Archive for September, 2007:
What’s Glory Got To Do With It?
Long before I believed in any kind of a God, I would ask Christians why God supposedly created us, and why we should believe in him. I (predictably) got what I thought was a cop-out answer: “to glorify himself,” or “for his glory,” etc. I always wondered why such a “loving” God would create humanity, and then watch us spiral into chaos, all to glorify himself. It sounds really selfish, doesn’t it? Since I have become a Christian, I have avoided that answer as much as possible.
Now, I do believe that God loves us and seeks to glorify himself, but I do not see the two quite so juxtaposed as I once did. I haven’t really been able to figure out why, but I think that the last week or so in my life has illuminated my understanding.
Read more »
dta
It’s been about 50 years since the U.S. began printing ‘In God We Trust’ onto the currency. This occurred during the Eisenhower administration to further accentuate the difference between America and the then-Soviet Union. That form of communism suppressed religion a great deal. We wanted any advantage out there.
This Cold War relic has held on though, despite challenges that that this phrase violates separation of church and state. As a Christian, I admit I do not empathize well with those who oppose this. I am somewhat bemused by notions that this moves the U.S. toward being a theocracy. More abrasive defenders of this have argued the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. While that’s a good slogan, I’m not sure how much that helps foster reconcilation.
(Strangely enough, Protestants are commonly thought of as pushing for a theocracy, though world history shows that either Jews (Israel) or Roman Catholics have been in the habit of establishing theocracies, not Protestants. But no matter.)
Should we continue to carry this message on our currency? Does it even serve a purpose? An article here examines the history of this controversial phrase. Enjoy!
Knowledge, Wretchedness, and Jesus
Some Christians have opposed academic learning because they believe it promotes a spiritual deadness, and promotes arrogance. As I am surrounded by young men and women here on campus I can testify that this is sometimes true. However, knowledge in itself cannot be the problem. After all, knowledge is a godly thing. (Prov. 8:10)
When we simply know things about the Bible, or about God, we tend to use that knowledge to build ourselves up. One comes to analyze sermons merely academically. We begin to read the Bible so that we can have more of the “right answers” rather than reading it for spiritual nourishment. We lose any kind of humility that is talked about so much throughout the very Bible we claim to know. I have fallen into this before, and I know the utter arrogance one has in that state.
What Did You Say?
[youtube=http://youtube.com/watch?v=Y2pTzkoGgwU]
This video looks at how we read the bible. Do you approach the bible as something that you use to justify what you believe, or do you believe based on what the bible says? It is a fundamental question that sometimes we dont ask, but consider it as you watch this video.
Lost in Translation, Part 2
Last week, I wrote about the challenge of communicating relationally in the blogosphere. Now I will discuss the importance of applying this same principle in understanding the Christian faith.
Disclaimer: I do not believe Christianity can be fully communicated in this medium, but I do believe that some understanding can be obtained with hard work and patience. I certainly do not hold to an agnostic epistemology (belief that one cannot know truth or knowledge). However, there are relational limitations to this medium.
In truth, I am ecstatic to be confronted with these limitations! Here’s why…
Read more »
A New View on Worldview
Worldview thinking has been on my mind lately. Maybe it’s been on yours?
I’ve been reading Naming the Elephant: Worldview as a Concept by James Sire (also author of The Universe Next Door). Sire became convinced that his definition of “worldview” was insufficient, and so he reworked it, wrote this book, and put out a new edition of The Universe Next Door. This book really struck a chord in me because I had a definition of “worldview” similar to Sire’s old one.
Everyone has a worldview. It may be a true, somewhat true, or false. Odds are, all our worldviews have many flaws. I used to think of a worldview as fundamentally a set of presuppositions. I believed worldview thinking was something mostly considered by professors in their “ivory towers.” But while a worldview certainly includes this, Sire’s new definition pushes against those boundaries:
“A worldview is a commitment, a fundamental orientation of the heart, that can be expressed as a story or in a set of presuppositions (assumptions which may be true, partially true or entirely false) which we hold (consciously or subconsciously, consistently or inconsistently), about the basic constitution of reality, and the provides the foundation on which we live and move and have our being” (122)
Christian Stereotypes
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KVwE6JUcH-I&eurl=]
Many people that I have had conversations with in person or in the blogosphere have a distorted image of what Christians believe, how they act, and how they interact with those who believe differently than they do. This video is a fun look at why that may be. Some issues that are brought to light by the two Christian shows captured in this video will be discussed in the next two entries I make over the course of the next week or two, so stay tuned. For the full length, original versions of the videos I borrowed, you can find them here:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8274583680980043774&q=vintage+21&total=175&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2910527690395612393&q=war+on+everything&total=4443&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5469244831587327869&q=farting+preacher+4&total=44&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
