June 15, 2004
'Under God' Stays
Because he doesn't have the right to speak for his daughter, Michael Newdow's case to eliminate the phrase 'Under God' from the Pledge of Allegiance has been thrown out by the US Supreme Court.
I wondered about this from the beginning. In fact, I seem to recall that the girl was reportedly not offended by the pledge -- her mother claimed at one point that the girl was, in fact, a Christian. In any case, he does not have custody of his daughter, so he cannot speak for her.
I wonder if this was the best ending to the case. I tend to agree with Rehnquist, O'Connor, and Thomas that the majority opinion dodged the issue. All that has to happen is for a custodial atheist to protest the pledge on behalf of his/her kid, and we're going to go through this all over again.
I also like what O'Connor said about the so-called 'heckler vote'. We won't get anything done if we are always having to worry about the protest of one person. Everything we do is bound to offend someone -- the Constitution doesn't give anyone the freedom from being offended.
If you want a legal opinion of this decision, take a look here. In fact, you might want to keep checking back there if you're interested in the issues the Supreme Court is ruling on.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 07:34 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Watch the SBC Online!
Go here to view streaming video of the procedings!
I think this is a great resource not ONLY for Southern Baptists who didn't get to go (like me) but for people who don't know how the convention works and are curious.
I plan on going either next year or the year after. I was able to go to the convention in Atlanta, and it was fascinating to me -- that was my first year of being a Southern Baptist. That was when I learned that a lot I had been told before about the convention was wrong. Of course, I learned that some of what I had been told was right, and found things I didn't like that nobody had told me about.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 02:22 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Study of Mark: Mark 3:6-12
Mark 3:7-12 ESV Jesus withdrew with his disciples to the sea, and a great crowd followed, from Galilee and Judea (and Jerusalem and Idumea and from beyond the Jordan and from around Tyre and Sidon. When the great crowd heard all that he was doing, they came to him. (9) And he told his disciples to have a boat ready for him because of the crowd, lest they crush him, (10) for he had healed many, so that all who had diseases pressed around him to touch him. (11) And whenever the unclean spirits saw him, they fell down before him and cried out, "You are the Son of God." (12) And he strictly ordered them not to make him known.
Jesus knows what the Pharisees planned, and He knew that it wasn't His time yet, so He left. As usual, a crowd gathers, anxious to see miracles performed. And once again, He cautions unclean spirits to not make Him known.
As we will see later in the chapter, the thing Jesus thought would happen did. The Pharisees accused Him of being a tool of the devil. I think, though, that that is only one reason He wanted the secrecy at this point.
Jews at the time of Christ were not able to understand His mission. They were waiting for a conquering Messiah, who would overthrow the Romans and free Israel from tyranny. Even the disciples thought He was going to set up His kingdom right then and there -- even after the ressurrection, they were wondering when He was going to establish the Kingdom. They didn't understand the idea of a suffering Messiah.
Christ took the next three years to explain things to them. He tried through parable, through example, through stragiht-out preaching and teaching, to get them to understand the nature of the Kingdom of God.
2000 years later, and we still don't quite understand it. Books are written about it, theologians argue about when, where, and how it will be established. The only thing we can agree on is that it will happen. And the best lesson we can learn from this is that we can't understand it all.
We're never going to totally understand everything about God. We can believe in Him, we can love Him, we can worship Him, we can study His Word and learn as much as we can about Him, but only in Heaven are we actually going to fully understand God.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 12:28 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Pick Your Denomination
Based on the answer to ONE QUESTION, the survey decided that I was better suited for a Reformed Baptist church. The question was pretty poorly worded, but that dumped Southern Baptist (my actual denomination) down to fourth.
Maybe someone should tell them about the Founders.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 12:04 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
June 14, 2004
David Cloud, Inerrancy, and Rebecca
I read a lot about the KJVO controversy. I've got a ton (almost literally) of books on the history of the English Bible, Bible translation, the history of the canon, etc. I've read David Cloud. I usually end up getting mad before I finish an article, so I was very happy to read Rebecca's thorough fisking of Cloud.
She does an outstanding job of showing Cloud's logical leaps, and his total mischaracterization of Dr. Daniel Wallace's views on inspiration. Get on over there and read it -- you'll learn something.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 11:51 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Christian Carnival is Coming!!
This coming Wednesday is the next Christian Carnival, and will be hosted at Belief Seeking Understanding. If you have a blog, this will be a great way to get read, and possibly pick up readers in the process or highlight your favorite post from the past week.
To enter is simple. First, you post should be of a Christian nature, but this does not exclude posts that are political (or otherwise) in nature from a Christian point of view. Then, do the following:
email Douglas at
dbass@stthomas.edu
Provide the following:
Title of your Blog
URL of your Blog
Title of your post
URL linking to that post
Description of the post
Cut off date is Tuesday by 12 Midnight EST
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 11:27 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
June 13, 2004
ACLU and the LA Seal
Just when I was thinking that the ACLU might have gotten it's act together.
I've posted twice about the ACLU doing something FOR Christians, rather than TOO Christians. I was starting to think that they'd gotten religion or something, but they haven't.
This story has been blogged about quite a bit -- if you've been living in a cave with no Internet access, check this out, or you can find it here. Post 7 or 8 at Free Republic has a picture of the seal. If you look closely, you can see the cross, middle right. That's what the fuss is all about.
Of course, the big picture of a pagan goddess right in the middle of the seal. Maybe we should complain about that. I'm waiting, as are others, for the ACLU to go after the name of the city/county -- after all, angels are religious figures, and many might be offended by the endorsement of a specific religious system over those who do not believe in angels. And what about all the 'San's in California? Are we going to see a wholesale name-change in California?
I don't even see this as the ACLU 'going after' Christians. I kinda agree with Ed Brayton that this is silliness on both sides of the debate. Unfortunately, the city caved in.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 02:51 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
June 11, 2004
The Quest. . . .
We need a new Reagan.
I'd been thinking this as I watched the service tonight. And I got the idea from Ron, when he talked about his dad not wearing his faith on his sleeve. That made me think.
After I got over being irritated that he'd politicize his eulogy, I realized he was right. And I think that's what makes me uncomfortable about Bush. He talks a lot about his faith, and does what he wants to. Reagan didn't say much about his faith, and yet it lead him and influenced what he did.
Bush is accused of this all the time, of course. But people who actually understand evangelical theology know that very little of what he's doing can be tied to his faith. I have no doubt that his faith is strong -- stronger than his father's, perhapse. But rather than giving lip service, he should stop talking and start doing.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 11:29 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
RIP: Ronald W. Reagan
I've put off posting on this until today, because I wanted to make sure that everything was finished before I said anything about what happened, or about President Reagan.
I've been kinda numb this week. Reagan was the president who influenced me to be a bit more politically active than I had been before, and take an interest in how things were run. I paid more attention, and learned a lot.
But it was still simply the death of a former president to me. I was sad, and felt bad for the family, but I didn't really mourn his passing until today.
Of the three eulogies in California, Michael's was surely the most moving. For the first time, I was reacting to Ronald Reagan not as a leader, but as a human being. A father. I knew how Ron, Patti, and Michael were feeling, because I had been there. Losing a leader is nothing -- losing a father is one of the hardest things that anyone will ever have to do. I watched just now as Nancy was given the flag, and I remembered when my Mom was given the flag from my Dad's casket, and the emotion I felt. I could actually relate to what they were feeling.
I think that's what was missing all this week. There was pomp and ceremony, a celebration of a great man and his legacy. But there was little emotion. I never thought of the person who was gone -- just the world leader. Today, I thought of the man: the father, the husband, the grandfather. And now I mourn -- for the family.
Pray for the family. The next week will be the hardest -- when everyone else gets to go on with their lives, and you start to realize just how much your own has changed.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 10:45 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Something New!!!
Over on the left side (everyone look now!) at the top of the Links section, you'll see a new link to the bookstore. Stop by there, and you'll find a list of my recommendations for reading. Pretty soon, I'll have a "Summer Readin' " list up there -- right now, the only fiction is at the bottom, where you'll find a list of alternate history by Harry Turtledove.
I spent yesterday working on the new layout -- my CSS skills are still rough, so I'm taking my time to make sure I get what I really want. Soon, though -- I promise -- there will be a slightly new look here.
ALSO, starting in July, I will have a special guest blogger each Monday -- the day I head to Southern for class. My lovely wife will be taking over the duty on Monday evenings, so the Bible Study will move to Tuesdays. She might be a bit more political than I am, but I have no idea what she's planning on writing. Maybe a trial run is in order ....
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 08:44 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
The Passion for Lawsuits
I'm not a Passion basher.
I ended up not getting to see it, but that was mainly because I couldn't find the time and, while I'm sure it's a great movie, it wasn't a real priority for me. I'll get the DVD and watch it at home.
I'm a little disturbed by the ammount of lawsuits surrounding this movie. He's suing because of pirated copies of the movie. He's suing a theater chain to get revenues that they allegedly promised him. He was rumored to have threatened to sue two groups that were protesting the movie.
I understand that Mel had a lot of money on the line. I understand that, in Hollywood, you have to protect your interests. I also had understood that making the movie wasn't about money -- he wanted to get a message out.
The movie pirates were arrested and charged. The movie itself has made a ton of money, and the merchandising promised much more. Another $40 million is at this point irrelevant -- unless you are in this to make money, rather than get your message out.
I don't really blame Mel Gibson, though. He's used to Hollywood -- he isn't used to the whole "Christian arts" thing, where we just want to get our message heard, and maybe make enough money to live on. It just bothers me that something that has changed lives, and has the potential to change many more, is simply another money-making vehicle for Hollywood. Didn't Christ say something like "Freely you have received; freely you should give"?
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 08:24 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
The 'Religion Gap'
USA Today ran an article not long ago about the 'Religion Gap' between the Democrats and Republicans. (Unfortunately, the full article in their archives is NOT free, so I can't link to it anymore.) There is a pretty good study of the subject here, and it's free.
To sum up:
According to Voter News Service (VNS) exit polling, in the 1992 congressional election, frequent worship attenders preferred Republican to Democratic candidates for the House of Representatives by 53 to 47 percent. By the 2002 congressional election, this six percent gap had ballooned to 20 percentage points, with frequent attenders voting in favor of Republican House candidates by 60 to 40 percent.
That's a HUGE difference in just ten years, probably because of the reputation of President Clinton. The article goes on to say that voters in 1992 who attended church regularly were more likely to vote for a local Democratic candidate than the Democratic Presidential candidate.
Why is this? Are religious voters more concerned about social issues like abortion than social issues like hunger? Or do religious voters have different answers than the Democratic Party has to offer? I tend to think the latter. Members of the 'religious right' have tended to put more emphasis on issues such as abortion, the death penalty, etc.
I'm surprised that the gap isn't bigger than it is -- after all, if you read the news and the Web, it's the "Religious Right" that is controlling the Bush White House (unless, of course, it's the Reconstructionists). The thing I think is important about the study is that the gap isn't as big as people want to think -- on both sides of the aisle. The "Religious Right" gets a lot more press, but there is a Religious Left that is calmer, quieter, and just as dedicated to getting their candidates in office.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 07:48 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
June 09, 2004
This Week in Church History
I've changed the title of this series, since I've only been doing it once per week. If I decide to add an extra entry, because of something very important or relevant happening on a particular day, I'll title that Today in Church History. Just so y'all know. ;-)
June 7, 1891. The end of an era. The final sermon from the Prince of Preachers, Charles Haddon Spurgeon.
I could say a lot, but thanks to Phil Jackson's archive, I think I'll let Spurgeon do the talking for himself.
"And David came to the two hundred men, which were so faint that they could not follow David, whom they had made also to abide at the brook Besor: and they went forth to meet David, and to meet the people that were with him: and when David came near to the people, he saluted them. Then answered all the wicked men and men of Belial, of those that went with David, and said, Because they went not with us, we will not give them ought of the spoil that we have recovered, save to every man his wife and his children, that they may lead them away, and depart. Then said David, Ye shall not do so, my brethren, with that which the Lord hath given us, who hath preserved us, and delivered the company that came against us into our hand. For who will hearken unto you in this matter? but as his part is that goeth down to the battle, so shall his part be that tarrieth by the stuff: they shall part alike. And it was so from that day forward, that he made it a statute and an ordinance for Israel unto this day. And when David came to Ziklag, he sent of the spoil unto the elders of Judah, even to his friends, saying, Behold a present for you of the spoil of the enemies of the Lord"—1 Samuel 30:21-26.
THOSE WHO ASSOCIATE themselves with a leader must share his fortunes. Six hundred men had quitted their abodes in Judaea; unable to endure the tyranny of Saul they had linked themselves with David, and made him to be a captain over them. They were, some of them, the best of men, and some of them were the worst: in this, resembling our congregations. Some of them were choice spirits, whom David would have sought, but others were undesirable persons, from whom he might gladly have been free. However, be they who they may, they must rise or fall with their leader and commander. If he had the city Ziklag given to him, they had a house and a home in it; and if Ziklag was burned with fire, their houses did not escape. When David stood amid the smoking ruins, a penniless and a wifeless man they stood in the same condition. This rule holds good with all of us, who have joined ourselves to Christ and his cause; we must be partakers with him. I hope we are prepared to stand to this rule to-day. If there be ridicule and reproach for the gospel of Christ, lot us be willing to be ridiculed and reproached for his sake. Let us gladly share with him in his humiliation, and never dream of shrinking. This involves a great privilege, since they that are with him in his humiliation shall be with him in his glory. If we share his rebuke in the midst of an evil generation we shall also sit upon his throne, and share his glory in the day of his appearing. Brethren, I hope the most of us can say we are in for it, to sink or swim with Jesus. In life or death, where he is, there will we, his servants, be. We joyfully accept both the cross and the crown which go with our Lord Jesus Christ: we are eager to bear our full share of the blame, that we may partake in his joy.
It frequently happens that when a great disaster occurs to a baud of men, a mutiny follows thereupon. However little it may be the leader's fault, the defeated east the blame of the defeat upon him. If the fight is won, "it was a soldiers' battle"; every man at arms claims his share of praise. But if the battle is lost, cashier the commander! It was entirely his fault; if he had been a better general he might have won the day. This is how people talk: fairness is out of the question. So in the great disaster of Ziklag, when the town was burned with fire, and wives and children were carried away captive; then we read that they spoke of stoning David. Why David? Why David more than anybody else, it is hard to see, for he was not there, nor any one of them. They felt so vexed, that it would be a relief to stone somebody, and why not David? Brethren, it sometimes happens, even to the servants of Christ, that when they fall into persecution and loss for Christ's sake, the tempter whispers to them to throw up their profession. "Since you have been a Christian, you have had nothing but trouble. It seems as if the dogs of hell were snapping at your heels more than ever since you took upon you the name of Christ. Therefore, throw it up, and leave the ways of godliness." Vile suggestion! Mutiny against the Lord Jesus? Dare you do so? Some of us cannot do so, for when he asks us, Will ye also go away?" we can only answer, "Lord, to whom should we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life." No other leader is worth following. We must follow the Son of David. Mutiny against him is out of the question.
We'll follow where he goes."
When a dog follows a man, we may discover whether the man is his master by seeing what happens when they come to a turn in the road. If the creature keeps close to its master at all turnings, it belongs to him. Every now and then you and I come to turns in the road, and many of us are ready, through grace, to prove our loyalty by following Jesus even when the way is hardest. Though the tears stand in his eyes and in ours; though we weep together till we have no more power to weep, we will cling to him when the many turn aside, and witness that he hath the living Word, and none upon earth beside. God grant us grace to be faithful unto death!
If we thus follow our leader and bear his reproach, the end and issue will be glorious victory. It was a piteous sight to see David leaving two hundred men behind him, and marching with his much diminished forces after an enemy who had gone, he scarce knew where, who might be ton times stronger than his little baud, and might slay those who pursued them. It was a melancholy spectacle for those left behind to see their leader a broken man, worn and weary like themselves, hastening after the cruel Amalekite. How very different was the scene when he came back to the brook Besor more than a conqueror! Do you not hear the song of them that make merry? A host of men in the front are driving vast herds of cattle and flocks of sheep, and singing as they march, "This is David's spoil!" Then you see armed men, with David in the midst of them, all laden with spoil, and you hear them singing yet another song; those that bring up the rear are shouting exultingly, "David recovered all! David recovered all!" They, the worn-out ones that stayed at the brook Besor, hear the mingled. song, and join first in the one shout, and then in the other; singing, "This is David's spoil! David recovered all!"
Yes, we have no doubt about the result of our warfare. He that is faithful to Christ shall be glorified with him. That he will divide the spoil with the strong is never a matter of question. "The pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand."
The old truth by which we stand shall never be blotted out.
Engraved as in eternal brass
The mighty promise shines;
Nor shall the powers of darkness rase
Those everlasting lines."
We are certain as we live that the exiled truth shall celebrate its joyful return. The faith once for all delivered to the saints may be downtrodden for a season; but rejoice not over us, O our adversaries: though we fall we shall rise again! Wherefore we patiently hope, and quietly wait, and calmly believe. We drink of the brook Besor by the way and lift up our heads.
This morning I want to utter God-given words of comfort to those who are faint and weary in the Lord's army. May the divine Comforter make them so!
Because of space limitations, I'm going to simply link to the text of the sermon, which is available here. Go there and read -- this man continues to bless more than a century after his death.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 09:14 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
New to the 'Roll
Welcome to the blogroll ... Nicene Theology.
I've read this one off and on for a little while, and I've learned something just about every time. I've especially enjoyed his writing on the whole KJVOnly controversy. And I like his 'Blogback' idea -- I'll be doing a few of these each week, I think.
If you haven't yet, head on over there and check it all out!!
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 08:54 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
How Fundamental Were They
In my ongoing quest to save the definition of "fundamentalist" from both the liberal/moderate factions that seek to demonize it AND the 'modern fundamentalists' who are legalists or even Ebionites (Judaizers) in sheeps clothing, I present the following article:
How Fundamental Were the Early Fundamentalists?
After you read it, you can join the "discussion" (like we ever just discuss anything there!) at the Fightin' Fundamentalist Forum (you'll have to register to fight, but you can read the whole debate to see if you really want to get involved).
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 05:14 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Christian Carnival is UP!!
I missed the deadline AGAIN, so nothing from me this week (next week, promise!). Head over to ChristWeb anyway and read some of the great stuff out there!
I know a lot of people who won't be happy about what Jollyblogger had to say about the whole Harry Potter controversy. I'm just glad someone is seeing things from a new perspective.
Back of the Envelope has a great article about eternal security and God's transcendance of time. I've had some problems getting there through that link, though, so you may just want to click the link in my blogroll and get there that way.
And I promise I'll have something there next week!!
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 04:57 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
My Blues Name
I used to daydream about being a musician. I even talked my parents into buying me an electrtic guitar for Christmas one year. Now I even have my stage name.
I am Screamin' Bones Smith. And I got da blues. I got dem low down, keyboard typin', gotta do some home improvement blues.
Ohh, yeah!
(Thanks to Rebecca for the link!)
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 04:00 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
June 08, 2004
Sigh .......
Drove to Southern last night (which is why I didn't update yesterday -- sorry!), ready to get all set up and start Greek.
Except it didn't happen.
Most of the problem was mine -- I didn't get some forms sent at the right time. Some of it was nobody's fault. A little of it was the US Postal Service's fault. But no matter whose fault it was, the fact remains that I didn't get to start school today. I DID get registered for History of the Baptists next month (July 6 to 15), so all I need is to find a place to live while I'm there (though someone is keeping an ear out for me on that front).
Sometimes I think God is testing me, to see how badly I really want to do this. Somethimes I think Satan is ticked that I'm going to school, and is trying to discourage me. And sometimes, I think that life is just wierd, and stuff happens.
All I know for sure is that sometimes, I swear I can hear my Dad up in heaven, laughing that big laugh of his at the predicaments I've gotten myself into this time. Glad I can be of some amusement, Dad 
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 11:49 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Study of Mark: Mark 2:23-3:6
Mark 2:23-3:6 ESV One Sabbath he was going through the grainfields, and as they made their way, his disciples began to pluck heads of grain. (24) And the Pharisees were saying to him, "Look, why are they doing what is not lawful on the Sabbath?" (25) And he said to them, "Have you never read what David did, when he was in need and was hungry, he and those who were with him: (26) how he entered the house of God, in the time of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the bread of the Presence, which it is not lawful for any but the priests to eat, and also gave it to those who were with him?" (27) And he said to them, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. (2
The Pharisees are so concerned about maintaining their outward holy appearance that they even prohibit picking food to eat on the Sabbath. Their traditions and regulations have perverted something God created to be a benefit to man -- the rules that were heaped onto the Sabbath were oppressive! Jesus again shows that He isn't concerned with outward shows of piety -- He can see into the heart, where it counts.
God created the Sabbath because He wants us to be able to enjoy the Creation He has given us. The rules that were put in place were designed to make sure that we set aside the time to rest and enjoy. God knows our nature, and He knows what workaholics we can be if left to our own designs. By building in a day off, He is showing concern for our well-being.
Their legalism even extended to miracle working and healing. Jesus points out their hypocracy -- "Am I allowed to do something good on the Sabbath?" They know that they've been had -- they cannot even reply as Jesus heals the man's hand. He had made them look foolish, and He was encouraging people to ignore their rules. He had to be stopped.
Notice that Jesus is not encouraging sinful behavior. He's not advocating open rebellion. He simply wants people to get back to the faith that Moses taught -- not the vain traditions that had been piled on top of God's Law.
We like to pile our own standards on top of God's. I'm not sying that having standards is a bad thing -- I'm simply saying that to elevate our own ideas of spirituality to the level of Holy Writ is dangerous if we don't have Biblical justification to do so. I may not like it when people stand to pray; maybe I'm a kneeler. Someone else may prefer to stand, hands lifted high. Someone else might simply sit down and bow, preferring not to draw attention to themselves. Who is right? We all are. Unfortunately, if the situation I've described happened in real life, there would be three new denominations -- the Kneelers, the Sitters, and the Standers. Then the Kneelers might split over whether to go to one knee or two. The Standers might argue over how high to raise your hands, if at all. Sitters might argue about proper posture. All because we've decided that the posture of prayer is something that is vital to spiritual growth, and everyone elseis totally wrong.
We like to condemn people for being fundamentalists, that they're Pharisees. We have to remember that we all have done this at some point or another. We also need to study the Word, so that we know when a standard is God's, and when it's ours alone.
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 11:00 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
June 06, 2004
WOAH!!
This is going to cause an uproar.
For those who aren't well-informed on Fundamentalist politics (and at times, they are FAR more interesting and intriguing than their secular counterpart), The Sword of the Lord has for years been the semi-official newspaper of Independant Fundamental Baptists. The preaching has been indicative of the preaching style of top pastors of the day, and up-and-comers have more often than not taken sermon ideas from its pages.
Curtis Hudson started the separation from Southern Baptists while he was editor. This was when the Convention was infested by moderates and liberals, and many fundamentalists decided to run away rather than fight (THAT'S a rant for another day). Secondary Separation is the watchword of the movement -- separate from those who are not doctrinally sound, but ALSO separate from those who won't separate. And separate from the ones who won't separate from THOSE guys who don't separate. And so on, and so on.
Conservative Christians have often thought that Dr. Rice wouldn't be pleased by what his newspaper had become. To have it officially recognized by one of his daughters is another thing. To have her actually call out the current editor of the Sword is a shot across the bow of many in the fundamentalist establishment.
Shelton Smith was my pastor when I was a teengager. He baptized me. I was a member of his church for 10 of his 17 years as pastor. I know his son. So I'm kinda close to the issue here. I wondered at first if he'd even respond, but now that it's more widely publicised, he will have to.
I like Dr. Smith. He's been a family friend for years. I have disagreements with him on finer points of theology -- to the extent that he has probably separated from me -- but I know him to be a committed follower of Christ and a man who is dedicated to spreading the Gospel of Christ. I think that he has allowed minors to become majors, and I am sad that he is willing to turn his back on many fellow believers because of these minors. As I've said before, I consider myself an historic fundamentalist. I reject what the label fundamentalist has become, though -- and Dr. Smith has helped to make it what it has become.
I hope that he reads the letter in the spirit in which it was obviously written. Mrs. Martin is concerned about the body of Christ, and the reputation of many believers. She is concerned about the legacy of her father, which she feels is being misused. I hope Dr. Smith prays over this letter. I hope that as he responds, he lets the Holy Spirit guide his words. And I hope that he sees the truth in the letter. That, more than anything else, will change things for the better. I am afraid, however, that there will be a lot more fighting, and a lot more separation, and a lot more people will point and say "Look at those Christians. They can't get along for five minutes."
Posted by: Warren Kelly at 04:57 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment | Trackbacks (Suck)
Processing 0.01, elapsed 0.2937 seconds.
35 queries taking 0.291 seconds, 25 records returned.
Page size 46 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.