Safe Haven

Well, I was engaging in that hallowed tradition among theology students—watching YouTube instead of studying—just now. As I left this morning, one of my favorite songs was playing: “Two Occasions” by The Deele (a band that included Babyface and noted producer Antonio “LA” Reid in the 1980s). Because I had to rush out, the video played to an audience of zero. But I have returned. So, it dutifully asked me if I’d like to watch that video again, which I did. YouTube shows you other related videos, so as I watched, I noted that Pebbles’ “Love Makes Things Happen” was an option. (This song shows you what beautiful things are possible with a keyboard before any words are sung.) And I like the song, I guess. That ambivalence is why I’m writing this post. From a Christian perspective, this is one of the worst songs ever written. Love is portrayed as a disease you catch, a mysterious force that leads normal people to commit adultery, (or at least fantasize about other people) and that it’s al...

I don’t have to write this post. And I could dispatch with recent days’ events with a fairly nerdy, clinical recitation of the relevant football statistics. [Frankly, maybe I should write about the horror of this .] But I’m hurting right now, and it has nothing at all to do with anything serious, or important. Not for people outside of sports. And I feel guilty about that, in a way. But as I noted, Brett Favre is walking away. For me, that’s very hard. And I won’t say he’s a hero; heck, I won’t even say he’s my hero. But a joy to watch, good or bad? Yes. Do I feel privileged to have done so? Yes, indeed. Will watching football be less fun? Certainly. Go ahead and call me an idolator (if the Bible’s any guide, I am the worst) and I’ll admit that. Moving on. People can sometimes be more powerful symbols than they are as human beings. I think of Favre, I think: man, tough, strong, America, team, guts, like me, like us, your neighbor, your dad, your friend. If someone did a Fourth of July...

This one’s been percolating in the brain for a bit now; it’s controversial, so please hang on. I don’t think the defense of ‘justification by faith alone’ (as traditionally understood) is the most pressing issue of the day in the church. Rather, it is the relation between the finished work of Christ, the sacraments, (I am referring to Baptism and the Eucharist) the individual, and our ecclesiology. In no sense do I mean to deny Luther’s important contribution, but rather to ask, “What are the means of experiencing that justification?” If the blessedness of justification by faith alone is that, on my own, I wage a battle to convince myself that my sins are erased by the work of Christ on the Cross, if the (chief) work of the Church is to help individuals contemplate the gloriousness of their individual reconciliations with God in Christ, then, frankly, I want no part of it. It makes very little sense. I’ve now been a Christian 10 years, (6+ baptized) and for the first 7 or so, this is e...

Tough news. I knew it would come some day, just not today, Brett, just not today. I won't write another lengthy post about him; I'll just say that Favre is the only one who could make me pause a second before answering the question, "Which is your favorite sport?" I reserve the right to write a sickeningly hagiographic post the day of the press conference.

I have a Facebook account, (it remains the more attractive option for non-teens in the social-networking world) and an application within it called ‘iLike’ that allows you to do various music-related things. It pleasantly informed me (as per my instructions) that Mariah Carey would be releasing an album in March, 2008 called, “Rainbow.” I said, “Wait, didn’t she already release an album by that name in 2000?” I clicked on the Amazon link, and sure enough, it redirected to the old album. Why don’t you just admit, iLike, that you have no idea what the new album in called? I wasted an entire 5 minutes of my life unraveling that mystery! Well, you wasted half your life listening to Mariah Carey.—ed. Touche! But if you had gone through the “I want to be ‘Black’” phase that every suburban white kid does (with no more than a quizzical curiosity about gangsta rap) you’d listen to MC as well. You’re still in that phase, aren’t you?—ed. Be quiet about that! Disclaimer: I in no wise endorse Ms. ...

I’m really mad today. And before I tell you why, let me preface it with this: I hope that RINO (let the reader understand) “Democrat” John McCain politically carves Obama in bite-sized, quivering little progressive pieces. Now, formalities aside, I don’t give a rat’s behind that Mr. Obama’s middle name is Hussein. It does not evoke fear in me, nor conjure a memory of a deposed Iraqi dictator (not a lasting one, anyway). I do not believe that his election will bring Sharia law into the center of US life. If he says he’s not a Muslim, I believe him. And there is NO reason whatsoever to continue stating his full name in the hope of scaring people into not voting for him. I can think of a hundred reasons to vote against Senator Barack Obama; his connection to Islam (by family, or the technicalities of conversion from Islam) is not one of them. Some guy named Cunningham brought this out again. They say Cunningham is a conservative radio talk show host. Spewing hostility in the direction of ...

For the record, if and when the Republican nomination is decided in the expected fashion, John McCain has my full, unequivocal, unhesitating support. His many crimes against movement conservatism, and various constituent parts of it, are hereby pardoned. We cannot take the risk that American foreign policy (especially vis a vis Iraq) will substantially change in the coming months. Questioning the decision now is fruitless, and bringing the opposing policy to bear on the people of Iraq is immoral and stupid. We owe them at least a fair shot at a free country; to do anything less would be to ensure that the enormous cost in blood and treasure will have been in vain. This policy represents the very heart of liberal internationalism, and how terribly ironic that the opposition now pretends to disavow it. The numerous errors in execution and strategy do not change the mission from worthy to unworthy. The hardships on our soldiers and their families (and us) break our hearts, but they should...

It seems proper to me today to pray for this nation. (The United States, that is, if I am lucky enough to have overseas readers, which I apparently do. Thank you, Tim.) We’re picking a president, even today, in Virginia, Maryland, and the District of Columbia. One of these four people will be our next president (Sen. McCain, Sen. Clinton, Sen. Obama, or Gov. Huckabee) and, to put it mildly, they’ll need all the help they can get. Pray this with me: Heavenly Father, we know that you already know who our next president will be. We humbly ask that you equip that person with everything they need to lead us. Grant them wisdom, patience, and love to carry out this high calling. Bless every one of the candidates to finish well, and give them grace and graciousness to accept the outcome of the contests, in victory or defeat. We ask you to bless in a special way Mrs. Edwards, and Mrs. Romney, who deal with illness and affliction. Give them a knowledge of your true presence there with them. May ...

I have an ongoing dialogue with Nathan Hall of nwhall.com re: U.S. military intervention. He would like us to take a less involved approach, in contrast to my position, which (arguably) favors more. He identifies the desirable position (in response to my queries) as follows: “When would Libertarians use force? When US property, territory, or citizens are threatened and force is the only way of meeting the threat. In principle, it isn't a hard question to answer at all.” [Italics are mine, and indicate the foci of my response.] After I indicated that my response to a request for an apology for invading Iraq (from the ‘international community’ for instance) would be along the lines of, “Kiss my ass,” Nathan replied thusly: “I don't want to see hand-wringing guilt or abject, tearful apologies. I also don't want us to run away from Iraq with our tail between our legs. I just think we should learn from our mistakes and follow the principle below in the future, possibly with an ...

Fine, I admit it: I’ve been giving Obama a free pass on his outlandish liberalism, which, as a conservative, I normally would hammer such ideologies with glee. But these are not normal times. We could use a little hope, a little lofty rhetoric. I also admit that this blog is Right-Wing Obama Fan Central, and in the end, I may conclude that he’s another hopeless statist, liberal dreamer who’s completely undeserving of the high compliments I’ve paid him. (I could not disagree more on issues than I do with him; I will not vote for him.) But I appreciate above all the tone he is setting; by sheer force of personality and (apparent) character, he does indeed have a chance to be a liberal Reagan, because a president Americans like and trust is one who can shift the terms of debate with less effort. As correct as I may perceive Reaganism to be ideologically, I’d be a fool to deny that some portion of its acceptance owes to Reagan himself, not some seismic shift in the intelligentsia’s evaluat...

My favorite political blogger (other than Instapundit--simply required daily reading) Mickey Kaus seems to think Obama is about to be jobbed by racism in tonight's SC primary. Geez, I hope not. I'll be the first to out Hillary's modified "Southern Strategy" if most Edwards supporters go to Clinton. (Not that it's her fault, but I want her to lose.) If one is truly liberal, Hillary is not your candidate. She betrays would-be liberal supporters routinely, as Ed Klein's book so amply demonstrates. If Pat Moynihan doesn't like you (and you're a Democrat) that's a really bad sign. The book details the late Senator's antipathy toward her very well indeed. (I was not inclined to dislike her until I read Klein's book. I have a generally favorable view of President Clinton, likely more favorable than he gets from most conservative Republicans.) She has never said anything that I felt deserved my affirmation. The only major vote she cast with wh...

It's MLK, Jr. Day here in our beloved United States. Whether it should be a federal holiday or not has lost a bit of salience because many businesses continue to operate. And it is indeed separate from the question of King's importance and legacy, despite some attempts to equate not supporting the creation of the holiday with the very racism that King opposed. I would surmise that King would oppose a holiday about himself. Here is a curious article. Would we not expect that King would lose support as he took stands that reflected a particular political ideology? In spite of his many flaws, King is to me an American hero. He has (rightly) been appropriated as a symbol by nearly everyone--right, left, and center--and by people in other nations. But I can say that I differ with Dr. King with respect to the Vietnam War, Ali, and probably economics, as well. Must I have been in lockstep with him politically at all times to share his 'Dream'? I should say not! It seems to me...

This past Sunday (if ESPN Classic is to be believed) was Joe Frazier's birthday. Yes, that Joe Frazier. Happy Birthday, Joe. They say he had the scariest left hook ever. If Ali-Frazier III is any guide, I'd have to agree, and so would "The Greatest." Speaking of that fight, have you ever seen it? (All of you who think boxing's barbarity should be outlawed can surf elsewhere now.) The last time ESPN Classic aired it (that I knew of, anyway) I watched it maybe 12 times over the next couple months. Someone from the modern day commenting on it between rounds made the astute observation that two aging legends declining at the same rate can make for a great fight; some say it was the best boxing match ever. (Not in the down-to-the-wire, "Who'll win?" sense; Ali won in 14, and it was trending his way for a few rounds prior.) But you saw shadows, glimpses of what each guy could do back in his younger days, and it's astounding to me that these two men wer...

Before I get to something substantive and theological, there are 3 things I am positively amped (that's right, AMPED) about. Tomorrow (or today, in roughly 10 minutes) when I rise, my seminary grades for the last term will be made known to me. (It's about time, boys, with all due respect.) Also tomorrow, the Michigan primaries for both Democrats and Republicans will take place, and we'll be that much closer to knowing who our (main) two parties will nominate for President of the United States. (It inspires me just to type that; I couldn't be cynical about this even if I tried!) Thinking back on it, my mother instilled in us a quiet, yet forceful patriotism and love for this USA. We're not unquestioning apologists, by any means, but we have/had this hope that this country can be what we want it to be, that people can indeed change things for the better. I have grown up simply knowing that: 1. It's un-American to talk loudly/make excessive noise/boo when our presi...

I've been a long time away, but it is the night after the caucuses in Iowa, and we had two big winners: Barack Obama, and Mike Huckabee. To me, they are the most likable of all the candidates. If they should win their parties' nominations, it would demonstrate that the young evangelicals have arrived. We are still figuring ourselves out politically; enormous shifts may still occur. Many of us are just learning that the scope of God's redemptive concern goes beyond the personal salvation of individuals. As a consequence, we should expect a statist, leftish hue to both nominees backed by evangelicals. The first step for many of us is to realize that God is not single-issue anything. The next phase is the realization that candidates on offer in the past may not have been holistic in their concern. The third phase would be the continuing wrestling with individual issues, abandonment of certain reductionisms adopted in idealistic and religious zeal. For an economic conservative,...

Major Pet-Peeve: 'Machiavelli' is Not a Synonym for Evil Isn't it annoying that in our cultural imagination, Niccolo Machiavelli is the devil? Well, it is to me. As countless authors have pointed out, the actual Machiavelli was not any worse morally than anyone else in his day. Besides, the adjective 'Machiavellian' ought to be a compliment! Having read The Prince, I can tell you that he was, at the very least, not a naive moron in foreign affairs. We could use a few more like him. And consider the context: Machiavelli was an out-of-work starving diplomat looking to also help his native Florence. The best avenue at that moment was the authoritarian Lorenzo d' Medici, if memory serves; it was dedicated to him. Other works (from Wikipedia entry) would strongly indicate a preference for some form of democracy (republicanism) besides. I hate how we call people and things we hate politically Machiavellian. He doesn't deserve that. Consider this example: "Sup...

[Disclaimer: The following political views are mine; you may choose or not to agree with them. No claim will be made that such views represent the majority of evangelical American Christians, or that they have any standing as 'THE evangelical position' on any issue. Thus, you in the media can now refrain from portraying us as a monolithic block of unthinking Bushbots or GOP lackeys, if we ever were. Thank you.] I must confess: I am a global-warming denier. That's really not cool to say. (Or maybe it is, who knows?) And it's not because A) I hate the earth (I most certainly love it) or B) I'm greedy (I'd like to think not, anyway) and I should say that C) to the best of my knowledge, I have not received funds from any oil/other energy company ever. Nor is my position on this issue conditioned by any, shall we say, sudden eschatological views (like, "Jesus is coming tomorrow, so who cares?" etc). This earth, once fully repaired, will be our home. If you...

It comes to pass sometimes that the seemingly culturally astute, the "with it"--miss something (or someone) blindingly obvious. Despite my professed awareness of '90s R&B, I missed a really big light: Deborah Cox. I discovered a few of her songs by accident a couple weeks ago on launch.com. I had probably heard "Nobody's Supposed To Be Here" once or twice before this. Well, that song caught my attention this time, so I listened to a few more songs, and...wow. Was I hiding under a rock? Sounds like Whitney, only better, with better songs. Of course, I loved "We Can't Be Friends," it being about broken hearts and all. That preference is odd, in that I've never truly had a broken heart romantically speaking. It's always been that way with me, loving love songs. One (non-emotive) theory might be that love songs have simpler, accessible melodies. It has always been my test: If I must sing along, it's a good song. If the words strike ...

Inerrancy: Vital, or Vestige of Rationalism? Lesslie Newbigin and B.B Warfield take Scripture very seriously. The Bible for both of them is the authoritative, normative rule for Christians as individuals, and as the church. But what these men said about its unique authority differed, dependent on what each man thought was the biggest threat to a lively Christian faith. Is it inflexible rationalism leading to public irrelevance? (Newbigin) Or is this grave threat due to a lack of recognition of Scripture’s origin in God, leading to a lack of submission to Him, and to it? (Warfield) How these men answered this important question, and their differing ministry contexts, lead directly to any dissimilarities between them. If I should be compelled to criticize Newbigin at all in the end, let it be known that I do so with the greatest reluctance, recognizing his heroic efforts in proclaiming the gospel of Jesus Christ. (And likewise for Warfield, though that is not the task at hand.) If ...

(The latest on) Why I Like N.T. Wright As I sat in my class today at seminary, our instructor was reading a quote from Wright (not wanting to dig it up "Wright" now...hehe) about how perhaps picking our "theme verses" and putting them on coffee cups, calendars, etc. seems to contradict our claim our claim that it is the Word of God. By de-contextualizing it, we are trivializing it. What a brilliant point. Some people now have a coherent, defensible reason for why they always found that so irritating:) Yea for you. If that weren't enough, I was reflecting on why I enjoyed Jesus and the Victory of God so much, and I figured it out: Wright's view of Jesus and the Gospels in that book is the Frank Herbert Version of the story. Have you read Dune ? (Frank Herbert's master-work, the very definition of science fiction, and likely in the top 50 fiction books in English of all time--about a messianic warrior-king who rules humanity in the bleak distant future--...