Category Archives for Random Thoughts

Truth in Spite of Itself

The Pope

This is my body, he said, two thousand years ago. This is my blood.

It was the only religion that delivered exactly what it promised: life eternal for its adherents.

There are some of us alive today who remember him. And some of us claim that he was a messiah, and some think that he was just a man with very special powers. But that misses the point. Whatever he was, he changed the world.

- Neil Gaiman, from Fifteen Painted Cards From a Vampire Tarot

I like Neil Gaiman, for the most part. I especially like some of his children’s books, like Coraline, The Graveyard Book, and The Wolves in the Walls, but also for books like The Anansi Boys. I find it interesting that Gaiman, who is a fairly outspoken atheist, has such a fascination with gods and the supernatural—with myth, actually. It seems that he is often unable to tell a story without it. He appears to understand the great power of myth—but perhaps fails to understand that sometimes it’s bigger than he is.

Easy Livin’

Just for fun – and following up on yesterday’s musical theology (and because I no longer have time to keep up my classic rock blog), here’s an oldie from the rock theologians at Uriah Heep:

Sad News

Blogging pioneer (and one-time commenter on this blog) Michael Spencer, the Internet Monk, passed away today of cancer.  He was 53.  More info here.

Spam

Some of the spam comments I get on this blog (and I get many, many spam comments…) are quite funny.  Too bad I can’t quote them – I try to keep this a PG-rated blog.  How in the world do people think up this stuff?

Managing Conflict For Church Boards & Committees

From my Conflict blog:

We all agree that bad conflict is destructive.  An apparent lack of conflict is also destructive, because there really is no lack of conflict. It’s either open and obvious, or it’s hidden; and hidden conflict is, in my opinion, far more destructive.  How many people disappear from churches for no apparent reason?  Truth is, there’s always a reason, and typically it’s an issue of unresolved conflict (although certainly that’s not always the case).  As someone once said, “wherever two or more are gathered, there is conflict.”  Conflict is a fact of life, as long as we are imperfect beings. Rather than ignore this fact, as many churches tend to do, the best case scenario would seem to be to put conflict front and center, but make it good conflict rather than bad.

Read the whole post here.

The Great Starbucks Laptop Control Mystery

A few months ago, I had a weird experience at Starbucks – my cursor started moving to the right, all by itself.   I first thought my wireless mouse was having issues, but unplugging it didn’t help.  No matter what I tried, the cursor kept on it’s determined course.  It seems like a little thing, but your laptop becomes essentially useless if you can’t keep the cursor still.

I suspected that my laptop had a stuck right arrow key, but when I got home, it worked normally.  When I went back to Starbucks, it flaked out again.  In a different Starbucks.  So, I googled everything I could think of, but no one mentioned a problem like this, except to say that some kind of signal interference can do weird things.

After a few weeks, it seemed to stop. Except for today.  Once again, my cursor began it’s march to the right, making it hard to do anything.

Then, it occurred to me that I was sitting in a spot I didn’t usually sit, in a little alcove by the huge Starbucks sign in the window.  I picked up my stuff and moved to the other side of the room, and viola!, the cursor behaved itself.

So, apparently the huge green mermaid sign was somehow hijacking my laptop.

Mystery solved… I think.

What do you believe about the Bible?

Faithful readers of this blog will know that I occasionally post articles about why you can believe and rely on the Bible, as well as criticize people like Bart Ehrman for making really stupid arguments to the contrary.   That being said, I also believe that there are serious issues with those who claim that the Bible is inerrant, or “without error in any way.”

Believers in inerrancy, I think, find themselves putting more faith in inerrancy than they do in the Gospel; however, the 1st Century Christians didn’t, for the most part, even have the Bible. Yet, it is clear from Paul’s epistles that they had “the Word of God.”  I suspect that the real issue underlying inerrancy is that these Christians have become trapped in modernistic thinking, where propositions must meet certain criteria in order to be “true.”  In this way, it seems that those requiring that the Bible be inerrant actually suffer from a lack of faith – one of the unfortunate consequences of modernism – rather than having a greater faith, as they would have us believe.

Yesterday Stephen at Undeception posted The Bible and the need for proof, makes some good points about why we don’t need to believe in “inerrancy” in order to believe the Gospel.  He asks at the conclusion, “why is it logically necessary, rather than merely preferable for one reason or another, that the Bible be entirely true through and through?”

My question, just because I’m curious, is “What do you believe about the Bible, and why?”

Status update

This is just a short post to let my faithful readers know I haven’t lost interest in the blog or dropped off the face of the earth.   The last couple of weeks have been consumed with home improvement projects and Christmas. While I fully intended to post my next in the “Exploring the Twain” series during the holidays, I expect it will be a few days before that gets done.

Another excuse is that I was given G.K. Chesterton’s Orthodoxy for Christmas, and it has more or less preempted my other reading plans.  Why haven’t I read this book before?  Chesterton is amazing… my New Year’s resolution will probably be to read more of him.  So, don’t be surprised to see something Chesterton-inspired soon.

But, I promise – I’ll get back to my look at Eastern Orthodoxy and “the Twain.”

Historical evidence for the Bethlehem census story

Weekend Fisher writes today concerning some historical evidence for the story – often written off as mere myth – that Jesus was born in Bethlehem as a result of a census.   Apparently, as no Roman documents exist from that period, that there is no record of such a census.  However, some interesting documents exist from the 2nd and early 3rd centuries that refer to such tax/census documents.  He writes:

Justin Martyr, attempting to persuade the Roman government to stop persecuting Christians, refers the Romans to their own tax registers to verify Jesus’ birth. After mentioning the prophecy of the Messiah’s birth in Bethlehem he continues:

Now there is a village in the land of the Jews, thirty-five stadia from Jerusalem, in which Jesus Christ was born, as you can ascertain also from the registers of the taxing made under Cyrenius, your first procurator in Judæa.- Justin Martyr, First Apology XXXIV (circa 150-155 A.D.)

Tertullian makes a similar reference approx. 50 years later, indicating that Jesus’ birth was recorded in the documents kept in the archives in Rome, essentially challenging doubters to go look it up.

Of course, naysayers will respond that these 2 could simply have been bluffing, although I doubt they could provide any proof that either Tertullian or Justin Martyr had a tendency to make stuff up.  Historically, these references – if related to nearly any other issue – would be given serious consideration.

At this point, it would seem that there is no reason whatsoever to doubt this portion of the story.  And, this provides another example of why it is important to pay attention to the writings of the early church.

The Post Post

Today I was reading yet another blog post talking about post-evangelical Christianity, and I realized just how sick I am of things being “post.”    All the time I’m hearing post-Christian, post-evangelical, post-conservative, postmodern, post-American, postnasal – I mean, what’s up with that?  It’s ridiculous.  Seriously, why does everything have to be post-something-else?  Why can’t it simply be what it is?  It’s a pain in the posterior; it’s enough to make a person go postal.

“Post,” apparently, is the  préfixe du jour, which is kind of ironic when you think that it’s a prefix that means “comes after.”  But, that’s the wonder of the English language.  Words – especially stupid words – do seem to come in and out of vogue; someone will use an odd word, and all of a sudden everyone is using it.  Years ago, I remember such a word was “diametrically,”  as in “diametrically opposed.”  Like “post,” it’s a word that really didn’t have to be used. I mean, how opposed to something do you really have to be? But, for a few years it seemed that no one was merely opposed to something, everyone was “diametrically opposed.”  And, like “post,” it didn’t really say anything about what anyone was, just what they weren’t.

If something is “post,” then it’s over; it no longer exists, it’s dead. Or, worse than that, it’s postmortem, after dead.  Dead is what it is.  If you’re worried about after dead, then you’ve got problems; post-traumatic stress, perhaps.

Being post is a lot like being a-something, like asymmetric, or perhaps asymptomatic.  Or an atheist, which is also all the rage now.  One of the reasons, I think, that atheists have such a hard time organizing is that they aren’t necessarily for anything, and they don’t necessarily have any shared beliefs; what they have is a shared unbelief.  Which, I guess, is a lot like being post something. The posts also have a hard time organizing, because, let’s face it, they’re simply too late.  They’re not only not for something, they’ve missed it – the ship has already sailed.

Why aren’t there any pre-anythings?  Wouldn’t it better to be a little early, rather than being late, or simply being not?   I guess that’s what prophets are – those who are pre-something.  Prophets are good people to have around – even the name is positive: pro-phet.  We don’t seem to have any of those guys around anymore. But, that’s a subject for another post.

I’m tired of all the posts; in fact, I’m against them.  I guess you could say I’m apostalic, railing against the posts. So, don’t talk to me about postmodernism or postevangelicalism.  If you are too late to be something, I don’t want to hear about it.