This video is made up of clips sent in by people imagining how an e-mail travels around the world.
Posted in Videos | 5 Comments »Since the anniversary was yesterday, I heard various things on the news. I heard that Bush was visiting the area and I heard about how much is still to be done.
I wasn’t really surprised to read this: Bush visit does little for Katrina victims
I think one of the problems with ‘news’ is that by definition it’s new. Listening to the news will only tell me what big problems there are in the world if they are new ones, or there is some reason to feature them that day – like an anniversary, or some new revelation about the problem, like, say, how mismanagement contributed to it. Katrina will be out of the news again soon but not because the problems have all been resolved.
And the smaller problems in the world – small to the news media but huge to the people they affect – will never make the news anyway.
I don’t expect I’ll be in a position to go down and help Katrina victims. But this reminds me to pay attention to the people around me, so I am aware of what help they need – in case I’m able to provide some of it.
Posted in General Conversation | 9 Comments »Phil Johnson of Pyromaniacs asked me a question in a blog comment that I thought was quite interesting. Here’s his question and my answer. If any of you feel I have misrepresented the Emergent/emerging church (or Off The Map) in my response to him, feel free to say so here. If you decide to post a comment on his blog I recommend reading the rules first because they do delete comments and ban people who violate their posting rules.
Phil wrote:
Do most of those who identify with the Emerging/Emergent conversation seem to want to try to help you regain your faith, or would you say they spend more energy encouraging you to feel comfortable with your doubts?
That’s a serious question. I’m not trying to start an argument. I’m interested in a candid answer.
That’s a serious question. I’m not trying to start an argument. I’m interested in a candid answer.
Phil, I’m happy to give you a serious answer. Especially since this is one of the more interesting questions any Christian has asked me lately (no offense intended towards anyone else who asked me a great question which isn’t presently springing to mind)
I still don’t know what to call you so I’ll go with VCC – Very Conservative Christian – to avoid picking fights with people in the EC who self-identify as Conservative Christians.
On the whole, VCCs and ECCs (Emerging/Emergent Church Christians) are equally uncomfortable with me being almost an atheist. Most ECCs I run into value their relationship with God highly and can’t imagine how not actively engaging in a relationship with God can be better than doing so.
Read the rest of this news item »
I like Scot McKnight’s blog entry today about four words to avoid, which are “might need it someday”. I guess this is another problem which only applies to rich people (rich as in, have lots of possessions).
From his entry
Do you use these words to explain non-decision or hope or procrastination?
For instance, Kris got it in her head the other day that, since we had a fresh coating of paint in the upstairs bedrooms, perhaps it was time to replace the sheets on Luke’s old bed. She found a wonderful new color that I really like. Which meant taking off the old sheets and putting them in a linen closet that had, you guessed it, about 15 old sheets that we might … go ahead and say it with me … “Might need it someday” sheets and pillow cases.
This is my favorite kind of blog post:
Read the rest of this news item »
It seems to me there’s usually a trade-off between money and effort. If I want to spend less money, it takes time and effort to figure out how. Also, doing something myself rather than paying to have it done obviously is more time and effort on my part.
Of course, not everyone has enough money to have the option of not caring how much they spend, or of paying others do so something for them.
When I’m in stores like Macy’s, I notice that other people are better about collecting and using coupons than me. I rip them out of catalogs more diligently than I remember to take them. Or sometimes I have them but I don’t want to use a Macy’s card because it’s harder to keep track if I have specific store accounts that need paying. And if I forget to pay, the fee for that wipes out what I saved with the coupon.
Read the rest of this news item »
Laura posted this in a comment on “Is the scientific method overrated?”
For me, faith is something you can explain logically, but not rationally, to those who don’t have it. And never did have it.
It’s a bit like trying to explain the colors of the rainbow to a person who’s been blind their entire life.
Sure, you can logically explain how light rays bounce of objects… yada, yada, yada. But how do you explain the beauty of light and colors and nature? You can describe it, but how much meaning will it have for a blind person?
When folks talk about their faith to me, I feel like I’ve been blind my entire life. I can logically understand and appreciate the effect on their lives, the peace and joy and love and the sense of awe and wonder and commitment they have. That’s because I have these feelings too.
But I still have no clue what faith looks like. I can’t see it at all. Not even a blurry outline.
I don’t think it would make sense for the blind person to think all the people who are not blind (so many, many of them) are not rational, just because they share an experience he doesn’t seem to be capable of sharing.
On the other hand, I don’t get why the sighted folks would get mad at the blind guy and tell him if he can’t see it, he must not be looking hard enough.
Posted in Comments from others | 52 Comments »My son began high school yesterday (his first day went fine). While he’s there he’ll probably take a typical academic course load. How much of what he’s taught there will actually turn out to be useful in his life?
Earlier this year I ran across a blog article about what schools should teach students to prepare them for life:
Top 5 Things That Should Be Taught In Every School
Posted in General Conversation | 15 Comments »A new online friend, Bill, invited me to guest post today on his blog, Friendly Christian.
Bill recently ran across Hemant’s story and website, Friendly Atheist. Bill decided he’d like to follow Hemant’s lead and he renamed his blog the Friendly Christian. Hemant mentioned Bill’s blog and a number of atheists went to check it out. Since then, Bill has had a number of atheist visitors and active Christian-atheist conversation on his blog.
This is what I posted on Bill’s blog today.
I’m curious about how differently Christians and atheists (evidently) see the world. The other day Gods Gal was saying she can’t look at the world outside without seeing evidence of God. hoverfrog, writerdd and siamang responded that when they look at the world outside they don’t see God at all. (That conversation is in comments #49-#52 on What If…)
Why do we see things so differently?
Here’s the tricky part. :-) See if you can answer these questions without offending those who see differently from you.
Posted in General Conversation | 30 Comments »In a comment on the Christians Confess blog entry, Pete wrote
Most of what was said here was very interesting, in fact I’m swiping some of the quotes/regrets and using them with my college student discussion tomorrow because I think they will helpful to show them how non-Christians view some of the more offensive beliefs of mainstream Christianity.
But this one disturbed me:
I regret that I let my belief system dissuade me from thinking critically and applying the scientific method to everything.
Frankly, I think the scientific method is overrated. Judging everything simply by what we can measure, develop natural laws (which are just man-made explanantions anyways)for and somehow tangibly experience, is in my opinion, a narrow view of the world and one the biggest issues with the world.
We don’t apply the scientific method to love, justice, mercy, grace, the bond of friendship, the way a starry sky steals our breath, the grief from losing anything loved, the sympathy we feel for others, compassion and a host of other things. Yet we would never claim those things are not real or true or valid (in fact if someone were to do so here, I would daresay they would be challenged passionately for not valuing another person’s experience).
So why then does it have to be something we apply to everything?
Honestly, I see this as being the opposite of the ‘faith crutch’ Christians are often accused of. Often, when a Christian can’t explain something, they play the faith card. But it seems just as often that when non-Christians want to poke a hole in something about Jesus or the Bible, they play the “scientific method/empirical proof” card. Both seem like underhanded and dishonest ways to ‘win’ the argument or at least feel like your view is justified without having any real support.
Why can’t BOTH be valid?
Posted in Comments from others | 103 Comments »