Thursday, November 16, 2006

Slate blogs the Bible. - By David Plotz - Slate Magazine

Slate blogs the Bible. - By David Plotz - Slate Magazine

This is very cool. Just heard about this on NPR's On the Media podcast. David Plotz is going through the Bible, verse by verse, and blogging about it.

Sounds like he's taken some flak for reading and interpreting the Bible unmediated, mostly from rabbis. However I believe the Bible - mysterious as it is - speaks for itself. I hope David finds the Bible reading him as he reads it.

Monday, November 13, 2006


Got some fancy new shoes on the weekend after my other ones fell to pieces. They're nice - they measured my feet and how I stood beforehand. Good feeling, knowing you're stepping into something that's made for you.

Made me think about how the Christian life is referred to as a walk. It takes persistence, but it also means God has prepared my path. I don't know if He's given me cushioned soles though!

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

What repentance looks like

You can read Ted Haggard's apology to his congregation here.

I didn't know much about Ted Haggard except that he was high profile in the US Christian community and also featured in Jesus Camp.

It was really sad to hear of another Christian leader's fall, and hypocrisy. Sad because of the harm it does to Christianity's image, but sad too because it makes me think of the things not yet sorted in my life. There but for the grace of God go I - even if not in the same way.

But what gives me hope is the truly repentant tone of Haggard's letter. There is no PR spin here, nor is there deflection of blame. This is what repentance looks like, and although it's scandalous that this has happened at such a high level of leadership and therefore responsibility, truth is we are all very broken people. It'll be interesting to see the church's response to this, although at the same time that's best kept behind closed doors and not made into a media circus.

Interesting and insightful analysis from Gordon McDonald here.

Saturday, November 04, 2006


Just spring-cleaning my desk and found a quote I'd scribbled down. I don't remember who said it but it was a guest on In the Studio with Michael Card:

"We wouldn't know Him (God) for all that He is, if we didn't see Him in and through all that He made."

Thursday, November 02, 2006

More thoughts on "The New Atheism"

Continuing from the last post, a few more thoughts.

"Everything you hinge your life upon is false"
According to the article, a lot of self-identified agnostics are really "polite atheists" who are shy of declaring their atheism because, in effect, it says to their believing friends: "Everything you hinge your life upon is false."

That may seem a bit on the nose, but it didn't faze me. Because, in effect, that's what I'm doing to people with a naturalistic worldview when I present Christianity - real Christianity - as a coherent, rational worldview with moral consequences. That's why I don't present it unsolicited too often - because if it's real, sorry, if Christ is real, then He will change your whole life and belief system, not just become an add-on to your life.

Yet how many people have not heard this? They make a commitment expecting it to be X, and then hear later that it's supposed to be Y. No wonder it's hard going for some, and many have been turned off church forever.

Why Wired?
I heard an excellent podcast (which I got through iTunes' feed, and can't find on Wired's podcast blog!) in which Wired's managing editor (I think?) interviewed Gary Wolf, the author of the article. In it, the managing editor asked, "Why is this a Wired article?"

Wolf answered along the lines that the Wired economy is built on technology, which in turn is built on science, and that these Intelligent Design people are standing in the way of true science.

It's an easy statement to make, but it's utter bollocks.

Another podcast I've been listening to, Intelligent Design the Future, seems to be a lone voice trying to remind the media that:
  • Intelligent design is as fair a conclusion to draw from nature as evolution
  • Scientists who believe in ID are still scientists
  • Intelligence in design doesn't necessarily mean the designer is supernatural
  • These scientists often face censure from their colleagues for not toeing the Darwinist line
  • It's Galileo all over again, but this time the Darwinist majority takes the place of the Catholic Church, getting really mad with those who dispute their dogma
On that third point, intelligence in design doesn't necessarily mean the designer is supernatural, sometimes words get in the way of real understanding.

If you're an atheist or an agnostic reading this, how about we substitute the word "supernatural" with "extradimensional"? Does that make the picture any more plausible to your scientific understanding?