How we too often exchange the truth for a lie (see Romans 1)
It took me a few minutes (and much mental energy) to completely absorb this article from ACSD.org, but I knew that I needed to. The task of actually reading the article illustrates well the point of the article — it takes effort, focused and distraction-free effort, to tackle complex texts. In some places, I was bogged down and had to re-read a segment in order to pick up the message.
It is pandemic.
As the pull quote mentions, those of us who are “used to multitasking and hopping from link to link will have difficulty tackling complex texts—and college-level reading.” Society is not designed for slow digestion. We have many distractions taking place constantly. We willingly wrap ourselves with more and more ways to escape. All of it robs any chance to invest our time to self-improvement, improved literacy, self-awareness and heightened senses. We are quick to read tripe; however. We can rarely stomach anything more complex.
Time is a luxury in our busy world. It takes time to really read something that’s not already pre-processed and half-chewed. Sadly, we cannot afford to.
The issue that concerns me the most is this–What does this all of this imply about reading God’s Word? Read more…
The Westminster Shorter Catechism Question 2 asks,
What rule hath God given to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him?
A. The Word of God, which is contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, is the only rule to direct us how we may glorify and enjoy him.
Wow, there’s a way to win an audience! But seriously, who/what is the proper authority to prescribe how I ought to govern my life?
One of the most fascinating inquiries taking place within American society today is that of ethics. Have you heard any lectures lately? How can we do medicine ethically? How can we do healthcare ethically? How can anyone determine ethical norms when we have abolished absolute values?
Who/what speaks the truth about ethics? If not the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, what?
Alert Americans may be listening to the narrative, but miss the real dilemma. Read more…
Touching story but a theological disaster. The writing of Letters presents an unfortunate account of the purpose of prayer, biblical suffering and the true meaning of salvation.
There is too much decaf theology in this flick. God did not send Christ so that we can have “someone to talk to about what is in our heart and get help,” but to rescue dying people from the eternal death that we all deserve.
There are two necessary components of a “Christian Worldview” that are seldom mentioned: sin and the cross. Without these, we may as well be watching Oprah.
According to their website, “Possibility Pictures is a team of gifted veterans and category leaders, formed from God’s will to reach out and spread His word through film. Possibility Pictures plans to diversify the choices available to our society and present stories that lift the spirit and spread the word of hope and love.” I’m afraid they didn’t quite accomplish the former of their objectives.
“Being number one is the result. It’s not the goal. It’s the mission that leads us. So, what’s the mission for the U.S.A? What’s the mission for China?. . . the mission is what drives you. It’s not being number one that drives you. The mission drives you.”
The Alibaba Group is the largest e-Commerce company in China, with almost 22,000 employees. China has the world’s 2nd largest economy. Ma’s billionaire concepts, which have grown his company, are ideas he admits he learned in the U.S. (while working for a software company in Seattle).
“What you see here [at Alibaba],” exclaims Ma, “is the Chinese dream. It is a part of the American dream. The American dream is what motivated us . . . and most of the world!”
Whether we struggle to remain number one, or whether the U.S. quietly concedes her seat, there is still merit in considering her mission. What is her mission?
If I were building up to any sort of climax with this series of posts, this is the one I have been building toward. The doctrine of pluralism gets center stage in the arts. I could search out and include dozens of examples from modern movies, music, books and visual arts, but to make my point more briefly, I’ll just use two examples from music–one from 30 Seconds to Mars and one from Disturbed.
If you don’t know what religious pluralism is, great. It is better this way. I also want to set pluralism apart from syncretism. Read more…
An article from August 2010 announces Stephen Hawking’s publication, The Grand Design. It is outrageous insolence. His disdain for any notion of the divine reaches a new level among fellow scientists:
“When it came to the creation of the Universe, God just wasn’t necessary.”
The article points out that:
Scientists, including Albert Einstein, generally did not rule out the involvement of a higher being when it comes to the creation of the universe. Even Hawking did not exclude the possibility in his earlier book, “A Brief History of Time.”
Isaac Newton, who developed the theory of gravity, historically argued that his science could only explain so much of the universe’s behavior, but not its creation. “Gravity explains the motions of the planets, but it cannot explain who set the planets in motion,” he wrote.