The Jericho Road

The continuing global economic crisis should be raising questions of faith and what the Scriptures say about the turmoil preceding the second coming of Christ. A current article in Bloomberg offers little to assuage market fears. It speaks of a One Trillion dollar short fall, covering many sectors. Below is a Reuters video Asian market woes, more of the same.

Dr. Julius Nam, a theology professor, has posted his lecture outline for first year philosophy students regarding the phiosophical arguments for or against the existence of God. You can find it here. Maybe I’ll see you in the comments section.

Recently, I joined in on a blog conversation in the comment section of Dr. Jon Pauliens ‘blog’, Revelation-Armageddon.

When one of the commentators, Frank, posted that he wanted to continue our discussion privately so as not to misuse his privileges, I was surprised to read this reply from Dr. Paulien’s spokesman:

Frank,
I can speak for Dr Paulien when I say this… that the blog was set up for this type of open ended discussion.  It was Dr Paulien’s opinion when we set up the blog that it would be open-ended discussion… without approval or disapproval of the comments.  No one edits out any comments… other than things that are obvious spam.  In other words… I was reading what you said too… with interest.  I was disappointed to see you go to a private discussion.
Regards,
John Miller (system admin)

Being the ironic and spasmodically irascible writer that I’m, I replied: 

John,

That a ‘blogger’ who has only posted 18 times since Nov. 2006 would expect his ‘administrator’…I am laughing now…to comment in his behalf betrays a certain and ironic ignorance of the online community.

I respect you (tell him for me, John) as a theologian and to be fair, blogging is…well…it’s blogging.

They are as common as grass and share the same fate. My own has never reached more than 6,000 readers a month, not counting the linkoverse, and is presently much less; I am sure all of those, apart from my mother, would get along just fine if I died tomorrow.

Really, Jon, (or is it John) if your too busy to blog or your just wanting to post a few hooks to hang your other ventures on, call it something else. But it ain’t bloggin’.

Sometime ago I had considered removing your link from my blogroll for being inactive. I thought I would wait a little longer, hoping, hoping, for a post.

Now, I’ll have to delete for mere pretentiousness. Sorry. Bloggers rules.

P.S. Frank, I’ll be waiting on that email. Of course, being a busy pastor with two churches…someone else may reply in my behalf. Nothing personal.

How Mr. Miller missed the irony of “speaking for” the blogger is just too funny! Why…Oh why…do we bother….?

I’ve found a great blog for Christian art links, among other things. Below is a sample of an African artwork link. The blog is Journeys In Between. Whether or not you like the theology, it is worth a look. Check it out.

I can’t write long today. Just a note to tell you where my head is at. I was disturbed, a good thing I suppose, by a program on the tele last night. I can’t remember the title but it was on ITV and was something like “The Muslim Jesus” or “Islam’s Jesus”. I don’t have time to look the link up on the ITV site. Google it if your interested. [See update below].

What disturbed me, and I already knew this, was the virulent opposition by outspoken Muslims, white Muslim converts, or Muslim wannabes toward the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, the divinity of Jesus Christ, and what those doctrines mean for an interpretation of his atoning work. I was reminded of just where I stand in this culture and it made me feel uncomfortable. It also made me feel angry.

I don’t mind reasonable discussions. Not long ago I spent some time with a Muslim friend, a Ph.d. in sociology, and we explored a few of our mutual and not-so-mutual beliefs. But these televised, ignorant assertions made about my faith and my Lord irritate me. The twisting of Biblical passages, the willing ignorance of their context, and the producers choice of loud, marginal voices as representative of their respective faiths, Christian or Muslim, is an obvious attempt to get viewers through nonobjective polarization of opinions. And this is passed off to those not educated in the various subjects as real, substantive discussion.

Let’s call it what it is, pure entertainment on the lower scale of the entertainment food change. Like a ranting Michael Moore documentary, it is biased and sometimes overtly deceitful.  The only good I salvage from such propaganda is the belief that even this serves to awaken discussion on the greatest question confronting human beings today, the same question Jesus once asked of his disciples: “Who do men say that I am?”.

Dr. Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, is presently being roasted on a spit by the British tabloid press, for remarks he made to a gathering of lawyers and judges at the Royal Courts of Justice. Dr. Williams has suggested Islam’s Sharia law may have a possible future in British society, within the Muslim community as it would apply to some civil and financial disputes. However, these remarks were made to a specific audience and within a larger context regarding the general nature of religious and civil law in modern Britain.

I believe, whether or not you agree with his position, that it is unfair, misleading, and unethical to falsely characterize his remarks, particularly when such an action will knowingly inflame already tender religious-racial tensions, not only in Britain, but on wider world stage.  That a tabloid such as the Sun does so is no surprise and doesn’t deserve further comment, but for those of a more reasonable persuasion, I would encourage you to take time to thoughtfully read the full manuscript of his remarks before offering your valued opinion, whether in print on air. You will find the full manuscript here.

For an interesting and articulate discussion of whether or not the Archbishop was wise in making his remarks, see this blog post and related comments at Faith and Theology.  

I have only had time to read part of the manuscript myself, so I’ll wait before drawing any further personal conclusions.  

Paranoid fans of the Matrix will love this, a “super-effecient chip” run on body heat. And in Matrix fashion, the vision is for war.

From Wired Magazine…here. 

[For the fortunate, uninitiated ones, the Matrix is a movie about machines ruling the world, powered by the body heat of human beings who are farmed as bio-fuel. The humans mysteriously find a way to rebel. It is a play on concepts of reality as dream and dream as reality. The powerful, delusional, subtext is the glorification of the autonomous self, i.e. man as god against God, who is vilified as the autocratic machine trying to destroy our right for absolute freedom. I nice little demonic work of half-truths. Typical for the devil.]