Disqus - Latest Comments for cawoodm

Re: Picasa video capture, sync issues

cawoodm — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 14:34:32 -0000

Strange behaviour from Picasa3 on all fronts it seems. I was able to capture exactly one video. Then, it seems, the trial period was over and I could capture nothing else - it just doesn't save anything.

Re: Quick Thought: Going to Church With An Abortion Doctor

SiarlysJenkins — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 21:30:25 -0000

I would have a problem with a pedophile being in a situation where s/he is likely to recommit the same crime -- and many pedophiles literally can't restrain themselves. That might be a reason to exclude them from church, since hopefully there are many families with children around. But, I have no problem worshipping with a pedophile -- it may be in prison, or in a secured medical center, but the pedophile is no less in need of, nor eligible for what the church has to offer. Incidentally, could we stop saying that someone IS a pedophile, or a thief, or a murderer? A person is much more than their most heinous acts. A person has molested a child, or has stolen, or has murdered. That is serious, but it is not who and what they are, in toto. A pedophile was once a fetus, and then a baby.

Re: Quick Thought: Going to Church With An Abortion Doctor

cawoodm — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 11:42:37 -0000

I've no problem with going to church with a white-liar but a big problem with a paedophile. Jesus did not "solve" sin in the sense that it no longer matters at all. As evangelicals we sometimes forget a) that it is the repentant sinner who is forgiven and b) that even God sees some sins as serious and others as not so serious.

Re: Quick Thought: Going to Church With An Abortion Doctor

cawoodm — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 11:38:44 -0000

Either abortion is a major sin or it isn't. Now, sin is bad and some sins are worse than others so I don't agree with the "we're all sinners anyway" crowd. Paul doesn't rail against the white-liars in Romans 1 nor does God judge Sodom because of shop-lifting.

As Christians, we are to exhort and reprimand and help one another get free from sin but we don't have to stone murderers. Churching with the sinners is a great way to influence them whilst ostracising seldom has the desired effect. Of course if one persists in sin one is to be put out of the fellowship eventually.

We need to love people enough to want them to be free from sin.

Re: You Say You Want a Revolution?

cawoodm — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 11:13:10 -0000

I am not suggesting we only obey a commandment if it seems beneficial to us but rather addressing the problem that some commandments were not directed at us and we need a way of determining if obedience to these is morally obligatory or optional.

I'm thinking of the many precepts and laws found in the Torah - some (i.e. do not murder) are still applicable while others are not.

The Sabbath is an interesting question because many Christians think Jesus did away with that one. Yet, I would argue, notwithstanding, the command is beneficial and should be followed.

Re: You Say You Want a Revolution?

SiarlysJenkins — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 10:25:57 -0000

Are God's decrees arbitrary, or really beneficial? That's an interesting perspective. Taken to its logical conclusion, that could mean that each of us can judge, by that standard, which of God's decrees we will choose to follow, and which we will not. But I agree that when we try to understand and apply scripture, we need to look not only at the words in a sentence of a verse, but what question was being answered, or what events inspired the response. For example, in John 14, nobody had asked Jesus "Can anyone who is not a born-again Christian get into heaven?" The term "Christian" was not even in use yet. The disciples were asking "How can WE know the way?" and "Show us the Father." Jesus was telling them, you can't see the Father, that's why I was sent. Many divine admonitions have surprising practical value: circumcision results in a sharp reduction of many diseases, including cervical cancer in sexual partners; Leviticus includes the earliest known instructions to dig latrines, which undoubtedly resulted in a better survival rate for Hebrew armies.

Re: Saying goodbye to online networking

cawoodm — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 07:11:06 -0000

Facebook is great for finding old friends but it can indeed waste time. Blogging can be very beneficial for the author even if no-one else reads it because a blog can be a record of a thought process. We make it public because we are writing things we are more sure of than to just keep them in a private journal.

Re: You Say You Want a Revolution?

cawoodm — Sun, 31 May 2009 17:31:16 -0000

The question to ask with all of God's decrees is: are they arbitrary or really beneficial? Is the Sabbath something God gave Israel for ethnic identity, a kind of obedience test or a real source of power and stability in society?

I've heard noted atheists say that one of the few beneficial things non-Biblical societies don't come up with on their own is the Sabbath. Maybe we really need to consider applying Sabbath days, weeks, years and so on...

Re: You Say You Want a Revolution?

cawoodm — Sun, 31 May 2009 17:26:37 -0000

Jesus "donkey ride" was anything but humble - it was the clearest sign of his claim to Messiahship, the focal point of the 70 weeks prophecy in Daniel 9 and, together with the temple cleansing, the proximate cause of his death. It was risky and a "must" for any would-be Messiah. He didn't meet their idea of a warring Messiah but this was a clear sign to the Jews of who he thought he was.

Church must be a subversive revolution in love and allegiance to the King!!

Re: How to Be More Moral: Think Less, Go to Church More?

cawoodm — Fri, 29 May 2009 04:15:38 -0000

Lewis' argument is not that different cultures share the same values but that they all understand justice or fairness. (He was however in a position to survey ancient cultures and comment on the similarities in legal and moral codes and I think there is more overlap than we perceive.)

But it's not the overlap that points to a Christian God but the mere fact of objective justice which points to a God (not neccessarily Yahwe) who defines what justice is.

If morality is socially conditioned then what Hitler did was morally acceptable.

Re: Are you a Follower of Jesus?

cawoodm — Thu, 14 May 2009 09:10:23 -0000

It seems you could "follow" Jesus, even obey Him, but not be a Christian in the sense of one for whom their sins are atoned.

Re: Hope Against Hope

cawoodm — Thu, 14 May 2009 09:05:51 -0000

The word "faith"is used ambiguously by Christians. One is faith in Jesus which is a decision to trust God's King. The other is faith which is a gift from God. The latter is the sign of having been justified. The former is from us, the latter fromGod.

The idea that we need to produce the latter in response to doubt is ill-conceived. On the other hand, the decision to trust in Jesus in times of trouble is a reasonable faith based on His credentials and our experience of Him.

I don't think we are called to blindly trust in a God who never shows up or does anything in our lives. I don't think God finds credulity or "blind faith" somehow virtuous.

Re: Why People Leave the Church

cawoodm — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 05:22:19 -0000

I think the term "gradual" applies to most of those factors. The bottom line is when your Church stops meeting your needs and/or losing touch with your experienced reality you stop going.

Re: Q&A Brent Laytham

cawoodm — Tue, 21 Apr 2009 06:31:01 -0000

Ooh I'd be interested to hear about the God who doesn't demand blood. As far as I can tell, our God, unfortunately, does :-(

Re: Speaking Religiously

cawoodm — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 06:16:13 -0000

I'm sure you would want your government to block satanism as a "bad" religion would you not? How about radical Islam? It is indeed a governments role to see that laws are obeyed and that's what I am refering to.

Of course Christianity is subversive of the world's value system and that's the positive sense of "subversive". What I mean is it's not subersively dangerous (in terms of violence) to western governments which are internally peacable. That is why Christians are not considered a problematic element in western society as are certain other religions.

This is getting a bit off track but my point is that governments are losing sight of the social good Christianity can do and us chanting "we're subversive" and bombing abortion clinics is not helping that image. Our task is to show the world another way of being subversive, Jesus' way and not fight fire with fire.

Re: Speaking Religiously

bethany — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 21:45:07 -0000

I agree with SiarlysJenkins that it's no business of the government to differentiate "good" and "bad" religions. More importantly, you think that Christianity isn't subversive??? I beg to differ.

Re: Speaking Religiously

cawoodm — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 15:51:43 -0000

I'm not sure what you disagree with - my cry of agreement applies to the last paragraph of the post. The rest of my comment is about secular government's increasing failure to distinguish between religions which harm society and those which help it. They've descended to simplistic thinking which says that if terrorists are religious then all religion must be bad.

Most modern, benevolent states want people to be happy, healthy and peaceable tax-payers. There are religions which fit nicely into that mould and those that are subversive. I don't mean the government is infallible in deciding which religion is good but we know that the standards they generally use (pragmatic ones) would give Christians more religious freedom and credence. Of course if the state goes bad we need to take a stand.

Re: Speaking Religiously

SiarlysJenkins — Wed, 25 Feb 2009 09:37:03 -0000

I generally agree with Bethany. In particular, it is no business of government to sort out which religions are good and which are bad. That is a choice each of us make, or its between each of us and God. The government is incompetent to judge. And if you look at religion in Uganda, don't forget the Lord's Resistance Army, which is responsible for child slavery, kidnapping, brutal rapes and dismemberment, all in the name of Jesus. (I know, Jesus most likely doesn't approve, but that is one form of on-the-ground salvation Christianity in Uganda).

Marc does have a point about Agnosticism -- not that there is an organized Agnosticism struggling for supremacy, but that many in our culture have come to believe that nonestablishment of religion means nobody should talk about it in public. That is not what the First Amendment provides. It provides that the government shall not ESTABLISH any religion, nor "prohibit the free exercise thereof." Individual religious speech, in public, is specifically protected. We need to reassert that principle of law in any public discussion about the role of religion.

Re: Speaking Religiously

bethany — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 11:12:29 -0000

wow, I really disagree with you here. I think it is in the interest of our freedom to worship in spirit and in truth that the government not have any part in promoting, regulating or funding our churches. Just because you think the government might support the churches you like now doesn't keep them from turning on us if we stand up to some unjust policy.

Re: Speaking Religiously

cawoodm — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 04:46:25 -0000

Hear hear! The idea that Agnosticism is itself struggling for supremacy among religions needs desperately to be developed in public discourse.

Now, whatever happened to religious freedom within the law of the land? Our nations are becoming increasingly desensitised to the difference between good religion and bad religion - maybe it's a veil or something. Places like Uganda are discovering the on-the-ground salvation Christianity brings and America is rejecting it for the absurd, yet thinly-veiled reason, that religions can be dangerous. How ridiculous to reject good religion because of bad ones.

Re: Closed Worship

cawoodm — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 17:22:04 -0000

As far as I know MacArthur is a Calvinist so fence-riding is not an issue. You're either elect or you're not and the word "slave" is not going to sway you. But seriously, the word slave today carries connotations it did not have in the days when the Bible was written. Being a slave was not the best job in the world but it really depended on your master.

For instance, Abraham's slave, Eleazar I think he was called, would have inherited Abram's wealth had he died without an heir. Slaves were like family and worked your land as did your son's and daughters.

Re: Modesty: A short rant

cawoodm — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 05:40:38 -0000

It may not provide protection but the fact remains: a woman scantily dressed is more of a target than one wearing a ski-suit looking like the Michelin-man,...woman,...person you know what I mean.

Re: What’s your reading list for 2009?

cawoodm — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:21:36 -0000

Bible obviously. Then anything by G.K. Chesterton. More books by Catholic believers. Some more emerging church stuff. Tom Wrights commentary on Romans.

@amyb - We studied the Boer war at school and visited the famous sights. You ain't missing much my friend!

Re: Religion and the Obama Administration

cawoodm — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 08:53:34 -0000

Faith, in the broadest sense, was a necessary tool for Obama to stand a chance of being elected in the US. I think his priorities will not align much with conservative evangelical Christianity.

Obama is all about change for the betterment of people's lives. He's fairly young and hopes to really make a difference. If he succeeds in improving things it will send a message to the media-saturated, uncritical world that Bush failed because he was a conservative Christian and so now we have proof that left is good, secular with a sprinkling of faith is good etc.

Our challenge is therefore to show the world that real social betterment is most effectively achieved when Christian beliefs are put into practice regardless who puts it into practice or what faith they profess.

Re: Suffering servants: is ministry hurting your health?

cawoodm — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 05:11:56 -0000

I'm reading Heitzenrater's biography of Wesley and John was active well into his 60's in an age when 60 was about the life expectancy. He was an early riser, severely disciplined about studying and fasting yet he writes, in his 60's, of feeling fitter than he did at 29. True, he was indeed plagued by various illnesses and ailments but his general condition was energetic, gallivanting about England on horseback.

Working in youth ministry has shown me how difficult it must be to be a pastor. I can't imagine how hard it must be to know and care for so many people and still drum up a motivational and spiritual sermon each week. That must be one of the most demanding jobs there are and I'm not surprised it takes it's toll on preacher's health. But it seems even commercial jobs are more stressful than they once were and this is confirmed by the older generation. The reason evades me...