I suppose this post is primarily for Christian readers, but hopefully it would be resonate in some way with anyone. No promises, though.

There’s a popular saying in Christian circles that goes, “in essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity.” Effectively, keep you priorities in order. We don’t make more important small things than large things. In fellowship with believers it is essential that we have unity in the Gospel, and in answering the question of who Jesus is. It is slightly less important (thought not irrelevant) to be in agreement on the length of creation days or in premillennialism/amillennialism/premillennialism. It would be, therefore, even less critical to share convictions over which particular songs should be sung on any given Sunday morning. We can disagree on things not at the very heart of the Gospel and still coexist.

Unfortunately at times, Christians have the very terrible confusion of these categories, whereby they put the lesser things in place of the higher. “Oh, you watch Rated PG-13 movies? You’re a bad Christian.” “Oh, you think the days of creation were ________ long? Apostasy!”

We also see this with apologetic methodology. Presuppositionalists might argue that evidentialists use an approach that puts the unbeliever in an unbiblical position. Evidentialists might argue that presuppositionalists ignore the example of the Apostles in appealing to evidence. (Don’t shoot me, people. I am just using an example. I am not debating methodology.) While this or that view might be right, I doubt most people would conclude that the person of the differing view is not at all a Christian. To such a person you would argue your position, not present the Gospel as to an unbeliever. Continue Reading…

Roger Olson in Against Calvinism:

One day, at the end of a class session on Calvinism’s doctrine of God’s sovereignty, a student asked me a question I had put off considering. He asked:”If it was revealed to you in a way you couldn’t question or deny that the true God actually is as Calvinism says and rules as Calvinism affirms, would you still worship him?” I knew the only possible answer without a moment’s thought, even though I knew it would shock many people. I said no, that I would not because I could not. Such a God would be a moral monster.

C. S. Lewis, from God in the Dock:

The ancient man approached God (or even the gods) as the accused person approaches his judge. For the modern man, the roles are quite reversed. He is the judge: God is in the dock. He is quite a kindly judge; if God should have a reasonable defense for being the god who permits war, poverty, and disease, he is ready to listen to it. The trial may even end in God’s acquittal. But the important thing is that Man is on the bench and God is in the dock.

This is Abortion (Methods)

September 7, 2012 — 1 Comment

After a short series of comments online today I was reminded that, while many people have opinions on abortion (even strong ones), there’s often not a whole lot of discussion of specifics or merits. Frankly, this is because there’s a whole lot of ignorance. And let me be honest: there’s an intentional emphasis on talking about anything but the details of abortion. So let’s try and discuss some actual facts. In this post I want to present the most common kinds of abortion. Merely, this is what abortion actually is; this is what abortion actually does. The descriptions are graphic enough. This post will not contain images or links to images of these procedures, though it is important to see what this is, just as we use visual instruction in every other area of education.

Continue Reading...

Which Is Hate Speech?

June 29, 2012 — 1 Comment

Dan Savage, the man behind the It Gets Better campaign, doesn’t like bullies. Well, he doesn’t like bullies that disagree with him. He is more than willing to bully others, and using the crudest and most shameful of means. A few months ago, Savage unloaded on masses of students at a journalism conference. Offended students walked out and were repeatedly heckled, called “pansy-a**es,” etc.

This post isn’t about Savage. Commentaries about him are readily available. I want to note the reaction against the students that left his talk. Note that this was a journalism conference where he launched into a tirade against all the “bull sh**” in the Bible. Offended students, ones that had no reason to expect such treatment, walked out quietly, quickly, and peacefully. It offends them; they left.

Now, let’s consider a recent talk Douglas Wilson gave at Indiana University. From the description (you should watch all 3 videos in their entirety):

Douglas Wilson, of Christ Church, Moscow, Idaho, was invited to Indiana University by Clearnote Church to talk about sexuality from a Biblical perspective. Bloomington Indiana is home to the Kinsey Institute, started by Alfred Kinsey who is famous for his experiments in sexuality. The videos below are the full lectures, as well as the very long Q&A that followed. A large crowd of “dissenters” gathered to demonstrate their disapproval of Wilson’s message in word in action.

It wasn’t a secret what Wilson would speak about, though as I’ll note below, what he actually did say is still a mystery to many present. This was a voluntary lecture that had an established topic. What did the mature student body of the university do? They demonstrated all the maturity of my three year old throwing a tempter tantrum.

Continue Reading…