While listening to my "Meet The Press" podcast I heard the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, say this:

"I don't think that anyone can say when human life begins."

Based on that logic Pelosi can't tell us whether or not her human life has begun, or when it will begin. The mind begins to boggle.

The peculiar thing about If Grace is True: Why God Will Save Every Person is that the authors -- Philip Gulley and James Mulholland -- quote the Bible generously in order to buttress their Universalist ideas, but flatly deny so much scripture and orthodox Christian doctrine that they shouldn't even be considered to be on the fringe of Christianity. Quite simply, they're heretics.



I don't know if I've ever read a "Christian" book and then, when finished, labeled the author a heretic, but with these guys it's a no-brainer.

Gulley and Mulholland make a few theological blunders (to put it mildly) and those errors turn out to be a poor foundation on which to build their view of God. For example, Gulley and Mulholland deny the authority of the entirety of Scripture:

If you are unwilling to question the Bible, neither my experiences nor my arguments will carry much weight. (Pg. 49)

Weighing Scripture allows for the possibility that some descriptions of God and his behavior are inaccurate. (Pg. 52)

With regard to biblical authority, Gulley and Mulholland make use of a popular St. Augustine quotation: "There are very many who though not denying the Holy Scriptures, do not believe in endless torments." While using that quotation to bolster their position, they flatly deny entire portions of the Bible that do not coincide with their Universalist ideas. The end result is a couple of writers who do in fact deny Holy Scriptures, while not believing in endless torments.

The authors also argue for a theology based on feelings and experiences, with God "whispering in my ear." (By the way, apparently to avoid confusion, the authors write the book in one voice.)

If all of that isn't enough, Gulley and Mulholland sidestep the necessity of the deity of Christ, and His sole efficacy in salvation:

I believe Jesus had a special relationship with God and an important role in human history, though I'm no longer persuaded this required his divinity. I'm committed to living the way of Jesus, though I no longer insist "there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved." (Pg. 125)

Finally, the authors deny a host of other Christian dogmas:

When I became convinced that God would save every person, I tried to hold on to traditional Christian formulas -- the trinity, the incarnation, and atonement theology. I wanted to pour this new wine into old wineskins. I quickly realised why Jesus recommended against this: the old wineskins always burst. . . . My mind enlarged, I had to abandon the formulas I'd been taught, had preached, and had defended. (Pg. 126)

I don't think reading the book was a complete waste of my time. Gulley and Mulholland have something to say about paradoxes within Scripture, the love of God, the mercy of God, and the teachings of JESUS. Their conclusions, though, are erroneous and dangerous -- they undermine the faith.

My lovely wife and I are going through the HBO miniseries, John Adams, right now. Have you seen anything good lately? Anything Netflix worthy?

My mother-in-law is shopping for a car, and she's been approached with this scam on numerous occasions so far:

Hi,
I'm Calvin Smith, you inquired about my 2005 Honda Civic EX Coupe Special Edition (VIN: 1HGEM22985L071701).
I apologize for the delay, I'm in the military and now I am in United Kingdom and that's why I couldn't reply in time. If you are still interested in buying it, I'm asking $5,350. It has a clean title, very well maintained, always garage kept, no rust, excellent condition, runs and sounds 100% perfect with no leaks or noises. All power and optional equipments are working perfect. I have to sell this car as fast as I can because in three weeks I will be in Iraq and I think I'll stay there for a while that's why I'm selling it so cheap. I intend to buy a new car when I'll get back home. If you want to buy the car, I can ship for free within US with one of our military airplanes so you don't have to worry about the distance. If you are interested we can use a third party escrow broker, Moneybookers (http://www.moneybookers.com/app/help.pl?s=escrow), to secure the transaction and to handle this whole process for us. Using a reputable E-Commerce third party escrow company will secure the transaction and you will receive the car before I'll get paid and of course I'm also covered because the funds will be kept safety into the escrow account. This is the best way for me even if I'll have to pay some extra money for their services. I'll cover the broker's fee and like I've explained, the shipping will be free because I can use one of our airplanes here and I don't have to pay anything. Let me know if you are interested. You can see some pics on the following link from my personal page: http://picasaweb.google.com/csmth7/CivicEX
You'll love the car, I can guarantee you that!

The funny thing is she's getting all of these scam messages from people who advertise in The Houston Chronicle. Anyway, here's a link that talks about the scam.

Ignore the music. Ignore the hair.

The New York Times has an interesting piece on Internet reading vs. traditional book reading.

Books are not Nadia Konyk’s thing. Her mother, hoping to entice her, brings them home from the library, but Nadia rarely shows an interest.

Instead, like so many other teenagers, Nadia, 15, is addicted to the Internet. She regularly spends at least six hours a day in front of the computer here in this suburb southwest of Cleveland.

At least six hours! That's unfathomable! Anyway, the article says that at least the Internet forces kids to read and write while they're wasting time, instead of mindlessly watching TV. I guess that's good. To quote Uncle Rico from Napoleon Dynamite, "You may as well do something while you're doing nothing."

For a chess fanboy like me, this is great ...

The three American hostages recently freed from Colombian rebels carved chessmen while in captivity and played the game on a board made of cardboard.

"When you are doing that you are free. Your mind is engaged, you are not a prisoner. That's the gain, that's the victory."

I've always shied away from the practice, until recently. These days I keep a prayer journal and a general long-winded journal on my lapper, and I keep a small Moleskine type journal that I carry around with me to worship services, Bible studies, and places like that. I also keep the little Moleskine by my bed at night just in case I want to jot something down.

While I'm not a huge journal guy yet, I do see (for me at least) the benefit in writing down my thoughts, prayers, and observations for myself and for my posterity.

If C.S. Lewis did it, that's good enough for me.

This write up lead me to wonder about the future of the Supreme Court based on the upcoming election. As a conservative, I obviously will be voting for John McCain.

I wonder, though, does anyone really want a court that is completely decided down ideological lines? It seems that to have nothing but conservative (or liberal) justices would mean having a court that's too blind to even consider the other side of the proverbial coin.

Consider what The Washington Post says about Justice Kennedy:

It is telling that Kennedy, currently the court's most influential justice, is never mentioned as a model by either McCain or Obama. Kennedy's iconoclastic views -- conservative on some constitutional questions, more liberal on others -- would not appeal to either candidate's base.

While I don't (and won't) always agree with Kennedy's decisions, what some see as waffling I see as being able to make decisions based on the merits of the case laid before him, not on an ideological cookie cutter in his back pocket.

In my last Supreme Court post, one commenter averred that some of the justices were merely "unelected dictators in robes." While that's obviously hyperbole, I'd agree that it's easy to think a justice has made a dictatorial decision if said decision did not go the way you thought it should.

However, one of the extraordinary aspects of the Supreme Court is that the justices are not elected. They don't have to kowtow to a political party. They can actually make decisions (like the child rape case) without having to assuage popular opinion a la McCain and Obama.

Maybe we need a court that looks and acts more like Justice Anthony Kennedy, and not like an elected official.

A couple of days ago Brandi and I watched the 1980 Anthony Hopkins film, The Elephant Man. To say that that movie is moving is an understatement. Simultaneously it's a portrait of human dignity, a redemption story, and a metaphor for the human condition: sin. (It's based on the true story of Joseph Merrick.)

In a culture (and sometimes, a church) where beauty is truth, the ugliness of the Joseph Merrick story helps us to look into the mirror, to see the hideousness that is our sin. We are ugly; yet, while we were still sinners, Christ died for us (Romans 5:8).

One of the most poignant moments of the movie for me was toward the end when Dr. Frederick Treves was helping Merrick get ready for their trip to the theatre. (Minor spoiler alert.) Merrick had just been rescued from being kidnapped and abused, being forced to work in a carnival as a sideshow attraction. Treves apologized to his friend, Merrick, because he wasn't there to help him when his captors seized him.

Merrick replied, "Don't worry about me, my friend. I'm happy every hour of the day, because I'm loved."

Through the kindness of Treves, Merrick tasted of the Miracle Drug -- the love of God. This wasn't a Hollywood romance story. Merrick never fell head over heels in love with some young beauty who learned to look beyond his disfigurement to see the true human being inside. Instead, it was something better. He tasted of the love of God through the kindness and selflessness of his friend, Frederick Treves.

In this age of idolized romance, we need reminders of God's grace through His Son, JESUS Christ, who loved us and pursued us with an everlasting passion despite the deformity of sin.

God, I need your help tonight
Beneath the noise, below the din
I hear your voice it's whispering
In science and in medicine
"I was the stranger, you took me in"
The songs are in your eyes
I see them when you smile
I've had enough of romantic love
Yeah I'd give it up, I'd give it up
For a miracle, miracle drug
-- U2, "Miracle Drug"

Thanks to the Holy Spirit, and Richard J. Foster, I've recently dipped my toe into the waters of various Christian disciplines. Unlike my previous toe dips, this time it's on the deep end of the pool, and I have every intention to jump in, or at least slowly acclimate myself to the water.

Yes, by God's grace this lifelong endeavor will not be a superficial pursuit. Its exciting to learn the value of such disciplines as fasting, prayer, study, simplicity, solitude, etc. I'm intrigued now by writings of Christians throughout the centuries. To borrow a phrase from Justin Martyr, "What anybody has said about truth belongs to us, the Christians."

(Of course, Justin was talking about Christianity in relation to philosophy, and while it's a controversial statement in that regard, I think he's right. I also see real and true correlation between the best of Christian thought being something that has accumulated, through various Christian writings, throughout the centuries. I think it's likely erroneous that we spend so much valuable time pursing the latest and greatest of the Christian writings, rather than the treasures that are in print from throughout the centuries. Of course, that's something that I'm barely learning to do myself. The attraction of modern advertising campaigns is easy to get sucked into, even with Christian literature.)

In case anyone's curious about where to start with something like this, The Practice of the Presence of God by Brother Lawrence is a good place to begin.

[Also published on The Mind's Eye.]

I'm back from hiatus. I told Bill that I noticed a dearth of U2 posts around here, and somebody's got to fix that -- stat!

I know that since January this blog has taken on a more professional aura: we're no longer using monikers; and we're all business with our Wall Street Journals, brief cases, 90s PDAs, and Tall mocha latte decaf frappuccinos.

I'm going to officially ease the tension around here by inviting all of our Thinklings friends and family to take part in Thinklings Chess (I actually never took a sabbatical from that!), and by announcing that my name on this blog is officially Bird. It's sort of an I Am Spock moment for me; it's like an epiphany ...

I Am Bird.

Some of you may wonder what I've been doing the past few months. The truth is I put a lot of things (unlike chess) on hold, and really have had a sort of metamorphosis in my life. (But that's for another day and another post.)

Above all right now, I'd really like to say that I love my Thinklings brothers (they're brothers in the truest, purest form of the word), and I'm glad to be back.

Sure, I may drop off the face of the blogosphere again one day, but for now, I'm here. And once again: I Am Bird.

I know. I know. I know. I’m a few days late for my inaugural post here at the new and improved thinklings.org. I’m glad the other guys have picked up the slack in my absence (not that that’s much slack to pick up).

The truth is, I’ve been swamped, and I don’t have a lot to add to the discussions going on here. I did, however, want to throw in my two cents about the death of the legendary Bobby Fischer.

Fischer, by all accounts, was a chess genius. He liked to consider himself a genius who focused his brilliance on one subject: chess. He was obsessed with the game, spending all of his free time studying, improving, and subsequently slaughtering his opponents in tournament play.

Unfortunately, after taking the World Championship from the Russians in 1972, he promptly faded away, disappearing to a life of paranoia, hatred, and self-destruction.

Since he’s the only Chess World Champion that America has ever produced, the chess community in the United States has always had a love-hate relationship with him; but, the reality is, most chess players in America honor him despite his dishonorable actions.

So, to the eccentric Bobby Fischer: thanks for leaving chess fans a catalog of brilliance over the board. I know you were a tortured soul.

For you chess fans out there, head on down to chessgames.com and check out Fischer’s 1956 match, Byrne vs. Fischer. That game -- won by a young Fischer -- is absolutely brilliant. Fischer’s queen sacrifice is something to behold.

Goodbye, Bobby.

Happy 2008!

... if you understand "Turn off my lights, Bruce."

Good thing we're not Baptist bloggers living in Georgia, because Georgia Baptists approved a resolution "against using blogs to critique Baptist life."

It seems that every time Baptist feathers get ruffled, a resolution is passed.

About a week ago I finished Brian McLaren's A New Kind of Christian. Like most Christian book fare it had some good, yummy stuff in it, and some bad, yucky stuff.

I'll tell you what, right around page 100, the guru, Neo, started to really get on my nerves. At first I thought his character was fresh, smart, and intelligent. Then I started to sour on the fact that he ALWAYS had an answer and his answer always seemed to be on some higher plane than normal, and some would say, orthodox, Christian belief.

It was a decent read, but it wasn't exactly The Ninety-Five Theses on the Power of Indulgences. I do, though, wonder if McLaren is almost trying to set himself up as some sort of modern day Martin Luther; he even mentioned a parallel with Luther in the preface.

I can imagine Billy Graham telling this to McLaren:

I knew Martin Luther. Martin Luther was a friend of mine. Pastor, you're no Martin Luther.

My pastor preached a sermon today on covetousness. He quoted a statistic that said in the 1950s the average American home was around 980 square feet, and these days, in the 2000s, the average American home is around 2300 square feet. The obvious impliciation is that our desire for more material possessions leads us to want more -- a bigger home, a bigger car, a bigger TV, etc.

In 2002 and 2003 I did some reporting for a community newspaper in Houston that covered the City of Southside Place in the heart of Harris County. Southside Place is affluent, very affluent, and most of the people who live there are wealthy professionals with nice, big homes.

I remember covering a city council meeting where the council was trying to decide whether or not to make certain restrictions that would limit the size of second stories of new homes being built in the area.

One of the Southside residents, who was currently building a home for his family of five, came to the meeting to protest the proposed restrictions.

"I have the plans laid already for a 4300 square foot home," he said. "If you all pass these restrictions then my home will not be able to be bigger than 3800 square feet. I can not raise my family in a 3800 square foot home."

I was floored. I'm certain the guy did not see the avarice inherent in his attitude and statement, and to me that was the saddest part.

While I don't think it's wrong to want a lot of space, whether it be a big house or a big car, I do think it's wrong to not be content with what God's provided you. And that's something I struggle with all the time.

Brandi and I spent four days in a hotel room last week. Since we don't have cable TV at home, we usually take those hotel opportunities to get our boob tube on with stuff on Animal Planet, Court TV, etc.

This time around we didn't watch much, but we did watch about five episodes of the reality TV show, Dog The Bounty Hunter.

Dog's a big, bad Boba Fett who runs a family bounty hunting business in Hawaii. Dog doesn't like crime and whenever he's about to take down a drug dealer he says stuff like, "I hate this guy already."

But the reality of Dog is this: he's got a heart of grace. In just about every case we watched, Dog would eventually develop a heart of compassion for the criminals and talk to them about how to turn their lives around.

I saw in Dog a man who has a real compassion for humanity. In that way, Dog reminds me of Jesus.

I meant to post this yesterday because yesterday was Jared's birthday.

Happy Birthday, Jared!