Christian Carnival CCXXVII

An amazing potpourri of posts were submitted for this week’s carnival. Jeremy Pierce may regret inviting me to present, since I am not below above adding my own two cents here and there. Enjoy.

Allen Scott presents The Gambler at Journey across the Sky. This is an argument against those who approach God with the immature faith of Gideon of old. Thankfully, God seems to be able to work with even that level of faith.

Wickle at A True Believer’s Weblog shares some thoughts about preachers, leaders, and commentators who claim that they know why God does what He does in a post entitled Speaking for God.

Over at Chasing the Wind, a post argues that we are commanded to witness, and the Holy Spirit will infuse us with power, but we are witnesses, not the prosecution; the Holy Spirit will do the convicting.

At Clashing Culture, Mike asks how we might be able to tell if a scientist is a Christian or not. His straightforward answer: Their scientific work product will be silent on the matter; the best way to know is simply to ask or read what they say about their religion. The answer sometimes works with the “hard” sciences. But not even then if you talk to a theoretical physicist. To take another example, it’s very hard to tell where Dawkins’ science ends and his anti-religion begins.

In light of recent events in Texas, Pligchild at FLDS View asks: How much religion, and how much freedom, is guaranteed by the first amendment? Some of us old-timers think that polygamy should not be guaranteed by that amendment. But maybe we are trying to have it both ways.

Crystal Nichols at a Christian in the Corporate World gives examples of how one might Turn the World Upside Down based on biblical principles.

Chris at Homeward Bound gets down with a post entitled A Christian in a Lexus and other perplexing thoughts. He makes the counter-cultural claim that the Gospel should actually impact our behavior as consumers.

Tom Gilson at Thinking Christian talks about the danger of going into the future without a firm stake in the past. The Lord’s Supper gets him going.

Chad Gibbons at In a Gloomy Wood, Astray tells us The Top 10 Reasons the Dispensationalist did not Cross the Road. Now that was funny.

Nick at Ignite Her Passion describes what marriage should be like from a complementarian point of view: a mutually satisfying perfect circle. How long ya been married, Nick?

Mark Olson at the great and not so Pseudo Polymath has a thoughtful post on the strange relationship of Christian ethics to poverty.

Claudia Riley tells it like it is when religion divides a family in two. Her Standing Straight blog is a joy to read. As she notes, she see parables everywhere.

Annette at Fish and Cans has a poignant post up about being a honorable person. She quotes scripture in a hard-hitting paraphrase:

A gold pot used as a potty is not going to be used as a fruit dish now is it?

For The Kids writes about how when God closes the door, he opens a window, over at Reasonable Kansans. There are reasonable Kansans? I didn’t know that. But I like the post better where the author spouts off about how religion courses in college are “a convoluted mess.” Hear that, James McGrath?

Leticia Velasquez has a beautiful Happy Birthday post up for her daughter Isabella. This fine Catholic blog was a discovery for me. Thank you, Leticia!

Theresa Twogood of Olin E Publishing addresses the age-old question: why is all this stuff happening to me of all people?

Dave Lafferty of Dante Explorer gives us 10 Reasons to Read Dante. A nice T. S. Eliot bon mot: “Dante and Shakespeare divide the world between them - there is no third.” He needs to do a follow-up post about what translation to read it in. There are some awful translations out there. What a great blog you have, Dave!

Rodney Olsen has a post up entitled Art or Pornography? It’s hard not to agree with Rodney: it is better to err on the side of censorship in a case like the one he cites.

Over at Double Barreled Opinions, there is a reasoned response to a anti-religious rant by Steve Pavlina.

Jeremy Pierce looks at Ezekiel 3 and touches on the question of how hard human hearts can be. Isn’t that the truth? In Isaiah 6, God takes responsibility for hardening human hearts. This subject deserves further treatment.

My own submission: On the Difference between Heaven and Purgatory.

Comments

[Jeremy Pierce]

The original blog carnival was the Carnival of the Vanities, and hosts for that often added their two cents. We've had Christian Carnival hosts do it on occasion. I usually resist and just comment on the posts I have something to say about, but that's more to be fair to all the posts and not single out some over others. It's not because commenting by hosts isn't allowed. It's usually the comments critical of a post that I'm especially resistant to putting in the carnival, and you seem to have commented positively, so I have no problem with it.

[JohnFH]

The primary purpose of a carnival I think is to have fun and thrilling time.

It's amazing how many thoughtful bloggers are out there.

[Nick]

Regarding your comment about Ignite Her Passion ending with "How long ya been married, Nick?" - LOL Yeah - I could see why you would say that.

The post describes the perfect circle in a marriage relationship as God designed marriage.

Unfortunately, we as human beings tend to mess things up quite a bit - nothing man gets involved in is perfect - including marriage - but we can try to get better and better with God's Word and His help.

To answer your question: 7 years and loving it. :o)

[JohnFH]

I wish you well, Nick.

One very common way for a marriage to be tested is through lack of mutual consideration. But the rubber hits the road in a marriage in all kinds of ways. In sickness and in health, for richer, for poorer . . . till death do us part.

I'm sure your readers will appreciate your reflections on handling a variety of crisis situations.

[Mike Haubrich, FCD]

I am grateful that you included my post in the carnival, considering that I am the atheist at Clashing Culture (one more will be joining soon.) However, I resented the gratuitous anti-Dawkins comment at the end.

Dawkins is obviously poorly understood and his viewpoint is unfairly characterized among Christians. He only felt it necessary to step in with his scientific dissections of religion because the religious insist on supplementing "faith" with the position that it can be demonstrated. In The God Delusion and in The Blind Watchmaker he clearly demonstrated why such a position is foolish.

I think that many sectors, and not just the creationists invited such a book, and I find it rather ironic that the reaction to it was so strong and largely missed the point.

Thanks again!

Mike

[JohnFH]

Mike,

I wish you well in your blogging. Dawkins elicits strong reactions for valid reasons. Anyone who dishes it out like he does must be ready to have it dished back at him.

Furthermore, his speculations about the nexus between the evolutionary process and human traits and proclivities are just that, speculation. But don't take my word for it: read around in the field of evolutionary biology, and you will discover that Dawkins' take on things is far from being considered the gospel truth.

He should not be taken too seriously.

[Michael]

Many thanks for hosting this week. I have a request, though; the links to "Chasing the Wind" are incorrect and lead to a "page not found." Can you correct them? The blog should be at http://chasingthewind.net and the post should be at http://chasingthewind.net/2008/06/01/empowered-to-witness/

[JohnFH]

Michael,

I'll fix it right now.

[Dante Explorer]

Thank you for posting my article. Wonderful site.
Regards,
Dave