One of the famous quote from Gandhi "I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
There is a flaw...
Challenge: But do you not like Christ enough to make Him your Christ?
Any response in defence fails epistemologically. (e.g. "No, I am not white", "No, I'm not born Christians", "No, I don't actually like Christ that much", etc.)
I could refer it to the right wing in general, but to be theologically correct,
Proposition: With the exception of their own parents, many children of the religious right love to grill the religious right.
With this proposition, I take it that their parents must at the least level of their hearts be disappointed at their children, in spite of the various masks the parents are putting up. Not because their children are not as extreme as they are, but that their children are irreligious all together.
Thus, the slightest change or opportunity for their children to inherit some portion of a devotion to God, even by mere appearance, should cause a burst of joy in the parents.
This is not surprising, that certain emergent churches such as that of Tim Keller's, that maintain conservative orthodoxy, are much appreciated by these parents when they learned of their children's involvement in such. Nevertheless, the shallowness of theology even among such parents, does not serve them any better in any further analysis of such churches more than what the media are saying.
Beyond the superficial admiration of these deep American root parents at celebrities such as Tim Keller, it imperative that they should truly admire those who are able to influence their children truly in a doctrinal praise and worship to God, regardless of race or fame, which often get in the way of such admiration.
On the other hand, we can command sympathy from the scornful towards these parents because of their children.
An interesting article from a woman who grew up raised by gay parents. I came across it via The Wretched Radio podcast. This is an open letter to the Justices of U.S.A. during the pertaining heated debate.
Katy Faust advocates traditional marriage. She's not the only one.
Chief argument: The rights of children. Should we deprive children the right to be adopted by parents of opposing genders?
05/10/2015 W83, @11:30AM.
Scripture Reading: 1 Samuel 181-14Saul's Jealousy - Fifth Sermon in series: David: The Man of Prayer, by Rev. John Lin. We had missed Keller's sermon @ 9:30AM.
Lin presented no real solution to jealousy after spending most of the time explaining it. His conclusion was to give up oneself and let Jesus be king. I disagreed when he mentioned that Jonathan was willing to give up his inheritance (secular view of kingship which apparently is John Lin's position) to David who "did not deserve it". But David was given this title by God, which certainly does not mean that he was not entitled to or did not deserve it. David was entitled to his kingship by promise of God - Which is the key missing here in Lin's theology - or practical theology, since he might be well versed in textbook theology.
I would note that recently, David Bisgrove's sermons have been expository, which is great. There was one time (about a month ago, I've forgotten the sermon titles) I actually had preferred Bisgrove's to Keller's.
This is definitely interest news, especially in America. Certainly, there are many objections especially from the commentators. "The golden calf of the reformation movement" as Paul Washer has called it.
Pastor Rodney Kennedy in Ohio is somewhat catholic-baptist, as he has claimed. The fear of this kind of hype, I supposed is to open the door towards liberal theology.
Nonetheless, since infant baptism is not unbiblical, tabooing it would only cause denominational pride and social extremism.
Yes, they don't want to associate themselves with the word church, they adhere to the Israel of the dispensationalism theology, some of them even subscribe to strict Jewish laws, still.
Nonetheless, after listening to Rabbi Jonathan Cahn addressing the member of congress right after the Justices debated on the issue of gay marriage, I am once again reminded of how many of them actually love Christ.
I suppose one can ask: "How much do you buy into the theory of evolution?" 100%? 99.9? In math, there is always a distinction between certainty and uncertainty. We do not make what seems as what is. True science is not a game of making truth out of chance (Or academic fluency). In the community of science, I must admit that mathematicians know better. Would biologists frown upon analytical precision? Or are they more encouraged to side with pragmatism?
One who loves the truth, would welcome challenges; One who does, shuns away those who disagree.
Ron Choong is a Malaysian who lives in U.S., received a bunch of Ph.Ds and loves middle Eastern archeology. Unfortunately, as it did many English-ed Malaysians, post modernism view affected Choong's theology.
Literal Adam: I confirmed that though ACT is "supported" by Redeemer (every Sunday we see the Christian society founded by Choong posing a stand in Hunter College after the service), Tim Keller (or Redeemer?) certainly has many crucial views that differ from that of Choong's (or ACT?). Keller is certain to stand on the fact that Adam and Eve were literal people, while Choong believes that they were more symbolic. They both believe Paul's view differently. Of course, with Adam being symbolic/some non-specific evolved form of early mankind, one would have to question not just the authenticity of the Bible, but the doctrine of original sin as well. To display Choong's view, I received their periodic newsletters and he clearly stated:
...For instance, in the book of Genesis, we will examine the ideas surrounding a Garden (of Eden), of the first human couple, of a talking serpent, of the tree of life, and various other iconic symbols that we read of but often do not pause to ask, "Why did the writer use this imagery?" In this course...
~ By Dr. Ron Choong, Academy for Christian Thought: March - April 2015
In light of this, I think there are some who are too quick to judge Keller's doctrine, for his network of friendship may reflect some of his doctrine, but it is not represented by the members of such relationship.
Keller noted C.S. Lewis as a denier of historical Adam. Of course, there are plenty of famous theologians who are in that same boat: Alister McGrath, Karl Barth (in distinguishing Geschichte from Historie[*]), etc. But Keller also said "I do not think the lack of such belief means he cannot be saved." To conclude his view, Keller listed some problems of denying the historical Adam: Trustworthiness of Scripture, consistency of the New Testament, watering down of the Gospel (good advice vs. Good News). Keller may not directly oppose the opposition, but his argument says it all.
I find that Dr. Choong's false accusation of those who disagree with him disturbing when he implied that they were ignorant to science. It appears that he is rather defensive of himself on such matter when he emphatically considered his response a civil one and that others are not.
I can agree with Keller, that denying this may not cost one's salvation, but it sure messes up one's precious mind, way of thinking. It also certainly does not mean that this would never cost one's salvation, because it would affect your relationship with God and your fellow Christian brothers and sisters...especially when your views differ, at the cost of fitting into a post modernism worldview, considering the problems Keller listed.
Update 6/12/2025 My chat with Ron.
S01E03 @ 34:18min.
It's Townsend Harris Hall. I couldn't believe I could recognize it out of the blue. I had to check it with the real photo bit by bit. I thought it was just a look alike building by perhaps the same architect, but I am definitely convinced now. I did have one class in that hall last year. Too bad the show only lasted 8 episodes. The second "popular" show after POI that obviously used NYC public locations instead of fake scenes from studios for shooting.
There's a Chinatown scene where they have fire trucks and police vehicles swarming at one spot...come to think of it, I do recall seeing such activities at the same location before, perhaps it was the film making instead of a real incident. I think I actually thought it was a real police ransack because they did have 介紹所 in that area. I'm not going to cut that scene (S01E06) because it's not that relevant.
Nevertheless, the better and more interesting story has been picked up by another TV series: Forever.
Championed by the Liberals.
There have been growing number of cases in the country about Christian bakeries (or other businesses) being sued and lost for refusing wedding cakes for homosexual weddings.
The above is predictable. The liberals love to tell others to be open minded while they would do just about anything to force everyone else to believe that their view is the one and only right view.
But what follows, in a case such as the one in Oregon, where the bakery store owned by Aaron and Melissa Klein was forced to shut down and got fined by court for $135,000, was that the effect of the liberal worldview has gone so bad that the crowdfunding account (GoFundMe.com) they use to get donations were shut down when their donation reached $109,000 in a short time. The excuse: The cancellation of the account was due to illegal activity.
Well, I guess for one, not that we should only trust a Christian crowdsourcing, but at least we should be aware of sites such as GoFundMe cannot be trusted for non-discrimination, for going back on their words, whether they keep the confiscated donations or not.
Good thing the Kleins could still have someone such as Franklin Graham's Samaritan Purse to rely on.
Finite State Machines: In the most basic form, uses switch/cases syntax as implementation. One chief example being syntax highlighting. The aid to FSM is a state diagram, which obviously is not the same as flowcharts.
