An interesting story in which at times I appreciated the contrast which was made between serving hate in the Japanese and US Navy vs serving love as aAn interesting story in which at times I appreciated the contrast which was made between serving hate in the Japanese and US Navy vs serving love as a follower of Jesus. But, then at times, it seemed to stated that God was behind the war, not just working out bad situations for good to those who love Him. That is all....more
This could have been an extra 20 - 30 pages and I think it needs to be. it needs just little extra sifting of the material and dealing with the fillinThis could have been an extra 20 - 30 pages and I think it needs to be. it needs just little extra sifting of the material and dealing with the filling of an alternate vision of Revelation and Apocalyptic literature. But, very good as an introduction to the Hope that is in us....more
Exploring the world of Fundraising is a difficult journey. With it's intricate link to money, relating to people who provide for your livelihood willExploring the world of Fundraising is a difficult journey. With it's intricate link to money, relating to people who provide for your livelihood will inevitably result in differences. I appreciated the paradigm shift this book presented in simply living in relationship with all, and seeking to bless all, rather than to be blessed. This is at the heart of all ministry, or even, of Christianity, as far as I can tell, and 'fundraising' is no exception, except, we aren't doing fundraising any more, are we? Why not 5 stars then? For me, it was too formulaic and absolute. It reads as a guarantee and exclusive in it's methods. Minus 1 star. The loss of the 2nd star comes in under the use of the core beliefs. Although they state it plainly, that the Bible assumes simple belief equates with how one acts. (In fact, one could speak of the act of following Jesus as one in the same). And if this is so, why take the step of entangling it with "Core belief" language. it would be enough to share, as they did at the beginning, the simple Biblical perspective of what it is to believe (act) and leave it at that. This was distracting to me as i read through the text....more
If this was supposed to be a book about the evidence for evolution, then why the constant texts against a world view that 1) Richard doesn't seem to uIf this was supposed to be a book about the evidence for evolution, then why the constant texts against a world view that 1) Richard doesn't seem to understand, though a little and 2) doesn't stand in opposition of science save some who tend to speak the loudest? I thought Dawkins was at his best when he was actually investigating, under scientific guidlines, the evidence for evolution and not singing it's praises and dragging what he does not believe through the mud....more
Not Pulitzer prize material. I have Stephen Greenblatt's stuff on Shakespeare. My wife read that. He should stick with poetry. As someone who has beenNot Pulitzer prize material. I have Stephen Greenblatt's stuff on Shakespeare. My wife read that. He should stick with poetry. As someone who has been exposed to the relentless efforts of scholars to stay within the texts and historical information we have about Jesus, I found Greenblatt's story about how the world became modern neither a story about how the world became modern nor a scholarly approach to just the facts. Despite the book being loaded with facts, I was turned off by his many speculations and one sided 'tellings' of Western Christianity and the pure and untouchable epicurean philosophies. Howard Zinn, I think, critiques US historians for mentioning the tragedies when that is all they do. Here, in this book, Greenblatt does more than mention the sadomasochistic tendencies of religious priests and paints it as definitive for all Christianity. And when he mentions the Epicurean followers errors, he writes of them with lightheartedness. I felt this book was both extremes with little in the middle. No doubt, and especially post-Constantine, Christianity was definitively different from and even anti-christ-like from it's earlier days. But arguing against the hypocrites of a faith by allowing their hypocrisy to become the definition of the faith is poor scholarship at best. Their hypocrites precisely because they are not doing that which their faith invites them to do. When the Popes killed and raped and sexed up their constituents, they were acting counter to what their faith upheld as right and true. of course hypocrites deserve to be critiqued, but don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Greenbolt, I think, did this and set it up as though he was striking at the core of anti-epicurean ideals. Only briefly does he mention the streams of Christianity that actually uphold value for human life and pleasure according to it's God given purposes. Though well written at certain points, I judged this book a little too favorably by it's cover. ...more
The Politics of Jesus aren't secret or safe. On a cross close to Hell they'll keep us and bleed us dry.
Scratch that. Rewind it back, make Jesus Rome, or bThe Politics of Jesus aren't secret or safe. On a cross close to Hell they'll keep us and bleed us dry.
Scratch that. Rewind it back, make Jesus Rome, or better yet, your blessed home.
They're bound to Time & Space unlike you think of conventional standards of measure.
They're not for the insincere or venal type. They attack those committed to retrospect, not knowing this poem is about you. Like white blood cells and Evangelical vain.
Or better yet, a hen brooding over her chicks in a menagerie of violence.
But who will listen? Do we think in images or paintings like 'the scream'ing silence? Do you think you can paint sounds out of your eyes? And if you do, if we gird up our loins and thighs and bolt my ears tight and fastened then what will they do to us, sons of Barabbas?
So better yet, take heed. They're smoking green And you want Fate to intervene? Our dry skin will catch in the heat of our own pyromaniacal needs.
Listen to the dead, 2,000 in 4 B.C. crucified like those on calvary. A whole town, Sepphoris, rebelled into slavery and in 66 A.D. to 70, you could hear an echo drop like a Temple with sign-seeking hypocrisy.
I could go on with seven unexpected prophecies, but you'll have to read the book, Jesus against the Rapture.
Here's what I think. I think Francis Chan is passionately committed to God. I think he is passionately committed to the Bible. I think he said he wasHere's what I think. I think Francis Chan is passionately committed to God. I think he is passionately committed to the Bible. I think he said he was not writing to respond to Rob Bell and Love Wins. I think he is deceiving himself. I think people are going to be better off reading Rob Bells book because I think Bell is a master communicator and employs the socratic method in his writing, along with a style and flow all his own which will generate authentic wrestling with the issues of Heaven, Hell and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived. I think Francis fails at allowing the reader room to wrestle with the text. Whether you actually do believe Chan's take, which of course is presented with such passion as to leave little room to actually disagree with him without disagreeing with the Bible, or don't, I wouldn't be able to read this a few years ago and wrestle with it because I wasn't thinking as much a few years ago. I felt Chan, though humbly, was spoon feeding me what to believe. Though, for Chan, I understood him to say that the writing of the book was just the opposite for him. That he indeed wrestled and continues to wrestle with accepting what he believes. I at least appreciate the personal parts of the book, but think it failed to translate in order for the reader to take up the same passionate struggle. ...more
An excellent, though difficult critique of the dominant 'worldview' of evangelical Christians toward the Bible. Christian Smith dismantles the currentAn excellent, though difficult critique of the dominant 'worldview' of evangelical Christians toward the Bible. Christian Smith dismantles the current position(s) held by identifying their inadequacy in providing believers with a credible theory of the Bible. And worse, the Biblicists inability to practice their own theories in real time. He also purports some possible ways in which to move forward without flailing about in liberal, Gospel-forsaken camps or springing into a post-modern philosophy of the unknowable. Though not complete, I think his solutions are an excellent beginning. I say that this book is a difficult critique primarily because their is so much left unsaid and unaddressed. The author seems to be aware that to leave readers with no solutions would be quite irresponsibly, yet, he admits that his solutions are incomplete at best and I agree. As well, at some level, identifying the problem, in this case, leaves oneself subject to the same critique. Smith does believe that the Bible has at least one unifying theme, but if the Scriptures are indeed subject to a multitude of interpretation, how are we to know this, especially if we decide to leave 'sola scritpura' behind? Identifying that the early church did not have the Scriptures as we know it may contribute to the conversation, but, this isn't our situation today. We do have the canon, and I can't imagine where we would be without it, despite the issues raised in the Bible Made Impossible....more