2009-02-26

Interesting thought, based on an analogy with diets... "how is a study that produced meager results, that doesn't use those diets, a scientific condemnation of those diets" "if somebody regularly reads The Message and doesn't grow much spiritually, does that prove that it doesn't matter what translation you read?" Nobody's favorite topic- diets

Patton asks how you would respond to a question regarding inconsistencies in the resurrection accounts. "Notice, I did not say “solve” this for that would be rather assumptive and more than what I am asking. I am not saying that this is not able to be “solved” but I am more interested in how you would “handle” this, the solving might be included." Biblical Contradiction- How Would You Respond-

Here's a chronological parallel of the resurrection accounts. http://www.carm.org/bible-difficulties/matthew-mark/resurrection-chronology

Josh Harris writes that he has people who criticize me, wrongly judge him - people who he finds to be a paint. Do we just tolerate them? Ignore them? Maybe we don't actively hate them, but we just look past them and choose not to care about them. And yet Jesus commands us to love them. To do good to them. To lend to them. He could have ignored us, but instead He crushed His Son to redeem us. Love Your Enemies

Challies has some really good advice on how to read, from his own experience (he reads two books a week, probably around 200 pages each). He gives tips on how to mark up a book, how he goes about reading (sounds like speed reading), and advice for time management. "Reviewing books is an excellent way of driving home the main points of a book. It is as good a memory device as I can imagine. In fact, I would encourage every reader to review the books they read, even if those reviews will never be made public. It is a good discipline to think through the main points of the book and is as valuable a discipline to formulate thoughts on whether or not the reader agrees with a book." Why not jot down a short review? [Well, that's what this blog is! Just for blogs, not books...] Random Thoughts on Reading

For those into Johnny Cash, he was born 77 years ago today. Johnny Cash

Manata responds to an informal 'consequence argument' against freedom and determinism ("if determinism is true, then our acts are the consequences of the laws of nature and events of the remote past. But it is not up to us what went on before we were born; and neither is it up to us what the laws of nature are. Therefore the consequences of these things are not up to us”) with a consequence argument against molinism and freedom: "If molinism is true, then our actual acts are the consequences of the possible world God actualized in the remote past. But it is not up to us what possible world God actualizes.... perhaps I'd choose to actualize the world where I freely do A over B. But God actualized B over A because B is the world that best brings about his will" Consequence Arguments Against Determinism and Molinism

Manata employs lay-Arminian argumentation (in this case, dictionary argumentation coupled with the view of the 'common man') to show that since God created all things, everything, and without him was not any thing made that was made, this means that God created all of our beliefs and they are not created ex-nihilo by our "immaterial substance." The only beliefs we have, therefore, are the ones God determined to give is. We don't have the "power" to create a belief to do otherwise. Ergo, libertarianism is false. What, All of a Sudden You Don't Like Your Argument-

JT points to a good-looking documentary by several scholars on whether Jesus is the God-man. Jesus- Man, Messiah, or More-