Home » 2006 » 2006 » August

You heard it here first…

NU: 45
LA Tech: 17

UPDATE: 09/02/2006
The final score was 49-10. Not bad for my first prediction of the year…

The truth about truth

Last Sunday, the pastor at my church taught from Revelation 20, which includes a reference the infamous 1,000 year reign of Christ.? What Stu had to say about that was interesting, but something else he talked about caught my attention.? He noted that the discussion of this millennial period has historically been a point of division in Christian circles.? This one little point of doctrine, nestled into the back of the back of the Bible, has become so important in some communities that Christians are willing to break fellowship over it.

Stu noted that Truth is extremely important, and that we should all strive to conform our beliefs to the Truth of the Bible.? And yet, he also described the three "Circles of Truth" that we need to be aware of:

Core:? In the core are beliefs that are non-negotiable.? These are the "essentials," which we must agree upon if we are to be in community?together as Christians.? The list of doctrinal issues that fall into this circle is short, but important.
Creed & Confession:? Most churches and denominations have a one-page "Statement of Faith" that defines their position on important points of doctrine.? As Presbyterians, we have a book consisting of thirty-three chapters, published in 1646, that we count as our Confession.? It details the church's position on everything from Creation to the Last Judgement.? The confession is specific enough to address many key doctrinal issues the church must wrestle with, but broad enough that some liberty remains.? We can disagree on some of these points and still "get along" as Christians, worshipping and working together in service to the same King.? Differences on this level have lead to the multi-denominational America we live in today.? Baptist believe different things than Presbyterians, who believe different things than Methodists, and so on.? All of these groups would (hopefully!) consider the others to be Christians, but with a different opinion on some important but non-essential doctrinal positions.
Convictions: These are the "fringe issues," and liberty abounds in this circle.? People sitting five feet from one another on a Sunday morning may have radically different views on issues of this nature without it becoming an issue.? For instance, you might believe that drinking alcohol in any quantity is a bad idea, whereas I might consider drinking in moderation to be the appropriate enjoyment of a blessing from God.? When the communion tray comes around, you might grab the grape juice on the outside and I grab the wine in the middle.? No big deal.?

Now, why was this Circles of Truth diagram interesting to me?? If you've ever read my blog, you'll notice that I tend to get a little worked up about things from time to time.? As a typical first-born, I tend to see things in a very black-and-white way.? I believe what I believe with a passion, and I normally have a pretty full bag of reasons why.? My own personal Circle of Truth looks something like this:

I seem to have trouble distinguishing which issues I should let slide by and which issues warrant the "nuclear option."? I would also add that I really like to debate and argue (which is the heart and soul of the blogosphere) even when I know an issue is not that important.?

I've come to learn that not everybody is like that.

For me, I can spend two hours telling you why you completely misunderstand the nature of the Atonement, the biblical practice of baptism, and the purpose of marriage and the family in relation to the Kingdom of God, and then flip a switch and enjoy a burger and a beer with you as we watch college football together.? Unfortunately, my Uncle Doug is one of the only other people I've met that enjoys debating as much as I do.

As I "mature," I am trying to learn to take it easy on a few more things.? I hope to remain vigilant in the defense of the Truth, but compassionate in understanding that most people aren't interested in debating the differences between synergism and monergism for hours on end.? Hopefully someday I will be able to figure out how to manage that balance.? Until then, you can continue to read my blog at your own risk!

So long, Blogger.

Nary an Original Thought is in a bit of a transitional phase right now. I am leaving Blogger in favor of WordPress, for multiple reasons. The main issue is control. If (yeah, right… when!) blogger is down, I am unable to publish new posts, edit old ones, or even republish existing content to my blog. If I change anything in the layout of the blog, I have to watch this icon go 'round and 'round for a long, long time while blogger republishes the static files for the entire blog:

Are you tired of watching it spin? Me, too.

Blogger has been good to me, but it's time to move on. I will leave all of my old posts in place so internal links will continue to work, but I have also duplicated the old posts within WordPress, so hopefully this move won't be too much of an inconvenience for my loyal readers. If you subscribe to my blog via the atom.xml syndication, now would be a good time to update your subscription.

Please let me know if you have any problems with the new site and/or layout. I've hacked the template up like crazy, so it is quite possible that it will have a few bugs for a little while.

See you on the other side!

UPDATE: I changed some settings on the old blog so visitors would see an announcement that the blog had moved.? Of course, I had to try three times before Blogger successfully republished the site.? Sheesh.

More Life on the Road

On the way to Wal-Mart:

PETER: Mom?

AMANDA: Yes, Peter?

P: Is Larry the cucumber LarryBoy?

A: Yes, I think so.

P: Oh.

The Sum of Some Parts

Rebecca Treadway wrote an interesting post about the unintended relational consequences that can come about because of the nature of the blogging medium. From her post:

Blogging is a strange medium that has great potential for allowing misperceptions and miscommunication to run rampant. To put it bluntly, you may not really know me if you only read my blog.

To that I would also add that the things you read in my blog may or may not conflict with the "me" you know from our "real life" relationship.

I ran into this as I began to consider moving back to Lincoln with my family. As I talked about looking forward to being back in our old church, a very good friend worried that this church (i.e. his church) might not be "radical enough" for a guy like me. He and I have been friends for almost a decade now, and while we were in college we were nearly inseperable. We kept in contact throughout my time in St. Louis, mostly by e-mail but also by him reading my blog. Admittedly, I definitely have radical leanings in my politics, religion, and cultural critiques. Yet, my response to him was that he should be careful to not understand who I am (or who I have become) on the content of my blog. He knew who I used to be before I moved to St. Louis, and he also knew part of me based on my blog. But, that part was not (and still isn't) representative of who I really am in total.

I blog as an outlet of sorts. Most often, the things I blog about are the things that really get to me and bug me enough to compel me to write about them. If something isn't particularly interesting to me, it's probably not going to make it into the blog. I like the St. Louis Cardinals, Bluegrass music, and Peanut Butter Panic ice cream, but I will probably never blog about any of those things because they just wouldn't be interesting to write or for anyone to read. But, they are all parts of who I am nonetheless.

So, a friend from afar can get an idea of what really bothers me by reading my blog, but being defined only by what bothers me is hopefully a very limited view of who I am. You can know part of who I am through my blog, but not who I really am as a whole. Continue reading this post »

Life on the road

A conversation between my wife and my potty training 2 1/2 year old son on their way back to St. Louis to pack up our stuff so we can finally move into our own place in Lincoln, overheard via cell phone:

AMANDA: I need to pee. Pete, do you need to pee?

PETE: Pee in the grass?

A: No… mommy can't pee in the grass. We'll need to stop.

P: I can pee in the grass.

A: I know you can.

P: Dogs can pee in the grass.

A: Yes, yes they can. Mike, I gotta let you go.

-end of conversation-

Through My Toddler's Eyes

Pete will be three years old in December, at which time he will no longer be "welcome" in the nursery at church. In anticipation of this change in his life, he has been joining us in "Big Church," at least through the songs at the beginning. This week we kept him a little longer so he could witness a baptism.

Pete and Elsie will be baptized on September 3rd. This is a decision that has been in the making for quite some time, and I hope to address my thoughts on the issue here before too long. Anyway, Pete was really interested to see what Pastor Stu was doing with the little baby at the front of the church.

Stu always addresses the adults of the congregation first, and then brings the kids up front and tells them what's going on as well before he conducts the baptism. Pete was too nervous to go forward, but he sat with us and listened intently as Pastor Stu told the kids that it was sort of like a bath. He explained how our hearts are dirty because we don't listen to what God says, and that baptism is a sign of how Jesus washes our hearts clean.

I whispered and asked Pete if he understood what Pastor Stu had said. In Thomas the Tank Engine vernacular, Pete told me that "Him's heart needs a washdown." A. A. Hodge may not have used exactly those terms, but Pete is essentially right.

Then, at lunch, Pete told Grandma Joan all about church that morning. He told her a man poured water on a baby, and also that we sang some songs. She asked him what songs we sang, and I triend to prompt him to tell her, "Be Thou My Vision." His version? "We sing 'Be… My… Engine!"

Pete continues to remind me of how our perceptions and basic understanding of the world shape our comprehension of the world around us. His worldview has been shaped by Thomas and Friends, and so his theology is, in some sense, filtered through what he already knows. When I get around to my paedobaptism post, this concept is likely where I will start.

I had always approached the subject as a separate, individual issue. "Just show me the verse that proves it and I'll agree," I thought. It turns out that my understanding of the purpose of baptism has greatly changed because the foundational bulding blocks underneath it have been rearranged by God's Word. Infant baptism didn't make any sense on top of the blocks I had put together. But, as God continues to re-shape my doctrine and theology according to his Word, paedobaptism suddenly makes much more sense.

But, like I said, that will have to wait for a future post.

Procreation and Politics

In an article entitled Dude, where's my voters? in the Oklahoma Gazette, Brandon Dutcher comments on an unintended effect of the Liberal position on abortion. According to Dutcher's analysis, all we have to do is keep out-breeding the Libs and we'll eventually be winning elections by a landslide.

From the article:

While creative-class Kerry Okies with medicated wombs are sipping lattes and listening to NPR, the procreative class is multiplying and filling the earth.

If liberals persist in their planned barrenhood, contraceiving and aborting their base, the country is going to be taken over by pro-marriage, pro-family, gun-toting religious homeschoolers who don?t like high taxes and big government. In other words, the kinds of people who founded the country.

Dutcher points out that the fertility rates are 12% higher in states Bush carried in 2004, compared to states that voted for Kerry. He also notes that the millions of "absent" Democratic voters ensured a Bush victory in 2000. Oops.