Four Corners Bible Conference with Voddie Baucham

Last night was the first night of a bible conference hosted by our church at which Voddie Baucham was the guest preacher. The theme of the conference is personal holiness. Here are a couple looks at Dr. Baucham from YouTube:

This first video is his take on Sarah Palin (and the “women issue”), also in this video is Margaret Feinberg, who has actually been to our church and is a friend of a family in our church, the Brothers. 

Next, is his take on education. 

More updates as the conference continues.

I Heart Tina Fey

I really do. Check this out. And here’s the real deal.

Etsy.com update

Check out our shop on Etsy.com. If you see anything you like, you can purchase it on Etsy, or if you’re local, you can call us and come by to get whatever you want (and save yourself the shipping cost). The photos aren’t super high quality… something we will want to improve on.

Woody Allen interviews Billy Graham

Something I need to get off my chest…

When it comes to church, sometimes I feel like that kid who finds out really young that there’s no Santa Claus, but doesn’t want to be selfish and ruin it for everyone else. I was that kid. And in regards to church [the institution], I often feel the same way. “Really?” I wonder to myself, “This is what we are doing?”

Then I feel bad about myself (for being cynical, negative, unhopeful, judgmental, and self-centered–assuming that my needs and sentiments apply to everyone). So, I keep most of this uneasiness to myself–secretly wondering if others are doing the same–supposing that I’d just be ruining it for all the people who seem to be enjoying it so much. I tell myself not to accuse and to just leave people alone, that there is plenty that is good about the system. So shush already. It’s just you. It’ll be easy enough to pretend, for everyone else’s sake. Anyway, Santa Claus is fun. 

But are there others sitting around suppressing the same uneasy feeling for the good of… who? I mean, am I alone, a part of a small minority, or maybe half of everybody? Or could it be most of us? And if we are the few, should we sacrifice for the rest of the group? That seems Christ-like… I mean, I love God, and I love his people, and I don’t want to ruin anything for anyone. And if people aren’t feeling uneasy, I don’t want to be the one going around telling them they should be.

Don’t know if I’m a part of the few or the many, if I’m being judgmental or prophetic, if people need or needn’t agree with me, and it doesn’t really matter. I just had to get this off my chest.

How (Not) to Speak of God by Peter Rollins

So I’ve gotten through the first half of the book that Tony Jones, of Emergent Village, said was a prerequisite read for his critics in order for him to respond to them. For all those clamoring that they need something more substantial in regards to the emergent church, it is a must read. For those who don’t care about the emergent church, it’s still a good read. Obviously, there will be items you will want to question (some because you should, others because it’s your knee jerk reaction, either way, you should test everything). But you’re bound to get something out of it if you’re not totally intent on rejecting it from the get-go. If anything, it’s a reminder to be humble about God, and our particular traditions.

Also: If you are of the tendency to only acquaint yourself with information about the emergent/emerging church that comes from it’s critics, and you want to read something from the “other side” but don’t have the time or energy to dig into everything they have written (and they have written a lot), Rollins’ book is a good place to go (also Andrew Jones’ blog is helpful, especially his letter to young american emerging churches). Both guys come from outside of the U.S., which is helpful in that it gives another perspective on the movement (one not tide to a reaction to American fundamentalism). 

This book was written two years ago, so keep that in mind. Some of the biggest critics of this movement have surfaced since then with questions that Rollins didn’t necessarily have the foresight to address then, but I think you will be surprised, in reading this book, how much he does clarify.

Hmm…

Selective amnesia when it comes to McCain

I feel crazy for asking, but when did McCain become the favorite among conservative Christian voters? Does everyone have amnesia? It all reminds me of Orwell’s Doublethink… with lots of people in a particular demographic happy to forget that he’s never really been their guy. He is divorced, doesn’t claim to be born again, and his only position on the issues that they are most concerned with-abortion and gay marriage-is that the states should decide (though his voting record can be misleading, and now he seems to really be playing up his “conservative side”).

Back in 1999 he was getting heat for saying that he would not support the repeal of Roe vs. Wade. Now he says he would, but not to ban abortions, instead, to allow each state to decide. In 2004 he voted against Bush’s attempt at banning gay marriage (again, in favor of the states deciding). And the irony of him gaining favor with conservative Christian voters by picking Palin, a woman, to be in leadership with him… Well, we won’t even go there, or here.

Hey if you want to vote for McCain, be my guest. But he is no more the friend of conservative Christian voters than Obama is (who, incidentally, is born again and the husband of only one wife). And lets not forget (you anti-McCainers too) how hard McCain has tried in the past to distance himself from the Christian right (being friendlier with H. Clinton than with Pres. Bush). ORIGINALLY, JAMES DOBSON REFUSED TO ENDORSE HIM FOR PETE’S SAKE! Now, he too is possibly having amnesia. But anyway… Please just don’t have selective amnesia when it comes to McCain, or merely be blinded by the light of Palin (who isn’t going to be president unless McCain dies). If you are going to vote for him (or against him), do it without joining in the nonsense of pretending he is a friend of the Christian right.

Edit October 4:

I’m posting a note here that I received about this entry from a friend of mine named Sara. I think she brought to light some things about this entry that could easily me misinterpreted (mostly due to my rampant and often covert sarcasm). Here’s the note (without edits):

“So I’ve been reading your postings and blogs and biting my tongue, but one comment you made, and I just couldn’t do it anymore. You said that “Obama is born-again.” Speaking of amnesia, have you not seen his interviews (yes interviewS) in which he blatantly and without apology makes fun of the Bible, and the fact that people would actually use it as a guideline for life? I have seen and heard with my own eyes and ears.
Make no mistake, McCain is not the best pick and I know that I have never claimed him to be the Christian’s best choice, but alas the economy and the war are not the most important issues. Important, yes, but not the most important. Our country was founded on religious freedom, religious. There have been wars for all of history, our economy has suffered and recovered for the last 100 years. But moral “freedoms” have deteriorated the infrastructure of our country, as our recent to present history so clearly demonstrates. This is not about blind voting, this is about voting for the party that historically has supported the family and moral infrastructure. Do you have as little mercy for the divorcee in your spheres as you do for this candidate? Do you scoff at the person who has gotten a new start after divorce like you do for this candidate? Let’s cut the double standards already. We both know that it’s just a cheap shot in order to prove a point. I’m not trying to change your mind, but let’s not pretend that Obama supports real-time born-again beliefs as we’re given through the Bible. This will be an issue that we agree to disagree on and that’s why I have not said anything to you thus far, but I just had to address the above-mentioned statement. Blessings to you Emily, truly.”

I won’t address here the above claims to our countries religious heritage and the party that supposedly supports these fundamentals (you may disagree but I believe responses to these claims lie on a completely different plain and are not on topic with the original post; it will have to suffice to know that I disagree with the above statements on the subject). I will however address the other issues raised.

Firstly, I know that the things I said about McCain and Obama’s personal lives (their faiths, marriages, etc.) could be easily interpreted as pointing either to their qualifying for my endorsement or lack there of. This is not the case. I’m either not voting or only half-heartedly voting for Obama (and not because of either his nor McCain’s faith choices or marriage relationships—past or present). I have no delusions about Obama saving the world or anything like that. If I were to vote for him, it would be for reasons that relate to MY faith, and not his. This may sound weird, but it’s the only clear conscience way I know how to do it (I’m very aware of how others approach the issue—I’m constantly surrounded by people who approach this issue very differently than I do, people who I love and respect–I think people have to do whatever they have to do to have a clear conscience before God).

Secondly, if it seemed that I was being unmerciful towards McCain due to his being divorced or not a “real Christian,” I sincerely regret that. I would never deliberately do that. I was actually just trying to point out what I perceive to be a double-standard set by right-wing evangelicals when in comes to the issues that they claim matter most to them. I don’t judge McCain for his divorce or his not being “born again.” But, when someone says that one of their top issues is the sanctity of marriage and religious belief and yet they endorse the candidate who has been divorced and not “born again” instead of the candidate who has not been divorced and claims to be “born again” (the veracity of which I do not feel capable of judging at the time, or perhaps ever) I find that wishy-washy. I wasn’t being unmerciful towards McCain, though I was perhaps being unmerciful towards the group that I was poking fun at with my sarcasm about what I see as a double-standard. It just seems funny to me that some Christians think they have to vote Republican even when their self-asserted reasons for doing so (I’m only referring to the ones I mentioned in the post) don’t match up to the reality of the candidates at hand, until McCain invited Palin on board… Which is an issue Sara didn’t bring up, so neither will I.

Updates

-My dad is still in the hospital (for at least another month and then rehabilitation). My mom says that he’s made friends with all the doctors and nurses and does everything they tell him to do. He actually got to go out on the veranda of his room the other day! I’m so happy for him! Mom said he just cried the whole time. 

-Watch Charlie Bartlett. I did.

-Finished reading The Shack, and honestly, I’ve been a bit amused at all the fear based ranting disguised as wise and thoughtful criticism that has come from this books publication. Not that it shouldn’t receive any criticism. Go ahead. But at least don’t play right into the authors hands, proving him right in his critique of the church, by acting like a bunch of petty and loveless legalists (which is what most of the “watch dogs” have ended up doing!) Chuck Colson: Seriously, sit down. You guys: Read the book, read the criticism, judge for yourself. 

-Reading Frank Schaeffers Portofino now.

yearbookyourself.com