MSNBC - Violence stilled amid some progress in Fallujah: “Civic leaders in Fallujah joined U.S. officials Monday in calling for insurgents battling Marines here to surrender their heavy weapons in return for an end to the U.S. siege, a spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition said. “

So much for the quagmire and rebellion that would destroy our ability to govern Iraq. So much for having to fight house to house to kill thousands of Iraq citizens. . .

Most people in Iraq are sorry we have to be there, no one likes being governed by someone else. At the same time, they are glad we are there, since the alternatives are worse. Is that so hard for the media to understand? “Yankee go home” and “Yankee save us” are things humans can say at the same time. It is the way we are.

Dante Continued (Paradise)

Tonight I struggled with love again. What is it? How do I know when the divine love is present? The love that is divine is fruitful. It bears children. Too much of modern love practices birth control. It aborts the natural fruit of love in order to stay in the sterile “love” of the young. It never reaches the ripe maturity of the father or the mother. The breast that does not feed children may remain for a time young in appearance, but it is really withered. In the same way, our married love must grow deeper and have children, if possible. If natural children are denied to a couple by God, then spiritual children will surely follow. For the dialectic between two lovers, must lead to children in word, if not in deed. For this reason, a man or woman should never intentionally marry a mental inferior.

This is all merely an analogy for God’s love. Our love of God must grow. At times it seems to leave behind the joy of the early days of our walk with God. Though we never leave our first love in the sense of finding new loves, we do grow up. . . the early love eventually bears spiritual fruit and changes. We become not just the bride of Christ, but bear Christ spiritual children, wives if you will.

The second question that puzzles me relates to this “bearing children” in word.

There are I think two kinds of “stamping” a teacher or leader can perform. The first is very bad and the second is good. Following Plato in Republic, one must condemn the sort of “stamping” that turns the student into wax into which the teacher impresses his likeness. This reduces the student to a tool and destroys his individuality. Paul in Ephesians 1:13 (thanks Katie!) presents a second kind of “sealing.” This authenticates the work of God in a human soul. The seal is added to the man, who is the document not the wax of the seal, to give power and authenticity to the soul. The man is left a man. He does not become God. It seems to me that Dante presents this second kind of “sealing” in the Divine Comedy and not the first. We do not become “god,” nor can we. Nothing can share in the divine essence. We do become authenticated and empowered to be free by the divine seal on our lives. We are then capable (for the first time) of becoming what He calls us to be. In that sense, since men are in His image, men can become like God. We become images of God, not because he stamps us with the “hammer” of grace, but because we become most fully the selves He created us to be. This is exciting, if true.

As usual I am left with more questions than answers.

Amazon.com: Books: Aristotle’s Children: How Christians, Muslims, and Jews Rediscovered Ancient Wisdom and Illuminated the Dark Ages

This book is in the airport tradition of semi-serious books to kill three hours. Books like this one interesting because they reveal what fairly well educated Americans are likely to think about an issue. The central virtue of the book is that it makes a difficult topic fairly interesting. People will also learn that the Middle Ages was not the “dark ages” a myth too frequently bought and taught in government schools. The roots of science and scholarship in the Middle Ages are also clear.

The book is often repetitive containing whole paragraphs that read like cut-and-pastes from a different part of the book. In such a quick read, it is a bit bizarre the amount of space given to recapitulation of arguments. It is being read, which is amazing. However, this leaves the concern that this is the only view of Christian philosophy most “upper brow” people will receive.

The pervasive secularism of the book is its most annoying feature. The author recognizes that something is wrong with secularism. It has no answers to the “meaning” questions. For the author a deep critique of secularism is “fundamentalism” and somehow all fundamentalism are lumped together and known to be bad. Religion was at one time a useful stepping stool to get to where we are now and could help in areas where science and “reason” have shown limits. No one could be a Thomist today, at least not mainstream scholars, who make secular assumptions. Rubenstein is merely repeating the prejudices of his class, but hoping (unlike most of his class) to add a little religion to the mix.

This weekend found me in Dixon, California talking to an encouraging group of Christians. They get “it.” What is “it?” It is the whole soul Christianity, that the team here at Biola wants to see. If He wills, the Holy Spirit can bring us passionate hearts, guided by rigorous intellects, with the miraculous power of God. The Christians of Dixon have exceptional leadership bringing this about.

J.P. Moreland, Craig Hazen, and I formed part of the team. It is fun to be with these men!

Iraq Policy a ‘Tragedy of Errors,’ Kerry Says: “‘Our stubborn unilateral policy in Iraq has steadily drifted from tragedy to tragedy. Our troops deserve better.’”

The thought that anyone not in the Coalition could help us in Iraq is amusing. Will the French send their one aircraft carrier? Does anyone, anyone, want to see a German army in the Middle East? Can the UN pacify a mob?

John Kerry should be forced to say how we would benefit from the Swedish army in Iraq.

MSNBC - Alleged bin Laden tape offers truce to Europe nations

And we all believe him. Because bin Laden would not lie to us. And Hitler will stop at German speaking areas. And Stalin will hold elections in Poland. And. . .

FOXNews.com - Top Stories - ‘Bin Laden’ Offers Europe Truce, Revenge to Israel

This makes me proud to be an American. Evil people lump us with Israel and hate us. Good news.

At this time exactly 92 years ago, the RMS Titanic went to the bottom of the Atlantic. I am told that a few persons still survive from that horrid night when human faith in technology was forever shaken in any sensible man. We honor the brave men of the ship who died to preserve the Christian rule, “women and children first.” We honor those men and women who gave up their places on the life boats that others may live.

May their souls and those of all the faithful departed rest in peace.

Operation: Refuting Compromise

Here is a “great” idea. Ken Ham and his young earth creationist organization are going to waste thousands of dollars attacking other anti-evolutionists who view Scripture differently. Mind you they are not going after people who deny the Bible is history, but people who think:

a. Noah was real, but the flood was local.
b. Adam and Eve were persons, but lived long ago.

We are in a war for the soul of the nation. Hugh Ross is not the foe. I am not fan of old earth creationism and I like Ken Ham’s position and ministry. This is not a good move for strategic reasons and is unsound reasoning. Hugh Ross and most progressive creationists may be wrong (as I think they are on many points), but he plainly is not wrong because he wants to “compromise.” Being wrong is not evil, just wrong.

Why not have a summer refuting progressive creationists by saying that they are wrong? Leave the falsehood that they are wrong because they are compromisers alone.

Better strategy:

1. Argue for your position.
2. Say why you think the other side is wrong.
3. Attack real compromisers (and they are many) who deny that Genesis contains history.

Uncle Tony Finds

Some good response on the Uncle Tony Passion contest. (Named for the Uncle Tom of evangelicals Tony Campolo. An Uncle Tony is an evangelical who hates actual evangelicals wishing they were more like themselves.) Rules were posted yesterday. I want to keep it going. . . so keep those cards and letters coming.

Thoughtful artist Miss Weaver writes:

http://www.gracecathedral.org/enrichment/reflections/ref_20040128.shtml
http://www.gracecathedral.org/enrichment/film_review/frev_20040225.shtml

These are both from the same site, showing significantly changing views of
the Passion, but, sadly, not by the same person.
————————
Possibly the best example though:
http://www.signposts.org.au/archives/2004_03_19-why_i_dont_want_to_see_the_passion.php

“You know, I really thought I would. Why wouldn’t I want to see a movie
about the passion of christ, an incredibly important event in my belief
system? Why wouldn’t I want to see whether I could somehow use this as a
resource, a discussion starter or whatever in our gen X
congregations?[…]And all of a sudden, it just got icky. Mentions of a
three part worship series based on The Passion (the movie, not the book
version(s)), discussions about the movie as an evangelistic tool, the
encouragement of group bookings for church congregations… it is all too
much.[…]Added to the fact that I am over the whole insane emphasis on
the suffering of christ as the defining point in our christian experience,
it is all too much for me. I had to go and watch the life of brian the
other night just to clear my head.”

Nathan McClelland found some classics:

From:
http://www.beliefnet.com/boards/message_list.asp?
pageID=2&discussionID=333057&messages_per_page=16

“I believe the New Testament was written largely to teach love-and
this film is devoid of that love-instead it focuses on man’s inhumanity
in an almost unbelievable way. I distance myself from it as a member
of the Judeo-Christian community and wonder if there was a motivation
beyond riches for Gibson in the making of the film. But perhaps he
wished to revivify the Passion in a world that largely pays it
lipservice and focuses on the sacrifice, love, symbology and theology
underpinning the story. If so he does it in the cruelist and most
sadistic way.”

There is this entire page, which seems to think any portrayal of the
passion has to be rendered safe and the audience carefully educated in
order to have the correct response.

http://www.bc.edu/research/cjl/meta-elements/partners/CSG/
passion_guide.htm

But the real winner in my mind, is this page. While it doesn’t quite
meet your film review criteria, I think it is similar in many ways. So
many evangelicals wanted to use the Passion as an evangelism tool, I
find it highly ironic when some guy does exactly that and ends up
bugging these Christians.

http://paradox.typepad.com/iamparadox/2004/02/2nd_viewing.html

I took my wife Angie to see the passion tonight. It was my 2nd time to
see it and I enjoyed it much more. Why? Probably b/c there is so much
expectation and hype, you just want to see it to see what its all about
the first time. I can’ t really explain it, but I was more moved by it
this time.

Until the end. As soon as the credits start to roll, this guy 2 rows
in front of us jumps up and yells “No one move. Jesus died for yours
sins and you need to accept him now.” It was awful. We were the first
people to leave the theater. Then they tried to hand us some literature
on the way out.

Another complaint: I don’t know if I ever want to see another movie
with a theater full of christians. We felt like outsiders. Everyone
around us knew each other and were talking to each other, passing stuff
back and forth over us. It was awful.

Further down in the comments page, you’ll find this gem:

My wife and I felt the exact same way. It’s sad. Here we are with other
believers and I’m embarrassed to be with them because of the way they
act. There were the clichés, fliers, “brother and sister” speech, and
of course the all to embarrassing “So your a youth pastor…so am I…I
have 150 kids in my youth group…how many do you have??”

I just came to watch a movie man…not sit here and be all churchy and
religious…but that’s what we have taught people in America what
church is all about. Say the churchy words, etc.

I just hope as the “new leaders” within the church we can start to
change some of that…

And this:

it makes me sad that folks just can’t let a film speak for itself.
the christianese makes me sick too..
i am going on monday for my first viewing…think i could find a
theater without embarrassing folks with fish on their cars?

Kerry Statement on President’s News Conference: “‘Tonight, the President had the opportunity to tell the American people what steps he was going to take to stabilize the situation in Iraq. Unfortunately, he offered no specific plan whatsoever. Rather, the President made it clear that he intends to stubbornly cling to the same policy that has led to a greater risk to American troops and a steadily higher cost to the American taxpayer. ‘”

Kerry is “college” smart in the modern sense of “college.” (College: a place where one learns job skills and how to jump through hoops provided by persons not having job skills. Perfect training for major corporate maneuvers.) He loves procedures, plans, seconding, minuting, and being the first to raise his hand in class.

Note to Mr. Kerry: spelling out your entire plan, blow for blow, on television is bad television. That is why administrations put out policy papers for details (like the scores put out by the Bush administration or conservative think tanks). Leadership includes vision.

Why are we in Iraq? To build an aircraft carrier for freedom in the midst of the Middle East from which liberty and human rights can expand all over the region. Is that hard? Yes. A better question for Mr. Kerry is: what is your vision for the Middle East and the War on Terror? We can hire wonks to write papers and plan (see the article “Procedure Man” to the right). Vision is much harder and requires wisdom.

Big Uncle Tony contest:

Some “arts Christians” (a group often best characterized by being neither) are always bemoaning how stupid Christians are about film. We go to stupid films. We make stupid films. Stupid. Stupid. Stupid. We especially don’t go to their clever films.

Early on these folk moaned about how The Passion would be ignored by stupid Christians, because it had sub-titles, was an art film, and well made. Then everyone went.

I noticed some “arts Christians” began to hate the film. Apparently popularity condemned it. Of course, it also meant that Christians would go see difficult, even R-rated movies, that were well made and did not mock them as, well, stupid. Which meant that maybe “arts Christian” films were not as clever as they seemed. Perhaps they did badly because they were bad.

My favorite condemnation of Christians who liked the film from an Uncle Tony was this one: “They just want to see films about Jesus.”

Well, yes. Christians, real ones, do like that Jesus guy. They like seeing respectful films about Him. Weird aren’t we?

So here it is: Can anyone find proof of a person who liked the film and then hated it when it became a hit? First, email with links is the winner. This Uncle Tony winner will get a teaching tape set (featuring me) on the arts from kindly me. What a reward!

JMNR

Jason Tressor has already been the first to spot our “Uncle Tony Evangelical Self-Loathing” winner.

(This is named after Tony Campolo, the Step-n-Fetch-It of the evangelical left who is always admitting we were wrong about something.)

Tressor writes:

http://entertainment.msn.com/movies/movie.aspx?mp=r&m=547803

If you scroll down to the bottom of the page you find this review by an “Openminded Christian”. I find it amusing that he thinks this movie will be “eye
opening” and “thought provoking”.

Stop Being Haters!
A review of Saved!
posted 3/17/2004
by Openminded Christian

I haven’t seen this movie yet, but I am so excited to
see it. As a Christian who is currently studying for
the ministry, I think seeing how the world looks at
Christianity will be very interesting. I see hypocrisy
everywhere, and don’t blame people who aren’t
Christians for viewing Christianity negatively. Its
people who are so narrow-minded (like some of the
characters in this movie appear to be) that give
Christianity a bad name. These are the poeple who feel
so threatened by a movie like this one that they feel
the need to start bashing it already. Keep in mind
these are the same people who commended Mandy Moore
for making “A Walk to Remember.” I find this
incredibly sad. I encourage everyone to see this movie
as I believe it will be eye opening and thought
provoking, especially for Christians to reevaluate
their faith. Not to mention it looks absolutely
hillarious.

Reynolds comments:

Yes, Jason. Mr. OpenMinded has really caught a cultural problem. People just aren’t calling Christians hypocrites nearly enough. Some of those Christians have been getting uppity of late, what with Mel Gibson and all.

Don’t give up folks! There is ever more review searching to be done! Who will win our second “Uncle Tony”?

Jason Tressor has already been the first to spot our “Uncle Tony Evangelical Self-Loathing” winner.

(This is named after Tony Campolo, the Step-n-Fetch-It of the evangelical left who is always admitting we were wrong about something.)

Tressor writes:

http://entertainment.msn.com/movies/movie.aspx?mp=r&m=547803

If you scroll down to the bottom of the page you find this review by an “Openminded Christian”. I find it amusing that he thinks this movie will be “eye
opening” and “thought provoking”.

Stop Being Haters!
A review of Saved!
posted 3/17/2004
by Openminded Christian

I haven’t seen this movie yet, but I am so excited to
see it. As a Christian who is currently studying for
the ministry, I think seeing how the world looks at
Christianity will be very interesting. I see hypocrisy
everywhere, and don’t blame people who aren’t
Christians for viewing Christianity negatively. Its
people who are so narrow-minded (like some of the
characters in this movie appear to be) that give
Christianity a bad name. These are the poeple who feel
so threatened by a movie like this one that they feel
the need to start bashing it already. Keep in mind
these are the same people who commended Mandy Moore
for making “A Walk to Remember.” I find this
incredibly sad. I encourage everyone to see this movie
as I believe it will be eye opening and thought
provoking, especially for Christians to reevaluate
their faith. Not to mention it looks absolutely
hillarious.

Reynods comments:

Yes, Jason. Mr. OpenMinded has really caught a cultural problem. People just aren’t calling Christians hypocrites nearly enough. Some of those Christians have been getting uppity of late, what with Mel Gibson and all.

Don’t give up folks! There is ever more review searching to be done! Who will win our second “Uncle Tony”?

Saved!

Hollywood’s idea of your faith. Wait! I get it. I know there are hypocrites in the church. I know every generation of evangelical young people think hard truths need to be said. . . but, well, aren’t they said an awful lot? Imagine a movie with the opposite plot. . .boorish secularists getting saved. There would be a new idea. Imagine it made by Hollywood. Forget it. There is no market for conservative Christian films. And the market for this film is? (My guess: Christian school burn outs combined with arty Christian college burn outs and evangelical hating web types. All together: about 100,000 people. However, the burn outs will have to borrow/steal the money from Mom and Dad as the 7/11 job will not give them the cash for a ticket.)

Special prize for the first email I get with a link to a Christian review that says, “But wait, this movie is not anti-Christian. In fact, it affirms spirituality in its wickedly clever send up of the hypocrisy. . .blah, blah, blah.”