5:05p
Our Prayers and Heartfelt Expressions of Concern go out to the People of Great Britain during a Day of Tragedy.

You were there for us during 9/11, and it’s aftermath – we’ll be there for you, in whatever way you need us.

Newly added to Vox Apologia:

Deism, by Chad MacIntosh (Doxazo Theos)

It’s an excellent explanation (and rebuttal) of Deism.

An addition to Vox XX – The Unfairness of Heaven?, from Anne/WeekendFisher at CADRE Comments.

From Anne’s synopsis: Response to atheist Michael Martin’s latest critique of Christianity. Although a few of Martin’s arguments were probably destined to be unique to Martin, I decided to respond because a few of them were common enough. I mostly wanted to retake the ground on whether Judgment Day is fair, being a bit tired of the atheists thinking they have the high ground there. I go some places that Christian apologists usually don’t go, but it was about time we opened up some new ground there and stopped being so defensive.

Anticipating:

The first set of questions for The Theomeme Project. Hint: The first question author is a member of Ten Christian Blogs

Other Cuts:

Parableman writes about The Problem of Evil, in reference to a reference of a paper on it. Follow the link trail – good reading all around.

Aggregated:

From the Apologetics Aggregator, we have a VERY nice collection of posts, of late. I really encourage you to read through one of the aggregator versions every day or two. There are 30 blogs on the aggregator, and I NEVER find less than 3-4 interesting posts.

Another post from Chad, entitled Ontological Musings explores the varying ontologies which necessitate the existence of God.

United Church of Christ and Gay Marriage

A Pastor and His Apologetics informs those of us who may live under a local rock that the UCC has voted to support gay marriage.

Alex Forrest posts about the Creation Science Museum. I’d also recommend this post from blestwithsons. And remind you what I think about evolution, etc.

Which reminds me: someone email me if I forget to do a post on Old-Earth Creationism within the next two weeks. I had an email exchange with my dad, and an interesting im conversation with a friend on the subject recently.

From Daily Apologetics comes America: Yoga’s Greenhouse

From Hux, we can find two posts on T.D. Jakes’ Modalistic Heresy. What is that? Read #1, and #2, to find out.

Check out James White’s fisking of BYU professors Millet and McConkie’s Sustaining and Defending the Faith.

Resource Blog is looking for articles and/or reviews

Should we Defend Doctrines? The Huntington Apologetics Team asks the question – and gives the answer.

Just read Vincent Cheung’s Blog. You’ll enjoy it, I promise. Read it all, if you have to.

Most importantly:

My girlfriend’s blog, which I just finished the basic design for.

Visit now, visit often – I’ll make sure there’s plenty of updates 😀

Now, did you enjoy that? Was it informative?

Well, I can’t do it that often. Look at the post time, in case you’re thinking “but, you did all of that – it’s easy, right?”

It is mind-bogglingly time-consuming to collect links JUST from the Aggregator. If I did half of the posts I WANTED to, this week – this would be three times as long – every day.

I’m still looking for people willing to collect 4-5 links per day – and post them in a similar format to Vox Apologia.

Think, people: 5 people, 5 links a day. That’s 25 links/day.

I just posted 17 by myself. Think about it. It’s not hard, and it won’t take long.

Email me – Contact button – top left.

Satan loves it when we’re weak. He buffets, torments, and tempts us – precisely when we are least equipped to resist. That is his plan – and we should beware. When circumstances, and their effect on us, render us as weak as a newborn kitten, insofar as vigilance goes – that is when he strikes.
Read the rest of this entry

I sometimes wonder. Did God create our overdeveloped sense of irony in order to give us a concrete example of how He works? I know – it’s an odd question. Here’s why I ask it, though.

Often, in life, He answers our prayers at precisely the point we would never have expected it. He works in exactly the manner we wouldn’t have worked. He uses the people we never would have used, to do what we never would have imagined doing. He does it on purpose, I believe.

He has an unknown woman driving tent stakes through foreign army commander’s temples. A coward leading an army selected by their mode of drinking from a stream. A treacherous prophet warned by a donkey, of all things. A strongman slaughtering thousands with the jawbone of a donkey. A boy with a sling, killing a giant, when an entire army sits quaking in their armor. A rebellious prophet swallowed, and vomited up, by a whale. Then, whining about the fact God didn’t kill everyone he was assigned to preach the Word to. Oh, and whining about a stupid plant more than the thousands he was assigned to save. He reduces the mighty king of Babylon to a raving beast. Shows the wisest man in history as the most prone to massive folly.

God knows irony.

I’m going to try to make this a semi-regular thing on my blog.

Sharing things I’ve learned, struggles I’m going through – etc.

A while back, a lady in our church (I’m not saying who, because I know they may read this blog) gave me some good advice. I didn’t take it – for two reasons.

Unsurprisingly, they were the two reasons I’ve had so much trouble in the past.

First – I don’t like people telling me what to do – even in a kind way. I’m very, very independent-minded – and this is detrimental, when I need to take advice from the wise, as i havea track record of being unwise in that area. Wisdom is wisdom – regardless of the way it is offered. It was seconded from a completely separate party – who knows me even better than this lady did – and I had the same reaction. Why? Because I have a problem, when it comes to “directing my steps”.

The problem is pride – I know what I’m doing, and I’m going to do it my way. I’ve put off doing something I should have done a long time ago – simply because I didn’t want to take advice. That smacks entirely too much of “needing” others.

Folly!

Second – I wanted to do what I wanted to do, in this circumstance. There was no reasoned explanation for it – although I tried to fabricate one. The truth was – I just wanted to do it. The supposed reasons for it were a bunch of crap. I just wanted to, to satisfy some “requirement” I created for myself, with no basis at all besides my own desire to do so.

Selfishness. A derivation of pride, but one focused on your own wants and needs and desires – not selflessness – it’s antithesis.

Selfish desires are never healthy – regardless of what they are. I really did have a noble goal, in a way – but the desire behind that goal was not noble in the slightest. Therein lay the problem. I can logically reason through plenty of things – but our own weaknesses are what we always overlook. I did that in this case.

We love ourselves too much to want to criticize ourselves too harshly – unless we are being remarkably honest. I have to say – that doesn’t happen very often – although, due to this course correction, I’ve found myself being remarkably honest to someone in particular – which was the point of the advice I was given – and it was correct advice.

Now, please forgive me for being vague – but it involves at least two that read this blog – and the third most likely reads it, for all I know. So… I can’t be overly specific. If a time comes later when I can give the exact situation – I will.

Suffice it to say that I do believe (and am discovering) that the course suggested is much more fulfilling, and much more enjoyable than the “noble” course; which, as it was pointed out to me not long ago, is not really noble – if I’m just trying to “satisfy a requirement” that I set for myself.

Being self-sacrificing, when it’s really no sacrifice at all, is not exactly what we should have in mind for “self-sacrifice”. If it’s what we want – simply because we want it – that makes it an idol. When it is both idolatrous and counter-productive to our spiritual growth, in several ways – that makes it sin.

I hope that made sense. This doesn’t have to do with either of the subjects discussed last time. I had to be vague, since the subjects will likely read this. I doubt they will even know what I’m talking about, I was so vague – and I hopethat is the case. But, suffice it to say – I know what I mean – and I am now acting accordingly. If someone is sufficiently discerning to figure out what I’m talking about specifically – my hat is off to you. You beat me 😀

Anyway.

Back to work on “the surprise” I’m working on for the next Vox.

I was reading a novel – nothing special. It was Saturday, and I was relaxing. I heard a resounding crack – and a small thud afterwards. I cringed, because it sounded painful.

Turning quickly, I saw trouble walk in my door – in the shape of a nine year old. Completely unexpected, and completely unwanted. I was perfectly comfortable – and he was a perfect terror. He was known as a troublemaker – a veritable dervish of frightful pranks. Here he stepped – to my front door. I cringed, wondering what he had broken today. He informed me, in a matter of fact tone of voice, that he had knocked down the mailbox – and that he was sorry – and please, don’t tell dad. I thought for a moment, and responded.

“Since you knocked it down, I want you to help me put it back in. It will take a few minutes – but it’s hard to break something so badly that it cannot be fixed. Come on – we’ll go get a shovel, a bucket, and a bag of concrete.”

His eyes lit up – most probably at the thought of concrete. What kid wasn’t fascinated by the thought of mixing concrete, and digging holes? We trudged down to the garage, retrieved the items, and headed back down to the road. I had him dig a hole, a foot or so deep, while I mixed the concrete. He struggled a bit, but finally got into the rhythm. The concrete was beginning to set, so we stuck the pole in the ground tightly – and poured it all in. I had him hold the pole while the quick-dry set. It only took a minute or two. I surreptitiously examined him, as he concentrated on keeping the mailbox upright, and level. He had several scrapes on his arms – several of which were bleeding. His knee was skinned up, as well.

The concrete was set enough to keep the pole upright. “Do you want something to eat?” I asked. He looked thoughtfully at me, for a moment, and rejoined with “Yeah, I would.” I smiled and said “How about a tall glass of milk, some chocolate chip cookies, and a ham and cheese?” He smiled. “Sounds good to me.” “Go wash up before you eat.”

My little brother and I walked in the house to make lunch. Dad always got upset when he broke something – and I didn’t help him fix it. I was 14, and the oldest – what else are big brothers of clumsy little brothers for?

I ruffled his hair before he ran up the stairs. He smiled.

(Submitted for King of the Blogs – trackback to this post here, to vote for me, if you feel so inclined.

Note to the judges: Although I’m relatively sure I’ll be marked down for not linking profusely… I’m working on another project, for the betterment of my future subjects. So… my subjects must take precedence. I’m sure you’ll understand. This caught me at a bit of a bad time – although I’m honored to be nominated. The Future King has spoken.)

I have a couple confessions to make, which I have been convicted of over the weekend.

I did a whole lot of studying on Ephesians, Chapter 6, this weekend. I’m exegeting the passage concerning the full armor of God. However… do you remember what comes right before that?

If you really wanna know… click “more”.

Read the rest of this entry

So, the last few weeks, I’ve been thinking. Thinking a lot.

Here’s the general drift of it.

For apologists, we sure don’t go out and practice our trade very often – myself included. Why is that?

Now, I’m not intending to be critical, or anything. I’m just curious. Why is it that we don’t? Are we more interested in the intellectual pursuit of a defense, and less interested in the actual, real-time defense to others? I find myself cruising an atheistic, or agnostic blog – I read something I so want to respond to – and I don’t. I think about it, and might even start on it – but, eventually, I give up on it. Why?

I gave myself a pretty exhaustive list of atheistic blogs to look through – and I could cull 50 posts a day that need to be responded to out of it. Why is it I don’t? I don’t think it’s fear of ridicule. I expect ridicule. Ridicule is, in all honesty, something I think is funny. If they resort to ridicule of the stance, instead of honestly responding to it – they aren’t going to honestly respond in the first place, and they aren’t being honest with themselves. If they can’t get past ridicule, and on to intellectual examination, it’s going to be a shallow conversation anyway.

I respect someone who is consciously attempting to formulate a counter-response. I have no respect in the slightest for a shallow, satiric, or dismissive response. Appealing to some sort of so-called “ridiculous” is the last bastion of someone unwilling to think. A conscious, or unconscious attempt to escape or evade serious thought has always, and will always, annoy me.

Now, I’m not saying everyone on the atheistic/agnostic blogs resorts to ridicule, and only to ridicule, to make some sort of spurious case. I find, however, that the vast majority have a large, large element of it somewhere. Aye, that’s the rub, as Shakespeare says. I’ve rarely, rarely seen someone who begins with ridicule turn the corner to serious discourse. It’s not common, or expected. So… what are we to do? When the vast majority of our potential audience is populated by “scoffers,” and we are warned about such as these: Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts. (2 Peter 3:3)

Now, one of Job’s “friends” asks if scoffers (he is speaking to Job…) should not be silenced… (Shall your boasts silence men? And shall you scoff and none rebuke?)

But, is it he who we should listen to? *sigh*

I mean, we are to “destroy speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to the obedience of Christ”

In my Strong’s, it says “reasoning, hostile for the Christian faith”, for “speculations”. I read that to mean logical concepts antithetical to Christianity.

“Lofty thing” is a bulwark, or rampart – barrier. I read that as “barriers erected against Christian principles”.

“raised up” is pride, or “to exalt oneself”. Obvious. Humanism is the religion of human pride. It’s also what atheism is really about.

“knowledge of” is gnosis – or, ” moral wisdom, such as is seen in right living”/” the deeper more perfect and enlarged knowledge of this religion, such as belongs to the more advanced”

So, yes – we are supposed to go on the offensive – this is the second part of apologetics. However… how do we reconcile this with “do not throw your pearls before swine”, and the command to keep from sitting in the “seat of scoffers”? Choose your battles, I suppose. But… where to? How to?

I don’t know. I’ve done some of this. It always seems to be wading in oatmeal, though. The urge for them to create a straw man Christianity, and somehow “debunk it” just seems to be too strong in most. Or, not even bother – and just ridicule things they know little to nothing about. How do we get around that?