textual parenthetics
My midwestern journey was a success. bbq was eaten and used books were bought (as usual). I went to a Chiefs game. Lots of other things too. It was good to see the family – beat up the sibs, reassert my basketball dominance; that sort of thing. And of course (the best part) someone Special came too (“a blog is no place for romantic sentimentality…”). These are the books I have recently acquired: / A Farewell to Arms by Hemingway (nice old hardback edition) / Animal Farm by Orwell (I’ve read it, now I own an antique hardback) / V. by Thomas Pynchon (one of the best modern novelists) / Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett (my fav. play of all time) / Metamorphosis by Kafka / Discourse on Method and The Meditations by Descartes /...
sabbatical
Well I didn’t make it. I haven’t been able to get time this evening to craft a suitable response to Trev’s 2nd set of postulations. So, you can wish me peace and joy on my trip and direct your attention (for now) to Dan’s blog. He has decided to dive into the discussion with this post.
con this (pro that)
On a break at school… thought I’d post the link to Trevor’s response. the previous dialogue (from the beginning). Trev’s Article // Tim’s Ad Hominem // Tim’s Treatise If I can, I will try to post a concluding response sometime this evening. Then I’m off. I leave tomorrow for KC. I am really looking forward to spending time with the family and eating some BBQ. And my girl is coming down too! It definitely doesn’t get any...
Specifism ad Universalis
Rather than posting an extremely long comment, I’ve decided another post would be better. You can reach my first post here, and Trevor’s article here. I think it is important to note that I do not take issue with Trevor’s entire article. Indeed, there are many positive things about it that I think are excellent challenges regarding how some Christians can tend to get wrapped up in a legalistic pharisaical way of living. My guess is that Trevor and I firmly agree on this area–legalism is why “religion” (not God) can suck. Though a good amount of Trev’s postulations connect positively with me, there are a few substantial specifics with which I take issue. I’ll post the lines/ideas that bother me and then comment after...
atman (ic) pantheism
I’ve been busy of late. Midterms finished yesterday. Have you ever ran into any one of those super-cool postmodern Christian pantheists who is really fascinated by Eastern religions, likes to think his ideas are philosophically brilliant (and rather original), but who, in reality, comes off as a misguided sentimentalist who has discarded the truth and the life and merely retained the way (in a Taoist/Hindu combo with Jesus at the head)? (wow, that’s a long question). If you haven’t encountered such thinking, you can here. This is troublesome to me on several different levels. Perhaps it isn’t the bad theology alone that makes me uncomfortable, but rather how inviting and “good” his ideas sound. “The Way of Jesus, then, is...