Category Archives: Culture

The “Reason Rally”: One comment

Posted on by TimDoubleU
1

On March 24, 2012 a “Reason Rally” will be held in Washington D.C. drawing “non-theists”/atheists from around the country to (according to the “about” page of their website) “unify, energize, and embolden secular people nationwide, while dispelling the negative opinions held by so much of American society…”

In an article describing this rally, event organizer David Silverman, president of American Atheists, further clarifies the purpose of this rally: “…the main point of the rally, Silverman says, is not to tweak the faithful. It’s to encourage closeted atheists to take heart.  ’The message is that if you can come out, you can out come out,’ he says. ‘And if you can’t come out, at least you’ll know you’re not alone, and maybe sometime soon you’ll be able to come out of the closet to your family.’”

The sense I get from these sorts of purpose statements is that  ”coming out of the closet” and identifying oneself as an atheist will be liberating for the individual.  Maybe it will be.  Maybe it will liberate this “closet atheist” to finally start living a certain way, unriddled by the guilt they feel has been imposed on them by whatever beliefs about God/believers/religion they’re rejecting (or never believed in in the first place).  Maybe it will be liberating to finally answer the questions they’ve been asking with responses they (for whatever reason) are more satisfied with.

Mabye…but not necessarily.

Continue reading →

Cultural Challenges on the Near Horizon (courtesy of Al Mohler)

Posted on by TimDoubleU
Reply

Recently Al Mohler (president of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Kentucky) posted an entry on his blog that addressed both (1) his hope for the church because of the young ministers entering and preparing for ministry, and (2) challenges/issues that are on the (near) horizon that demand careful response and attention by the church.

This article was one of those pieces of writing that kept me thinking for a while even after I read it, so I figured it was worth referring along.  Here are some (brief) excerpts from Mohler’s post that will give you a sense of what he’s covering (and hopefully whet your appetite to reading his whole article – we’ve provided a link to it at the end):

 

Continue reading →

Transformative Eschatology: A third way beyond eschatomania and eschatophobia

Posted on by TimDoubleU
Reply

This weekend in Brookside’s class, “Fuel for Faith: An Important Class about Christian Theology,” I’ll be teaching on the category of systematic theology called “eschatology” (i.e., the study of the end times and the renewal of God’s design).  Mention a study of the end times to someone, and you’ll usually get some variation on one of two responses.  (Allow me some – but maybe not much… – exaggeration as I make a point.)

First, there’s eschatomania.  The eschatomaniac is the person who – upon hearing about an end-times discussion – suddenly (and often dramatically) pulls out charts and diagrams (and maybe even the rare flannelgraph, if you’re lucky) to explain their position.  For this person, the numerous references to Jesus’ return and the end of the world have become dislocated from their biblical contexts, and have instead become a sort of code to break in-and-of itself.  And, often, this person’s study of the end times hasn’t only led to deeper study of select biblical texts and a few charts; rather, eschatomania often leads people to a strong, evangelistic zeal for their position, a closed-mindedness/borderline arrogance toward other orthodox options, and a narrow focus on this category of theology to the neglect of others.

Second, there’s eschatophobia.  The eschatophobe is the person who – upon hearing about an end-times discussion – does their best to remove himself from said discussion by a radius of at least 100 yards.  Perhaps they’ve had a negative experience in some end-times discussion in the past, are aware of the unfortunate controversy and division that can result from such a discussion, and/or simply don’t know what the Bible has to say about this topic.  This person’s fear of anything slightly related to the end times has them avoiding biblical passages that deal with this topic and studies that introduce them to this area of theology in a balanced way – and the result is that an important component of the Christian faith in absent from their lives, minds, and worship.

I wonder, though, if there’s a third way beyond eschatomania and eschatophobia – an approach that takes what the Bible has to say about eschatology seriously, and yet allows that material to cultivate transformation rather than to breed speculation.  Enter: transformational eschatology.

Continue reading →

History in the making (er…discovering)?

Posted on by TimDoubleU
Reply

Is the Bible we have today the same Bible that was circulating in the first century?  Yes.

We have every reason to believe that our English Bibles are tremendously accurate, and agree with the originally-inspired Greek and Hebrew languages in which God’s Word was first recorded by the inspired human authors.  For those who suggest that various levels of corruption or human invention have been introduced to the text over the centuries, there is a discipline called “textual criticism” that helps protect the integrity of the biblical text.  To be super (too?) brief (and maybe a little confusing if you’re new to this), textual criticism weighs internal and external manuscript evidence to help us accurately identify which words the Gospel writers, the Apostle Paul, or any other biblical author actually wrote.  And within the last few weeks, an evangelical expert in textual criticism by the name of Daniel Wallace has hinted at recent findings that will further strengthen an already-compelling case for the validity of the New Testament.

Continue reading →

The Historical Adam: To be, or not to be?

Posted on by TimDoubleU
Reply

Anyone who’s been part of church culture for any length of time knows that the relationship between science and the Bible is often a delicate one. Are they competitors or complementary (or, at times, both)? What do we do when the claims of one seem to conflict with the claims of the other?

These questions have been central in the ongoing “creation versus evolution” debate, and are popping up in fresh ways as a recent burst of information is bringing the existence of a historical Adam into fresh consideration. This is likely something you’ll hear about on the History or Discovery Channels, or get into conversation about over some Thanksgiving meal with extended family or friends.

Knowing this, here are a few articles (and one book), written by evangelical Christians, that can introduce you to this topic. Keep this in mind, though: these articles present a variety of evangelical approaches to this topic and may at times even conflict with each other. As always, read with your thinking caps on and with a commitment to the authority of God’s Word.

Here are some articles that will introduce you to things:

Here’s a book that tackles this subject from a firmly evangelical viewpoint:

If Francis Schaeffer was wrapping up our series: Somethin’ ’bout the Series (Wrapping up “The Difference,” part 2)

Posted on by TimDoubleU
Reply

Since our series on “The Difference” was pretty “apologetics-heavy” (apologetics simply means “explaining/defending the faith”) I thought it’d be fitting to end with a quote by a guy named Francis Schaeffer, a well-known Christian apologist of the 20th century.

Francis Schaeffer was a really smart dude who knew his apologetics stuff well; yet listen to how he explained what he called “the ultimate (or final) apologetic” below.  My guess is that he would encourage us all in the same way as we conclude this series on “The Difference.”

“…as we struggle with the proper preaching of the gospel in the midst of the 20th [or 21st] century, the importance of observable love must come into our message.  We must not forget the final apologetic.  The world has a right to look upon us as we, as true Christians, come to practical differences and it should be able to observe that we do love each other.  Our love must have a form that the world may observe; it must be seeable.”

“What then shall we conclude but that as the Samaritan loved the wounded man, we as Christians are called upon to love all men as neighbors, loving them as ourselves.  Second, that we are to love all true Christian brothers in a way that the world may observe.  This means showing love to our brothers in the midst of our differences – great or small – loving our brothers when it costs us something, loving them even under time of tremendous emotional tension, loving them in a way the world can see.” (Francis Schaeffer, The Mark of a Christian (InterVarsity Press, 1970), pp. 34-35.) -

Somethin’ ’bout the Series (Wrapping up “The Difference,” part 1)

Posted on by TimDoubleU
Reply

Last Sunday (February 20, 2011) we officially concluded our series called “The Difference” where we’ve been (1) examining other major world religions and worldviews, and (2) comparing key beliefs of these other religions with evangelical Christianity.  Click here to be directed to our “messages” page at http://www.brookside where you can listen to Sunday morning messages online.  For “The Difference” series, scroll down to Jan-Feb 2011.)

Over the course of the series, it’s been encouraging to hear of the ways these messages have impacted Brooksiders in a “big picture” way:

Continue reading →