Linkathon 1/16

You may also like...

18 Responses

  1. brian says:

    Good links as usual. Thanks for the effort Brian thought provoking. I hope everyone has a nice evening.

  2. brian says:

    I found this really hopeful. But it had Rick Warren and Oprah in it so that most likely filled with Satan, of course thats not true but some view it that way. But if they cannot see God in the third gentleman then their god is dead and need not be feared.

  3. PP Vet says:

    Thanks for the link #6 to McGrath’s blog. He is remarkably prolific, and is thought-provoking. Not sure if it caused me to waste two hours when I should have been sleeping, though.

    I ws somewhat frustrated in trying to ascertain his beliefs. No hell, probably, but not necessarily universalist. Agnostic perhaps on many of the core doctrines of the Christian faith. Seems to have run into Jesus in his personal experience but still relies on his carnal mind for truth. Believes in the resurrection personally, I think, but cannot assert it as fact.

    I always have this question: Do you know the Jesus that I know? Do you have the same joy, the same inner conviction, leading to brokenness and love and an eagerness to do right?

    Some people just love to be ambivalent on all that and send mixed messages.

  4. Jtk says:

    Wow on Olasky’s reformed lyrics on “Hallelujah” (heard in “Shrek”) sometimes it takes an atheist to get a new perspective on how shocking Bible stories such as David’s really are!

  5. Michael says:

    BrianD, this is so excellent…thank you.
    Wendell Berry’s piece is extremely thought provoking on many levels…

  6. BrianD & Michael,
    Thanks again for a great Linkathon & place to discuss them!

  7. Jtk says:

    The more I listen to the “original” Hallelujah and Olasky’s “cover” the more fascinated I am….and pleased with Olasky’s.


  8. #1 – “evangelical” i give up – i will relegate the word to a non-word status, like “gay”

    #10 – “Hallelujah” … ? … i admire Cohen’s talent – he thinks, as do many others, that he’s honest about life … at least, he knows what his nose tells him about life
    i respect Olasky as well as admire him – he is far more qualified spiritually and academically to address life
    i neither respect, nor admire the self justitying author in the article linked – he is a victim, perhaps, but that’s all i can see – oh, and he’s prettier than Olasky


  9. Em says:

    #2 – after a little over 13 months of enjoying a beautiful son, so full of life and ahead of the curve that his pediatrician said that watching him develop was an anecdote to all the sick children in his care – we rushed our son to the hospital on the 13th of the month and he passed on to his eternal home on the 20th – too soon gone and one week too long ill – and something in me died – that’s all, it died, it’s gone – i don’t know a name for it
    i offended the hospital chaplain as i didn’t want or need their formulaic, if well intentioned, hand-holding – there were prayers, tho, hundreds were praying … and God simply took over – He came to me, a presence as real and omnipotent as the hospital corridor was dark and cold (and, yes, He spoke to me)
    i’ve had many years to ponder this and to sort out the question of “denial” versus an unexplained mystery of power and comfort …
    i’m relating this here because we need affirmations that God is and is able – i have had many times since when God hasn’t “come through” solving my heartaches or problems, but He has shared so much of the reality of Himself and His Truth, more worthy of worship with every passing day … we are so self justifying, sometimes i think that is our greatest sin – dunno

  10. 5. Gem right there!
    7. Same old argument, just dressed up with a name that I guess people are supposed to respect. He takes the argument in crazy places, not advocated by any sane christian. I mean is any christian saying to go into people’s bedroom and investigate homosexuals practices? Oh and to top it off, he brings in the crusades, torture, terror, slavery, and various genocides to compare modern christians to. I am sorry, did I miss the news reports that showed roving bands of christians with pitchforks killing gay people. Same old argument dressed up to sound more righteous than the regular christian. I guess Wendell Barry is that super christian we have all heard about. Again, argument moving to make those of us who believe homosexuality is a sin as comparable to Nazis.

    Sick home from work today…feeling really blah.

  11. jlo says:

    Derek, praying you feel better soon.

  12. 1) According to Wikipedia – these are the 4 criteria to be considered evangelical:
    a.The need for personal conversion, or being “born again”
    b.A high regard for biblical authority
    c.An emphasis on teachings that proclaim the saving death and resurrection of the Son of God, Jesus Chris
    d.Actively expressing and sharing the gospel

    I would think Mclaren would not want to be included in any of those four. But I don’t mind if he calls himself evangelical. It’s not a biblical term anyway.

  13. Fly on a Wall says:

    Brian, I know this comment will make me your mortal enemy, for that I’m sincerely sorry. But I had to share it.

    This is what always pops into my head when I listen to Rick Warren:
    (to the tune of Pop Muszik)

    Pop Pop Pop Jesus
    What is it?
    Pop Pop Pop Jesus

    Shobie Dobie do Wop
    Radio Video
    Living in the disco
    Everyone’s Doing it
    Go ahead and buy it

    Pop Pop Pop Jesus
    Lets talk about
    Pop Pop Pop Jesus
    what is it?
    Pop Pop Pop Jesus

    God Bless M. and one-hit wonders.

    Yep, just about sums up what I think of Warren and his emerging church.

  14. #4 – that’s the beauty of Phxp – some may try, but no one can shout someone else down … because … ahem …
    how can we listen, if no one is speaking? 😀

  15. Lutheran says:

    evangelical. It’s not a biblical term anyway.

    I disagree.

    Guess it depends on what you mean by “biblical term.”

    The word/term Trinity isn’t in the Bible. Neither is the word/term “Bible.”

    Yet they are both “biblical.” They are derived from the Bible.

    If you look beyond the current context, the term evangelical refers to the Gospel — the Evangel, the good news. That would be “c” in the Wikipedia definition. t’s been used that way at least since the Reformation and probably prior. In the US, you’ll find many “Evangelical Lutheran” churches. Again, there, evangelical refers to the good news.

    But in the US, especially since Billy Graham and post-WWII, evangelical denotes a certain type of conservative Christian heavy on the authority of the Bible — what you quoted in your Wikipedia reference. To some usually outside the Church, it also is used interchangrably with “evangelistic.”

    I don’t think we should throw out the term just because it’s being used to argue who’s “in and out,” though that does get awfully ponderous sometimes.

  16. I should have said the LABEL “evangelical” is not biblical.

  17. papiaslogia says:

    5. Carson makes some good points about discipline and suffering…

    7. Not so sure that Berry’s arguments are that good…..kind of has some fallacies. Not that I am a logic major…

  18. Em says:

    #6 – creationism, age of the earth, when does life begin etc? doesn’t it seem logical that science should be applied to science? science should apply their best understanding of the “rules” to their own pursuits as should those of us who follow Christ apply our best understanding of His rules … why should either one be telling the other how to do their job?
    science is evolving and a God-given ability; it seems to more of a blessing to humanity than a curse – so far … God is complete and He’ll be waiting for the scientist at the other end

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Discover more from Phoenix Preacher

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading