Will be hosted here – and, if all goes well…

It’ll have a surprise thrown in.

The subject is: “Glory to Man in the Highest: Humanism’s Dangerous Claim”.

This is my “pet subject” – so gimme something good 😀

Send submissions to: this address.

Is up, at Amy’s Humble Musings.

Go read.

Next week, I’m hosting. The subject is Glory to Man in the Highest: Humanism’s Dangerous Claim.

However, if everything goes well… you’re going to have a surprise. (Those who know… don’t give it away :D)

The topic for this week is: They are precious in His sight: The least of these

I find the title interesting.

The first part comes from the song “Jesus Loves The Little Children” – perhaps the second most well-known children’s “hymn” in Christendom. (The first, of course, being “Jesus Loves Me”)

The second part comes from a passage in Matthew, where Jesus is explaining the concept of the Last Judgement, and the Sheep/Goats paradigm we find there.

So, all in all, it’s an interesting, yet very applicable juxtaposition. Going with that theme… I’m going to compound the principles even more.

Amy relates the expression “the least of these” (which is, in the Mathew passage, concerning Christians – as He calls them “My brethren”. We are joint heirs, by adoption, with Christ – He is the only begotten Son, we are His brothers and sisters by adoption.) with children. This is very apt, as she is a mother of several small children – and her blog’s focus reflects it.

This comparison is also apt in the Biblical sense. In two passages in Matthew 18, Jesus compares us to children – and we are told to imitate them. He also gives one of the most explicit – and in my opinion, most frightening – warnings in the whole Scripture.

whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him to have a heavy millstone hung around his neck, and to be drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world because of its stumbling blocks! For it is inevitable that stumbling blocks come; but woe to that man through whom the stumbling block comes!

This is not just Jesus, the gentle teacher talking – this is the Son of God – the Judge of Heaven and Earth, speaking.

The word translated “stumbling block”, in the NASB, and as “offenses”, in the NKJV, is an interesting word. The word is “skandalon” – the word from which we derive the English word “scandal.”

Note the various definitions possible: ” the movable stick or trigger of a trap, a trap stick”.

That, my friends, is a perfect description for sin – the subject He is discussing. Sin has a trigger – a stick, that when moved, sets the trap. Think of the seven deadly sins – what are the triggers for each of them? It’s a very interesting thought, when you think about it in that way. I found it to be so, at least.

It’s often translated as “stumbling block”, though. Which is a phrase which has become almost second nature to those of us who grew up in a Christian atmosphere. Here’s an interesting tidbit, though. The “stumbling block” metaphor is a Jewish one – it was applied to Jesus himself, by Paul. It applies to an obstacle, or a snare. Jesus’ appearance was so contrary to the expectations of the Jews that it became a stumbling block for their own way – on which they were rushing headlong to their own doom.

but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block, and to Gentiles foolishness – 1 Cor. 1:23

So, we have an interesting word – which gives us an interesting contrast, with the two different applications. Michael Card, in his song “Scandalon”, says it this way:

The seers and the prophets had foretold it long ago
That the long awaited one would make men stumble
But they were looking for a king to conquer and to kill
Who’d have ever thought He’d be so weak and humble

He will be the truth that will offend them one and all
A stone that makes men stumble
And a rock that makes them fall
Many will be broken so that He can make them whole
And many will be crushed and lose their own soul
Along the path of life there lies a stubborn Scandalon
And all who come this way must be offended
To some He is a barrier, To others He’s the way
For all should know the scandal of believing

It seems today the Scandalon offends no one at all
The image we present can be stepped over
Could it be that we are like the others long ago
Will we ever learn that all who come must stumble

I find things like this fascinating. In essence, Jesus is using a phrase which will identify Him – and turning it on itself to identify those in opposition to Himself.

Anyway… let’s move on.

So, Jesus compares us to children, in the passage above. In Amy’s reference, we are told this:

I assure you: Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of Mine, you did for Me.

So, if we, as children, are hungry, thirsty, strangers, naked, sick, in prison – if we are provided for, or have provided for others – we have, by the words of our Lord, been stand-ins for our Lord, or have provided for our Lord.

It’s that simple. Amy’s comparison is very, very apt indeed. So – that’s the surface juxtaposition. I want to make another, however. The comparison which gives us the title. It came from a sermon my pastor gave yesterday.

We are all orphans.

When we see an orphan, we are moved to care for them – either by providing for them, or by adopting them. If we are not – we should be. There is one thing worse than a physical orphan, however.

A spiritual orphan. We are the adopted children of the Father of Lights. The only father the world has is the Father of Lies. In short – spiritual orphans. Just like a physical orphan, in most parts of the world, has only suffering, starvation, crime, and death to look forward to – their “father” seeks only to kill them – in the most painful way possible. They are orphans.

Christianity, of every other religion in the world, is the only personal religion in existence. No other religion conceives of their Deity as both all-powerful – and personally related – and loving. We pray to a Father. We are loved by a Father. Not a “national” Father, like the God of Old Testament Israel. A personal, loving, caring, and interested Father. There is no comparison – anywhere in the religions of man. Nowhere in the worship of man is there a relationship which so closely matches our personal family relationships – and, actually – is the model.

We are fiercely, jealously, and justly guarded by a Father. This is why God is a “jealous” God. This is why God is the God of battles, in Israel of old. His people were His chosen – and He supernaturally intervened for them – time, and time again. For a people who did not yet call Him father – who did not dare to even attempt to say His name. This same God is our Father – who sent His own Son to die – that we might live – and adopted us as sons and daughters!

That is the God who tells you – “it would be better that you hung a millstone around your neck, and drowned – than to cause my little ones to sin…”

The least of these? The least of these should be all of us. God’s order is reversed, remember. First is last, last is first. That, my friends – is us. We are His children – and we are also the “least”. We should be afraid of the righteous anger of a Father disciplining His children – the world should be fearful and trembling, lest He avenge wrongs against His children.

God is a jealous God. We are a stiff-necked and rebellious people.

Spiritual Orphans, though… not only are they the most pitiable of people – but they are also in danger from God Himself. This is the problem with the “God is primarily Love” school of thought. God’s love has an unlimited reach – but He limits its application. He reserves a special love – the love of a Father for His children, for His own. For them, He would do anything – even send His only Son to die for them.

Woe to the world because of its stumbling blocks! For it is inevitable that stumbling blocks come; but woe to that man through whom the stumbling block comes!

Have you ever seen a father avenging a wrong committed against his child? I’ll go out on a limb – if you were the one who wronged that child – and you see the father coming – you would likely be afraid – very, very afraid.

If that Father is God…

Be very, very, very afraid.

The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom

‘ Vengeance is Mine, and retribution, In due time their foot will slip; For the day of their calamity is near, And the impending things are hastening upon them.’

For we know Him who said, “VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY.” And again, “THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE.”

The least of these? Yes, you are. You, as a believer, have a responsibility to guard your steps, so that you do not cause a brother or sister to sin.

You, as a child, have a responsibility to your Father.

We are precious in His sight – so precious that entire books of the Bible are devoted to God’s protection, vengeance, and guidance. However – there are countless more examples of God’s discipline of His children, when they misbehave. Some rather spectacular examples, really.

Discipline shows you that He loves you – however – it also grieves your Father.

If you aren’t in the family of God – you are a spiritual orphan. You are also in a precarious position. It isn’t looking good.

However – I do have some good news for you. I know, this hasn’t been a particularly “upbeat” read thus far.

and everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die. Do you believe this? – John 11:26

That question, two thousand years later, still stands – it resonates with crystal clarity, in the twisted, cruel, dark-grey perversion of a world which the Father of Lies has molded to his own designs – and you along with it. It cuts through the morass of degradation, spite, suffering, and meaninglessness like the piercing beam of a lighthouse cuts through the fog-shrouded night with a blinding, dazzling, display of overpowering brilliance.

If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give what is good to those who ask Him!

Don’t be a spiritual orphan.

Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow.

It doesn’t have to be…

He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him over for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things?

The family is waiting for you…

Come to Me, all who are weary and heavy-laden, and I will give you rest.

And He called a child to Himself and set him before them, and said, “Truly I say to you, unless you are converted and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever then humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoever receives one such child in My name receives Me.”

Come – meet the family. We’d love to welcome you – and introduce you to our Father – and yours.

Will be hosted at Amy’s Humble Musings.

The Subject: They are precious in His sight: The least of these

Amy says:

Some places this topic might go (but is certainly not limited to): who did Jesus mean when He spoke of “the least of these?”; what should caring for these ones look like?; the role of the government and the Church in this matter, etc. What this topic will not include, though it fits here well, are articles on Terri Schiavo. There are several websites, lists, blogrolls, and such that are handling that well, and I do not want to reinvent the wheel.

So there you have it. I like Amy. Her hubby is a rocket scientist! Frequent visitors here probably know that my dad is in NASA…

So, this should be a good VA. Start thinking about your entries – and visit the first link in this post for submission information.

(And yes… I’m working on the new blog – so I apologize for the few and far-between posts. It’ll be worth it, though. I promise.)

Is up, at Greatest Pursuits.

Genesis tells us, rather plainly, several important things, which must, in order for Christianity, and Creation, to be true, stand in total antithesis to Evolutionary theory.

First:

Physical matter is of supernatural, not natural, origin.

This, obviously, is a place the two views stand in complete antithesis. The Creation view is that God, from His own power, and His own Word, created everything that we consider “natural”. Nature itself, and all it contains, is a product of the Will and Word of God. The Evolutionary views vary. There is a view that matter, space, time, and energy have always existed. There is a view that says that it all came into existence Ex Nihilo, in a similar manner to God’s creation of it. There is still another view which says that energy has always existed – and that everything else resulted from a change from energy into matter.

Second:

Man is of supernatural origin, and created in the image of God – Not the product of eons of progressive changes, resulting in what is now known as man.

Evolutionary theory once again stands in total antithesis to Creation theory. Evolution says that man is nothing “special” – only his own uniqueness makes him special. If even that. He is simply the product of blind chance – a (dare I say miraculous?) step by step occurrence which has led to modern man, as he now stands, on his own two feet. Creation, and, specifically, Judeo-Christian thought, holds man to be in the image of God Himself – and thus worthy of dignity and importance, as a reflection of the awesome God who created Him.

Third:

Man is an improvement upon all that came before – and can improve still further. This contrasts with the Judeo-Christian thought forms which hold man to be created perfect, distinct, and as he is seen today – with one crucial difference. Man has Fallen, and is thus regressing, not progressing.

This is a very, very crucial difference. Evolution holds that man may perfect himself – and that this is the inevitable nature of things. Creation holds that man was already perfect- and that his relationship with God maintained that perfection. Once his relationship with God was damaged – so was man. The ills and evils of mankind since are a reflection of a process of regression – not progression. I cannot stress enough what a significant difference this makes. In one, man is inherently good – and can become still better. In the other, man is inherently evil – and must seek out the source of his original perfection.

Is there any reconciliation possible between these two views of the very fabric of our existence?

No.

When we look at nature, and say “this is all there is” – we forget what we all ask, and have within the very weave of our souls – “is this all there is?”

We must answer the first – “No, it isn’t.” We must answer the second – “No – and we will know what else there is, as we already know that there is more.”

Evolution discards the soul. We know we have souls. We know that these souls are missing something – just as all of nature seems to be missing something. That something is our Creator, and nature’s Supernatural.

We dare not, we must not, and we cannot look an enemy in the face – and turn away as if it is irrelevant. We made that crucial mistake when this enemy first appeared – and we dare not continue. We cannot look at naturalism – at evolution – and spit in our Creator’s face by saying “so what if they deny you?” Romans warns us what excuses exist, for those who deny their Creator. None. His Creation, regardless of attempts to deny it’s Creator, stands as a testament to His power, His majesty, and His creativity – as do we. Despite the philosophical dexterity accompanying the devaluation of man, while simultaneously exalting his attributes – we should take it as a warning. If we exalt the natural – we dethrone the supernatural – we dethrone God – and take His place as the pinnacle. When we take over the pinnacle – we set ourselves up as God.

This is the result of evolutionary theory. The rise of humanism – the rise of human pride. We follow in the footsteps of someone else who thought to usurp God’s place – and follow him to his eventual destination.

So, can we say “So what” to evolution? No. Never.

I realized, after a couple questions from a friend of mine – that I may be guilty of over-structuring a brand new idea.

In fact – upon further reflection… I probably am. However – while I don’t want to be guilty of one extreme – I also do not want to be guilty of the other.

So, while we may develop a firmer structure over time – I don’t want to begin devoid of it.

So… let me outline the priorities of this project, as I envision it – and how I’d like to apply it.

Dissemination of Information:

While information is readily available – it is limited to the scope, or breadth, of the individual searching for it. An advantage of a group is that you have multiple individuals, who look in varied places for varying information. My hope is that the individuals who want to help with this blog can do 2 things.

1. Search for, link to, and comment on, apologetics being done, apologetics needed, and apologetics as a theory, and a philosophy.

2. Spotlight the good, the bad, and the ugly – and direct people to examine it; in order to defend it, oppose it, or repudiate it.

Which brings us to the second point.

Create a Community:

While apologetics is often a lonely activity – it is lonely precisely because it is so disorganized. We have a myriad of apologetics organizations and resources – but they just do not work together in concert. The blogosphere is incredibly good at linking things together. this, friends, is what is normally called a “community”. Let me challenge you with something. How many of you, on the aggregator, even knew the others existed, prior to being added to it? How many new friends, or new blogs did you find as a result? Is that not building a community?

Now – what we realize is that not everyone on the aggregator is what we’d commonly consider an apologist. Many are theologians, or reformers, or astute observers and commentators. Several who are apologists are not in it. However- regardless – we’ve created a community. What I want to do is create a communal center. Not in the way Communism wants community – but in the way that a community, once established sufficiently, organizes itself as such. It builds roads, erects a city hall, and establishes an order peculiar to its surroundings and circumstances.

We are a martial – if not militant – group. I want to build a fortress, and man the walls. Once a community has a sufficent defense – they can think about going on the offense. This often brings another set of problems with it – that of an over-reliance on safety. However, due to the nature of our calling – I’m going to trust that it won’t happen – and that we will not let it happen. regardless – once this defense has been established – the defenders can man the walls, and do it ably. The offensive can then take place, with the knowledge that the defense is ably attended to.

Do you see my hypothesis? If we set up as a central bastion something to be attacked, and defended from – we can also have a secure area to go on the offensive from – instead of going forth into single combat. Pick it apart if you like – but keep the general principle in mind, will you? We have the full armor of God – but we also have the virtual Kingdom. Let us build a citadel within that Kingdom – shall we?

An “Industrial” Base:

Every army has behind it, the resources of the Kingdom it fights for. Are we any different? We have the Word as our weapon, and our doctrines as our armor – but our resources should be collected, stored, and used to further our efforts. We all have written a great deal of material on various issues – but how do we find it, amidst the wash of all of our disparate blogs? Answer: We start creating a library.

Vox Apologia was a small beginning. It won’t be the end. We all have at least 2-3 things we could contribute. Why don’t we collect the links and tie together the subject matter into a library of treatments of various topics? The Argument from Evil is a common argument used.

How many of us have responded to it? I have. I know several others who have as well. A quick read through our various treatments would give a significantly fuller treatment to the subject – don’t you agree?

The same goes for a lot of things. So, out of the various things I want to do – those stand out as the primary functions. The rest are just outgrowths of those ideals.

So, I’ll use the second half of my name – KISS. Keep it simple, stupid!

Comments, Questions, Suggestions?

Leave your message, after the tone…

Alright – we have a bit of interest now.

I’m suspending my Daily Cut, and my Schaeffer study until I get this done – and we are decided on what to do.

This means that I want, and need, your input and prayerful counsel.

The plan thus far:

1) A new domain name – I bought voxapologia.org I wanted it anyway. If we use it, cool. If we don’t… VA can use it all by itself. Regardless… it’s a good name, and I came up with it. So, neener neener.

2) A group blog + extra features.

I installed WP 1.5 today, on the VA domain, and a set of forums as well. I’m not going to mess with templating quite yet. I’ll do a portal, too, if anyone wants – but I want to see what we want to do, first. So… what all do we want? I have a pretty superly hefty webhosting package – so seriously… don’t be shy.

3) Archival of contributor/submitted apologetics work – or links to it. Whichever/both.

And people to archive it/collect it/organize it – and to write it.

4) Central “command post” for Vox Apologia. I’m really thinking that since VA is a symposium, not a carnival – it should be rooted in one place. I know you guys would like the traffic – but really… VA isn’t exactly a traffic generator – you know? It’s a collection of symposiums on various topics. If someone different wants to host the VA there, and be the “guest director”, giving their blog a plug – that’s awesome. It’s just almost more of a pain than it’s worth, with the migrating hosting. Especially since we can make this a permanent, regular fixture this way – with no worries about “late announcements” (kick me, please), or the like. And, with a group blog… there’s more people to blame! (Instead of just me :P)

5) Place for skeptics/apologists to engage each other. The initial skirmishes can be blog trackbacks, etc – but “tracking the discussions” is helpful, and informative. We can discuss here, track discussions back and forth, or etc. Regardless, a group blog also generates multiple people who can help with the tracking. If I have to, I’ll do it myself – but I’d prefer some help 😀

6) Place for skeptics/other worldviews/religions to put their questions to – someone they can expect a reasonable, biblically sound answer, on a wide variety of issues, and multiple perspectives. Such a place needs to exist in the blogosphere. Forums are good – and we can add that to a stable of resources – but blogging is much more… network-capable. Which is why it’s grown so much. However – what we lack is a hub. I’ll build it.

Let ’em come, and let us invite them.

7) A focus on both general, active, and issue-specific apologetics. Let me explain.

General:

There are two general “areas” – offensive and defensive – which I believe go together. This is general apologetics.

Active:

Offensive:

There needs to be a way to actively engage the agnostic/atheistic/humanistic blogosphere – as well as any other sort of issue which apologetics comes into. We need to mobilize, and organize. Having a central “dispatch office” is what I’m planning this for. The springboard is my key focus, though. We all like to write on our own blogs. That’s cool – and it does some good work. However, we need to be both training for and actively searching for opportunities to go on the offensive, and engage others ourselves. Blogs are flytraps – they aren’t flies. I want to be a fly – that another flytrap can’t seem to digest. Know what I mean? This is a pretty consistent theme with me. “GO” and make disciples of all nations – not “sit and home, and wait for potential disciples to come to you.” Now, we’re to make our homes as inviting as possible, for when we invite them to have coffee, and talk things over – but I think that as apologists, our job is to go out and engage – then bring them back home to talk things over, if we can pique their interest, or challenge their arguments.

Defense:

If they want to “come to us” – we’ll have both the blog and the forum to work from, and through. So, we can use it both as a springboard, and as a flytrap. Every blog is a fly trap. The point is to make a big, fat, juicy-looking flytrap – which also happens to be where we go out from to engage the world, the culture, and the ideas “raised up against” Christ, and His word. We all know how to defend, from our specific “areas of interest”. An assortment of apologists, who contribute, link to, or categorize their own work in a central location, could be a formidable array of defenses. This is something I want to discuss – logistics. I’d be willing to put the entirety of my apologetics work into a new blog. That’s what I wrote it all for, in addition to the specific issue I was writing it for initially. Who else would be willing to do so, or at least go through and categorize what work they have done thus far, and linkfarm it all?

Issue-Specific:

By category, or target audience. So far I have the following – please comment if you see any you think are missing – and why you think they’re important.

Atheism
Agnosticism
Cults
Humanism
“Life” issues (Euthanasia, Abortion, etc.)
Doctrine/Theology misconceptions
Biblical (defending the Bible itself)
Common/specific “Objections” answers
Debates
Other religions
Philosophy
Culture
General Skepticism (Skeptic’s Corner?)
Seeking Truth

Any more?

< ------------------------------------------------>

So, there’s the general plan, as it stands right now. Form, and direction are yet undecided to a great extent – my personal goal is as outlined above, with input from a couple people thus far.

Expressing interest in participating:

Joshua Duncan, of The Lazy Logician/HAT

Tim, from Church Voices

Alex Forrest, who is studying for a degree in apologetics.

Catez, from AllThings2All

Now – do me a favor.

Read the above, whoever else is thinking about it. Tell me if you can help with one of several things.

1) Assist with collecting/posting apologetics links and blog entries on a semi-regular basis. From maybe, say, 5 blogs, that fit your interests, and are blogging about apologetics-related topics.

2) Go debate/discuss with another worldview – tell us about it, send us a link to it.

3) Write about one of the above topics – and send the links – or give links to your collections of apologetics entries on various subjects.

4) Collect links from bloggers from other worldviews, asking tough questions about God – or looking for answers – or someone to answer.

5) What else can we do? Some of the above are more time-consuming than others. I can tell you, though – reading 5-6 blogs and getting apologetics-related links isn’t that time-consuming. You don’t have to do it daily. Take a read through once a week, and send us what you collect – or contribute yourself and post it on the group blog. Whatever you think would help.

So – what can I/we do to help you, as an apologist – and what can apologists do to help each other? That’s the point here – and that’s the goal. The mission is the same – defend the gospel, destroy strongholds. The strategy I want to use is a bit different. I want fellow strategists – or even short comments or suggestions. Seriously – just tell me – what do you want, or need? I’ll do my best – and I hope others feel the same way.

This post will be the “home base” of Vox Apologia editions. So.. if that’s what you’re looking for.. you’re at the right place.

Vox Apologia I

Vox Apologia II

Vox Apologia III

Vox Apologia IV

Vox Apologia V

Vox Apologia VI

Vox Apologia VII

Vox Apologia VIII

Vox Apologia IX

Welcome to Vox Apologia II. I know this week’s submissions were a bit light compared to last week. I apologize for that, as I feel I goofed a bit, by posting the dates/times so poorly.

From here on out, we’ll have hosts, dates, and times delineated, and planned further ahead – and the next week’s host, email, and subject defined within the Vox Apologia entry.

That being said… Welcome: To the Digital Saltshaker.

Today’s host is yours truly – Joshua Whipps, aka “RazorsKiss”. Our guest artist is my brother, Paul, aka “BrainCatalyst”. I hope you stop by his site, when you’re through. I enjoy his work – in fact – it’s all over my site. Including the banner, you see above. (Mouseover the images, as you browse down the presentation – I tried to arrange the posts by the general “tone”.)

Today’s subject is “Digital Salt”. I left the definition and description purposely vague, to see what people came up with. Several people took a similar approach, several people took “the road less traveled”. Both types of entries complement each other well.

Note: If you have a late submission, due to my general “uh, I’m supposed to be organized?” moments… just
send it. I’ll add it. Thanks!

Submission	Host’s Commentary
AllThings2All shares a story called “Is It Tomorrow Yet?” She writes: “If there was any impression I gained this time out it was that people are wasting time… Always passing the time and waiting for tomorrow.”	This story is powerful. It’s a wonderful example – from people ACTUALLY leaving the saltshaker, in the un-digital world. If this doesn’t convict you – you need a spiritual checkup.
Weapons of Warfare brings us Spreading the Salt. He writes: “What does it mean to be salt on this earth? More specifically, what does it mean to be salt in this new and growing medium, the blogosphere?”	There are some excellent points made here. My favorite is concerning an “over-concentration” of salt, in one place. If I didn’t know better, I’d think that fell right in with what we’ve been talking about, with the “Ghetto”.
From firstPete315, we get Mmm Mmm good…or not. He takes a brief look at the responsibility we bear as Christian bloggers and the outcomes of “blogging” in a way that is consistent with the inspired counsel of Paul.	You know – this is a wonderful “manual” for the Christian who is sharing the Word, or the Gospel, with someone else – and encounters opposition. It’s short – but chock full of good advice.
Dory, from Wittenberg Gate reminds us of the difference between effective apologetics, and winning an argument, in her entry entitled Know How To Answer Each One. She bases it on Colossians 4:5-6, and explores what our apologetic goals are, so that we can wisely choose the best approach to meet them.	She’s right. There are two types of people: scoffers, and hearers. Whether we encounter scoffers, or hearers – our audience is always the hearers of the Word. So, our speech, as she reminds us, should always be “as though seasoned with salt.”
My own post is titled “Salting the Digital World“. I write: “We shouldn’t be venus flytraps, waiting for someone to stop by, and step into our parlor. We need to go knock on other people’s doors – and go visit.”	Basically, it’s like this. We have these nice, comfortable blogs. We stay here – and, in the nice, comfortable blogs of other people we know. It’s nice to be comfortable. However – it’s nicer to be in an active dialogue with those who need to hear what we have to say – and, hear it in THEIR parlor – not just ours.
Every Thought Captive asks us a question: Where To From Here? He writes: “We are on only the ground floor of what the blogosphere can do for the Church. Let us be wise, winsome, and creative in how we proceed!”	Phil makes some great points, which serve to give an example of how to “encourage the saints” – not to mention detailing how to both engage in, and sustain a conversation in this medium.
Hill Country Views gives us Digital Salt. He writes: “We don’t hoard the digital salt for ourselves, but pass it freely around the internet.”	Anselm explores a sort of “lifestyle evangelism” – from a blogging perspective. How does your light shine, before all men? Are you actually _being_ salt?
The Greatest Pursuits reminds us, most appropriately, of another use for salt: creating traction. His entry is Melting the Ice. He writes: “As the “salt of the earth,” I believe Christians are given the ability to melt away the snow and ice coming between those who are lost or in bondage and the truth which can free them”	Very, very astute observation he makes. You really need to check this one out. In this wintry weather, you may appreciate it even more.
The Revenge of Mr. Dumpling gives us some pointers on how to BE Digital Salt, and WHY we should be Digital Salt, in his post “Digital Salt“. He writes: “I believe that the Internet is the mission field of the 21st century. The instantaneous nature of Internet communication and its global reach mean that anyone, and I mean anyone, can share their thoughts with any person, in any part of the world with extremely basic resources.”	Man, I like this guy. He’s speaking to us, about just what we’ve been talking about, via the discussions about the “Ghetto”, and what our role, as Christians, should be in this digital world. Go check it out. You won’t be sorry.

Next Week! Next guest host is David Goodwin, aka “Mr. Dumpling”. Send entries HERE , no earlier than Thursday, January 27th, no later than midnight EST, Sunday, Jan. 30th.	Graphics courtesy of: My brother, and a graphics guru.	Got Defense? Host Vox Apologia! “being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence”
The Vox Apologia is a weekly symposium, conducted on a “thematic” basis. It includes blog entries based around a single theme, in order to garner varying perspectives – which will be assembled, as time passes, as a database of sorts. Each edition of the Vox Apologia is ‘guest hosted’ with commentary from the guest host, relevant to each submitted article, where possible, and a graphic – if desired. Participants need not be members of the Apologetics Aggregator, nor do the entry URLs submitted have to be those of the participant. Submission guidelines and a short FAQ are here. Credit goes to Gary Cruse, of The Owner’s Manual, for the presentation concept. We now return you to your regularly scheduled blogging.