Skip to main content

Checking In On The "Drunk Ex-Pastors" (Podcast 14)

Jason (Stellman) and Christian had a re-hash of their discussion about what exactly constitutes "indoctrination." I still believe that the negative connotation it carries (which Christian takes as the real definition) is wrong. I would grant that some conceptions of "Christianity" are simply fideism, that is, claims without reason, with no basis in reason, as naked appeals to authority or the threat of punishment. But Christian should simply say that. That is, it does not follow that rejecting a set of beliefs proposed because the reason to believe is "because I said so" requires the rejection of anything that purports to be supernatural (agnosticism/atheism). All that is to say, I'm looking forward to more of Christian explaining his story.

Jason basically made that exact point in the first 15 minutes or so, and brilliantly, at that.

I agree with Jason on almost every point usually, but I have a growing appreciation of Christian. Frankly, it had been hard to imagine that someone who is not crazy or stupid could be on the "Left" (as both of these guys are). He would probably say the same of me.

I could have a beer with Obama, if I ignored everything substantive about him or his policies. And actually, that's pretty much what Obama has asked America to do. He's gotten an assist from the media, and from crazy people, who truly despise him. Obama can point to them and quasi-convincingly believe that everyone who opposes him is insane. That's a fairly easy move for a narcissist. Just sayin.'
Labels:

Comments

Christian said…
Jason, there is a real definition of indoctrination. It's not just me "taking it as the real definition." Here is the definition from Merriam-Webster: "to teach (someone) to fully accept the ideas, opinions, and beliefs of a particular group and to not consider other ideas, opinions, and beliefs." You'll find similar definitions in every dictionary. The transliteration of the word is not the definition of the word.

And, hey, Jason S. and I actually agree on quite a bit, so you'll eventually agree with me too! ;)
9:45 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...
17 comments
Read more

Dear Alyse

 Today, you’re 35. Or at least you would be, in this place. You probably know this, but we’re OK. Not great, but OK. We know you wouldn’t want us moping around and weeping all the time. We try not to. Actually, I guess part of the problem is that you didn’t know how much we loved you. And that you didn’t know how to love yourself. I hope you have gotten to Love by now. Not a place, but fills everything in every way. I’m not Him, but he probably said, “Dear daughter/sister, you have been terribly hard on yourself. Rest now, and be at peace.” Anyway, teaching is going well, and I tell the kids all about you. They all say you are pretty. I usually can keep the boys from saying something gross for a few seconds. Mom and I are going to the game tonight. And like 6 more times, before I go back to South Carolina. I have seen Nicky twice, but I myself haven’t seen your younger kids. Bob took pictures of the day we said goodbye, and we did a family picture at the Abbey. I literally almost a...
Post a Comment
Read more

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...
Post a Comment
Read more