How can you know someone you that you know nothing about? It has recently become the avant-garde thing to do to once again proclaim no creed but Christ and to know God outside of church, doctrine or creed. But my question is how do you do that?

I was one of the few people I know who were really discipled. Don Nonnenman took me under his wing and he taught me what he felt was important, then I spent two years in Bible College, and 8 years as a heavily active member of the church that sponsored the college. I still feel woefully uninformed when it comes to orthodox thoughts on Christianity. I learned a lot of about word of faith practices and how to “work the Word” for all that it is worth but very little about the core beliefs that make Christianity what it is.

Having not grown up in church I was never subject to Catechism or even much more than a very basic Sunday school experience. Heather and I have spent some time reviewing Catechisms for ourselves and our girls so that they will know what to believe and why as they grow up. Just from an anecdotal evidence I see very little proof that those young people who have grown up in church know much more about Christianity than those who have not been to church before.

Christian Smiths book Soul Searching: The Religious and Spiritual Lives of American Teenagers interviews thousands of young people from many different church backgrounds and he discovered that many of our church kids follow what he describes as therapeutic moralistic deism and not orthodox Christianity. Could this be because we have gotten away from tougher deeper teaching to in order to be attractive to consumer driven seekers? I am not sure but I believe it must be considered.

In her new book “Quitting Church: Why the Faithful are Fleeing and What to Do about It
” Julia Duin (pronounced dean) talks about the new reformed churches that are a growing number of churches that are gaining popularity. Churches like Mars Hill in Seattle is taking on tough questions and would never be accused of being seeker sensitive. Pastor Mark Driscoll pulls no punches with his devotion to the Gospel which he admits is an offense to most who hear it. He uses all the larger words of the Bible that many shy away from for the fear of sounding to religious.

The question becomes whether or not Christianity will be able to separate itself from any general spirituality that surrounds it. Although on paper we may be able to I don’t know of those who call themselves Christians can articulate the difference.

Popularity: 3%

I suppose I am one of the few people who would hurry to get a book before the movies comes out when they have no intention of seeing the movie.  But when I discovered that the new movie Blindness is based on a noble prize winning book I decided to branch outside of my normal reading patters and give it a try.

The author employs some very interesting methods in his writing the first of which is his grammatical form.  There are very few paragraph breaks and little punctuation outside of commas and periods, which makes the conversations in the story very difficult to follow until you get used to it.

Additionally, none of the characters use proper names but are simply described by some feature of their personality, appearance or their relation ship to another character.  I felt very little attachment to the characters as a whole and there was very little development of them.

The book does have at least one scene of a graphic sexual nature that I was not comfortable with and wish I could have skipped because it added little to the story but nevertheless I feel compelled to warn anyone who may be tempted or offended by such a scene.  To be honest I wish I wouldn’t have read this scene for the images that came to my mind.

I am sure that the author was attempting to make some great moral or philosophical point when he wrote this book but he doesn’t make it very clear the story is barely coherent or interesting and doesn’t have a good ending.

I thought a Nobel Prize winning book would be better.  It seems when I step outside of my normal reading patters I discover why they are my normal reading patterns.

Popularity: 8%

Genetic Fallacy

There has been a lot of talk about the origins of church practices since George Barna and Frank Viola published their book Pagan Christianity.  Many in the house church movement seem to whole heartedly reject common modern church practices simply because of their perceived origin; this concept is known as the genetic fallacy.  In a Genetic fallacy a conclusion is suggested based solely on something or someone’s origin rather than its current meaning or context.[i]

Read the rest of this entry »

Popularity: 30%

Rob Bells Trampoline

In Velvet Elvis Rob Bell discusses Doctrine as the spring on a trampoline. The springs are not the main point; they merely facilitate the greater goal of “us finding our lives in God.” He compares it to looking at doctrine as a brick wall that when bricks are removed simply falls apart. However a trampoline missing a few springs can still be useful.

This analogy falls apart in itself in that when you remove enough springs you no longer have a trampoline but a tarp. However it betrays an understanding of Christianity that is becoming more invasive as this “emergent” line of thinking expands. Christianity, unlike other religions, isn’t based on a system of living; if you do more good than bad you will be accepted by God. It is based on the premise that our very nature is abhorrent to a perfect God and we can by no means please him. In fact we don’t even know enough to pursue him or look for him save for his provision of grace. Christianity isn’t simply a better way to live, which has lead non believers to the idea of “That may work for you but not for me or others.” Christianity isn’t subjective in its claims, the first century church was called to testify and bear witness of Christ’s resurrection, as historical fact.

There are certain dogma’s of the faith (the proper definition of dogma is to mean those things which can not be compromised not the negative connotation it has taken on) which we can not allow to be compromised for to do so would bring a halt to our Lords work.

Things like the resurrection must stand lest all of Christianity be destroyed, for even the apostle Paul said “And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men….If I fought wild beasts in Ephesus for merely human reasons, what have I gained? If the dead are not raised,
‘Let us eat and drink,
for tomorrow we die.’”

If Christ is not raised we are left with nothing but a human invention of morality by which to live.

Christianity is different because the LORD not only requires perfection which we can not obtain but then provides the mean by which it is imputed to us by his grace and not by our own means, otherwise we would still be lost. Not other religion is one of grace and destroying the solid brick foundation of those dogmas destroys the Christian faith. I don’t think I am looking to bounce so much as I am looking for a ROCK upon which to build my house.

To be clear I am not opposed to examining other aspects of how we do things as Christians, I believe methodology is always up to examination and change as we adjust to the culture. However we can not compromise out doctrine in the process.

Photograph: Virgil Vaduva

Popularity: 100%

I have finally gotten my hands on a copy of “Pagan Christianity” by George Barna and Frank Viola and I wanted to review it.  Read the rest of this entry »

Popularity: 49%

I recently read CS Lewis’ ‘Studies in Words‘ which was a fantastic challenge to my mind. I promised myself I would look up any words I was unfamiliar with because I am always challenged by Lewis’ precision with the English language, I was forced to look up a dozen words in the introduction alone. One particular section that challenged my was a lesson on authorial intent.

Read the rest of this entry »

Popularity: 42%

Review of Huckleberry Finn

As I begin writing this post, I don’t feel entirely adequate to review such a classic piece of American literature. Mark Twain was a brilliant man in many ways and his insight into the human condition is most astounding. The book is known to be one of the first to be written in the language of it is a kind of deep south dialect, and from the fist person view of Huck himself. This can make it terribly hard to follow and slowed my reading down considerably; it also has had a minor impact on the way I personally speak. I have found myself adding some of Huck’s colloquialisms to my own vocabulary, Bye and bye I suppose they will disappear but until then I enjoy using them.

The only other disadvantage I suffered by reading this book what the number of imitators I have experienced. Much of the comic effect was lost because many of what were original ideas have been reused so many times that they have almost become cliché. I do, however, greatly enjoy discovering where those clichés originated and I feel I have a greater insight into American literature as a whole for having read this book.

Popularity: 26%