselves in.
All of which, I think are not efficient. They take the most amount of energy with the smallest amount of return. I think we need to rebuild our culture from the ruins we find today. Instead of thinking about the next 4 or 8 years, I like to think about the next 4,000 or 8,000 years. We start rebuilding by investing our energy in our children. Giving them the best education, and the most opportunities we can to place them in a position in society which changes and shapes culture. My hope is not for my child to be on a street corner handing out tracks to people who will throw them away, but to show God’s love and grace to their 2,000 employees or to their constituents or have their music or art displayed in world renown settings or their technological and scientific breakthrough prove to anyone that a life is ended by an abortion. I’ll leave the gay marriage thing up for debate for my great grandkids vs. their great grandkids. Non-Christians will ultimately bring death upon themselves, whether it’s killing their unborn children, or through gang violence, or through not procreating. That sounds horribly callous, and it is not that I don’t love them, or pray that God would have mercy on them and that they would become Christians, but we don’t need to fear that our world will be over run by pagans. God is still in control.
So my critique is as follows:
Shane: I found myself agreeing with a lot of what he said but his whole pacifist ideal is nice and seems pious, but we live in a society that the only way he can be a pacifist and free is because others have gone to war. Logically pacifism doesn’t pan out through history. Without war we would still be part of England subject to their rule, (well maybe not because other colonies have received their independence without war) or Muslim extremists would come and take our land, women, and children. Or do you just let the non-believers fight in the Military for the Christian pacifists’ freedom? Is that loving you neighbor as yourself? Would we not have blood on our hands if we never stepped in to defend free people in WWII? On a family level if someone was going to kill my wife and I had the opportunity to kill them first? They would be gone. I think this discussion is difficult now because of Iraq and the question of justice with the US there.
Colson: With Chuck I understood his position much more clearly than the other two because he spoke regular English and not some Christian tribal dialect. He used normal words, history, experience, logic to form his belief. And although I didn’t agree with him that we should be super politically charged, (which is what I got from him). He certainly garnered much more respect than the other two who used some form of Christian-post-modern-English that I couldn’t understand. Shane talked about scandalously something, and enemy-lover and blah, blah, blah. For someone trying to be relevant to his culture (dreadlocks) he should brush up now how most people speak.
Boyd: This guy could have said. “Vote in a manner that most efficiently furthers God’s work in changing the world” If you don’t think a president is going to effect the state of abortion for the better or worse, but you’re convinced the candidate is going to help ‘orphans and widows’ then vote for that candidate. Instead he goes on and on about the kingdom as if his definition of God’s kingdom is universally known to all believers. Kingdom this and Kingdom that, it may have sounded Christian, but I think it didn’t clearly explain his position. I also thought he came across through his posture and tone like an arrogant bastard (but that’s just me).
I think this topic is so much broader than what I’ve said and after re-reading it there is a lot that goes behind each thought like a believer’s eschatology, their doctrine of free-will vs. the elect, whether you believe that only the spiritual can be good and the tangible world is bad, and the purpose of the church today. In thinking this through I find that everything is connected and everything matters. How you believe changes how you live.
I’m sure I’ve forgotten something or my thoughts aren’t completely cohesive, but this is what I thought of the video.
Thanks Dan for hours of good conversations with Leslie.
I was raised Mormon, which is a reformed theology.........
What's an Altar?? Seriously when is the last time anyone saw an Altar in the Church?
And what is interesting. Outside the Church is where the flag isn't respected the most.... and that is leaking into the Church.
Just a few weeks ago a high school student wrote in the school paper that flag burning is "Freedom of speech". Where is the speech in burning a flag? a flag of any Nation.... not just American... isn't that an action? I'm sure the ACLU will rush to his aid to embrace him and his boldness, Just like they did with NAMBLA (North American Man-Boy Love Association)
We can't swing the pendulum to far so to speak on comments referring to history and the Roman Government.. We are far from "returning" to any Government that permits heads being cut off.. However, it is possible that one can find themselves like Nick Berg did by traveling to other countries. And it is possible to fall to a crime here as well. But, I don't see our Government moving in that direction.
this is some of what I see...
-A forced sharing of wealth by targeting the affluent for most of the Governments revenue. (we think we're taxed to much now, just wait...)
-Lax school discipline on American children to promote their so-called liberties..
(anybody here about the High School girls making a pact to get pregnant?)
-Naked hostility to religious values and their expression in public.
(which wont just be "in public"
-A touchy-feely vision of our society that places individual self-expression and rights over self-sacrifice and adult responsibility.
(San Francisco and the alike...... need I say more?)
I believe addressing what is relevant to today rather than holding a discussion that is repeating history. We already learned from that. That's one of the main points Colson was making..
I feel like I'm blogging on Dan's blog... I'm done here... I think I've said enough..
Although it would be nice to see some of my questions answered in my earlier comments instead of dodged...
I think it' a given that I'll be sharing more on my blog...
-til next time....
mormon "theology" is heresy. it "reformed" Biblical Christianity into a religion of man/god, founded by a mr smith, a charlatan. comparing mormon "theology" to what calvin and luther did is pretty brazen.
okay.. one more..
Jeff,
It's interesting that you talked about Lincoln and the Gettysburg Address. For those that follow Howard Zinn you wouldn't know that speech even existed.
More striking than Zinn’s inaccuracies...intentional and otherwise...is what he leaves out.
Washington’s Farewell Address, Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address, and Reagan’s speech at the Brandenburg Gate all fail to merit a mention. Nowhere do we learn that Americans were first in flight, first to fly across the Atlantic, and first to walk on the moon. Alexander Graham Bell, Jonas Salk, and the Wright Brothers are entirely absent. Instead, the reader is treated to the exploits of Speckled Snake, Joan Baez, and the Berrigan brothers. While Zinn sees fit to mention that immigrants often went into professions like ditch-digging and prostitution, American success stories like those of Alexander Hamilton, John Jacob Astor, and Louis B. Maye...to name but a few, are excluded. Valley Forge rates a single fleeting reference, while D-Day’s Normandy invasion, Gettysburg, and other important military battles are left out. In their place, we get several pages on the My Lai massacre and colorful descriptions of U.S. bombs falling on hotels, air-raid shelters, and markets during the Gulf War of the early 1990s.
Lets not forget guys like Matt Damon, Ben Affleck,Bono, Eddie Vedder, and Rage Against The Machines top reading lists... These guys are amazing actors, and musicians but skew and distort things just like our friend Zinn.
Josh.. My comparison brazen? I think that word is unfit....
You're implying that Mormonism is heresy because it goes beyond your boundaries of what you perceive as Reformed Religion/theology.. and that is not fair to say.
ok... seriously I'm done....
for the comment olympics dan will now beat nate :) good job dan...not only one of my best friends but my favourite pastor/paperboy/reddingbikemessenger :)
Just for the record I haven't ever heard of Howard Zinn, nor have I read anything he's written.
And when referring to Reformed Theology, capital 'R' capital 'T'. Of which Leslie and I ascribe to, we are referring to an actual type of theology, not a different religion. The following website should help you out. Or just google Reformed Theology. Mormonism won't come up.
http://reformedtheology.org/SiteFiles/WhatIsRT.html
Juan we have altar at church.
where have I been the past 30 years? ... I've got to start reading the Record Searchlight ... this political stuff is great ...
juan-
with all due respect to you and your upbringing in the mormon church: mormonism is a revisionist theology, not a reformed theology. it is outside the boundaries of traditional orthodox christianity, namely they deny a trinitarian God.
i believe that is why josh called it heretical. sorry that it was offensive to you, but it is probably what most of christianity would call it.
blessings to you, in all sincerity.
Uh.... Mormons believe in the trinity. Mormonism is a Reformed Theology.
Most Christians will not say this because it doesn't fit in the "boundaries" that they seem to lay out. Giving me a historical, religious and belief system rhetorical on Mormonism is a waste of anyones time. What has been stated is merely assumptions of assumptions of more assumptions rather than fact.
Humbly I ask that you understand that I encompass far greater understandings about the Mormon faith than the average Christian. I was a Mormon. Although I am no longer and have come to experience the true God and savior, my experiences and knowledge in the Mormon faith still remain. I have witnessed many Christians inaccurately make statements about Mormons. It amazes me of the ignorance most Christians have.
Furthermore I think it's better to Challenge writings and thoughts that are a little closer to home that carry extreme inaccuracies. It's scary to think that writers like Rob Bell, Brian McLaren, Greg Boyd (as seen in the video) and a few others that speak to a postmodern emerging crowd make some serious Biblical errors and speak of some "New" idea. A "new anecdote" about God, completely different than what we have been taught for the last 2000 years. They claim this whole time we have missed it. They choose to preach mystery rather than truth.
Rob Bell references people like Marcus Borg, who doesn't believe that the Bible is the "literal" word of God. Borg also believes that Jesus is not the only way to God. In his book Velvet Elvis, Bell points to Borg as someone to explain a central assertion of Christian world view. Claiborne in relations with Tony Campolo in my above comments that nobody wanted to address.
This is a big deal..
In referring to an Altar I was addressing the context of it being spoken like its original purpose.. Or so I felt.... I know we have the "front of the church" that we like to call the altar. and the symbolic meaning of the altar.... but nobody has a tangible traditional alter that they are slapping lamb chops on... or do they? In which I think people would raise question to.
Juan-
I will concede that you would know more about the Mormon church than I since it is your ubringing.
However, I CANNOT concede the point that it is REFORMED THEOLOGY. Namely, it is anabaptist in nature-- ie a post-"conversion" baptism- Reformed theology greatly stresses an paedo (infant or child) baptism. Also, another major tenet of the Reformation is SOLA SCRIPTURA- scripture alone. I don't think that the Book of Mormon fits into that, I am sure you can even concede that point. And as far as the Trinity. I can only assume that you mean that you believe in three seperate Gods--FAther, Son, Holy Spirit, whereas I would believe the 3 are ONE.
I could go on, but I don't know that it is worthwhile at this point. I do not seek to offend you, but I do think you are wrong. Sorry to say it so bluntly.
Again, in sincerity, God's blessings to you.
I am curious to know your definition of Reformed theology.
Love that you guys want to talk about this stuff. Couple thoughts.
Jeff- I'm glad this has given you and Leslie the opportunity to talk about this stuff and clarify what you believe. I know this stuff is right up your alley.
This thought is for everyone- It's hard to read tone, real intent, and sarcasm in a comment. The reader is left to make a lot of assumptions. (you know what assuming does!) At times in reading these comments I've felt pride and quite a few sweeping generalizations. It might not be your intent but it's just the feeling I get. My suggestion is you swap phone numbers and have a good hearted debate where you can actually hear each other. Then comments won't be reactionary, you'll be able to hear each other out. I know all of the people personally in this discussion and they all claim Jesus is Lord, and they'll all good willed people. We're on the same team.
I love the debate but I'd like to get a little closer to all of us speaking the truth in love.
Side note: Where in the world is Leslie's blog? The world is waiting.
I realize even in writing this that I might be coming off like a prick so give me a call and we'll talk! You'll all got my number.
My blog is just in my head. Sorry, no one else is allowed in. Just kidding. I really don't have time for one. I just get on little blog tangents now and then.
I sincerely hope that my tone was not arrogant or rude toward our brother Juan. However (as someone who is proabably old enough to be his mother) I could not in good conscience allow him to assume certain things about Reformed theology nor claim that Mormonism is a part of it. That would not be prudent or responsible on my part. Especially since I was the one who brought Reformed theology to the discussion. I make no excuse for that, I am proud of it as it makes me who I am.
I am glad that we all can agree that Jesus Christ is Lord and came to save sinners lost. I believe this is an excellent debate (church and politics) to have. I was personally not offended by any comments, but I think I have a relatively thick skin when it comes to these kinds of discussions.
My hope is that it would spur us on to study and know more of our own Christian History. There is much to be learned and sadly the American church has been neglectful in teaching it's congregants the church's 2000+ year history. I even went to Christian College for 4 years and am sad to announce that I didn't learn much about Church history...(sorry, Slane, but I sure did know that you liked Bonhoeffer and that you were a Clinton/Gore supporter)(oooh...that was probably a snarky sidenote...forgiveness please!)Let's just say I am doing a lot of make up work in my old age!
At any rate, the dialogue is good and it is right. It may be heated, but no one has called anyone a heretic personally nor denied that they trust in Jesus and belong to him. If anything, I have learned a few new things. That is always a good thing.
So, what's next on your blog...believer's baptism vs. infant baptism.... election vs. free will....Just kidding...I am sure you would probably block Jeff, Josh and I from those discussion as we would overload your blog with 15 paragraph comments....
I'm pissed!
;)
(sarcasm)
nothin' but love :)
Leslie,
Have you read Justo Gonzales, "the story of Christianity'? You should check it out and prescribe it to anyone you think would like a greater understanding of the history of the Church. Its a great overview.
Also, on the subject of infant baptism vs. believer baptism. Why don't we do both, just to cover the bases. Two baptisms!!. Nice idea. Heck, i think i've asked the Lord into my heart like 50 times when i was younger just to make sure i got it right.
Viva La Vida
P.S. I work 13 hours a day, have two jobs, writing a book, a wife and kid that want my time, and still have time for a blog. No more excuses. WWSD? What Would Slane Do?
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b260/IMMonkey/Forum%20Funnies/Misc-Internet.jpg
Super serial, yep.
took me 4 days to finally sit through and watch this.
interesting dialogue.
interesting comments too.
i'm diggin shane.
wish i could hang out with that guy for a while just to have some of his knowledge and perspective rub off on me.
thanks for sharing.
question: can someone answer my questions??
Dan... have you seen this?
http://www.lordsaveusthemovie.com/home.html
Post a Comment