home | archives: June 2006

Welcome

FaithFusion offers blogs and columns on many topics: storytelling, society and culture, philosophy, religion, politics, science, and especially “deep doctrine magic” about all seven.
 

Features
 



Tags
 

Archives
 



 

Search
 



Updates



Follow me on Twitter
 



Recently read:
Nonfiction
 


Recently read:
Fiction
 



Weapon wielding

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 09:05 PM ET , Thursday, Jun 29, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Deep Doctrine Magic: Life Applications, Media: Books



From page 150 of John Piper's now-classic Desiring God — chapter 5, Scripture: Kindling for Christian Hedonism:

Satan's number-one objective is to destroy our joy of faith. We have one offensive weapon: the sword of the Spirit, the Word of God (Ephesians 6:17). But what many Christians fail to realize is that we can't draw the sword from someone else's scabbard. If we don't wear it, we can't wield it.



'Verisimilitude'

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 06:47 AM ET , Tuesday, Jun 27, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Media: Music, Film and DVD

Superman Returns Recommended
Superman Returns
by John Ottman, Damon Intrabartolo


/verrisimillityood/

• noun the appearance of being true or real.

— ORIGIN Latin verisimilitudo, from verisimilis ‘probable’.

-- The Oxford English Dictionary


The term was used multiple times during the filming of Superman: The Movie in the late 70s by director Richard Donner and others — they spoke in the DVD commentaries about seeking to create the most realistic, disbelief-suspending story they could.

Along with Superman himself, I believe my disbelief will be soaring off the ground, not only during my soon viewing of Superman Returns, but in listening to the soundtrack. While emulating the classic score by John Williams, its style is still original — fresh, yet somehow familiar.

Soundtrack.net has clips, allowing me to know the score's nature in advance. But already, because of hearing the music reprised in the film trailers, I suspected the music would be — super, of course.

Release date is today.



Don't advertise if you're not in the market

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 05:58 PM ET , Sunday, Jun 25, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Deep Doctrine Magic: Life Applications, Local News



Frequent reader Mother Music offers this in regard to female modesty on her blog site, in response to an ongoing NarniaWeb discussion about Boy Meets Girl:

The controversy on the thread centered around whether or not women invite sexual advances by their mode of dress.

I think it might be edifying to have a different picture in our minds while discussing this, since the topic of what is appropriate dress is so volatile. As Dr. R[ansom] uses his analogy/metaphor of buying and driving automobiles at ridiculously young ages, allow me, if you will, to use the analogy of an unrelated object as well.

Let's use tools. Guys want tools, and guys want women. Nothing wrong with that. It's hardwired. If a woman owns a tool and wants to keep it, she doesn't leave it laying around. And ESPECIALLY if it's a particularly wonderful electronic, noisy, power tool. Leave it in the driveway, and you can wave goodbye to it. If you carry it in the bed of your pick-up, laying out there exposed to the world, some unsavoury fellow is going to find it irresistible and attempt to walk off with it.

Nope. If you want to keep your tools for your own use, then you lock them up in tool boxes. This has several advantages: It keeps your tools in one place, where you can find them. It protects them from weather. And it allows you to use them instead of some criminal who walks by.

There's no guilt in locking them up. It's SMART. It keeps them under your own control, where they can be used as you see fit. Neither does it absolve the criminal who steals the tool of guilt and wrong doing. However, if you leave your tools laying out in plain sight, then anyone would say you were foolish to do so, and you yourself have some culpability in the crime.

Do you see how this applies?

If you feel you MUST wear “sexy” clothing, then you MUST be willing to take the risk that there is an undisciplined person out there looking for sex. IF you are a Christian, and believe that, as Jesus said, the second greatest commandment is to love your neighbor as yourself, then you MUST further choose to dress in such a way as not to tempt your neighbor deliberately, whoever they are.

It seems we need more females who can encourage younger women to dress modestly — for the right reasons!

I wonder how much I as a guy can say to someone — particularly a very younger someone — who isn't dressed appropriately.

For example, the other day in a bookstore, a preteen girl came in with (I assume) her grandparents, to look at youth fiction novels. While showing them there, I noted with subconscious satisfaction that she was dressed most appropriately — and yet her tshirt contained this scintilliating slogan:

Do you want to be my boyfriend?

1. Yes
2. No
3. Maybe

“Well!” I told her and her guardians, after showing her Frank Peretti's The Door in the Dragon's Throat. “Are you looking for anything else? Perhaps a boyfriend, as your shirt says? I think today we're out of stock.”

She smiled and laughed nervously, her grandparents laughing much louder.

“How old are you?” I asked the girl.

“Eleven,” was her response.

“You ready to get married?”

Embarrassed shock registered on her face — I love causing those. With another nervous giggle, she replied, “No.”

“Then why act like you're asking for one?” I asked. “You wouldn't test-drive a car before you're 16, would you?”

“Her dad hates that shirt,” the female guardian offered.

“And I think your dad's right,” I told her. “No purpose at all with boyfriends if marriage is so far away.”

Too much said? Too little? Perhaps just right, especially for that age level — and for a young lady accompanied by good-humored adults who seemed to agree. Though I could have only known that for sure in retrospect, at that point it seems a light “correction” by an older guy might help offset the filth the propagandists will be smothering onto her later. ...




The end of an epic

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 04:19 PM ET , Sunday, Jun 25, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Media: Books, Science: Genesis, Deep Doctrine Magic: Christian Novels



At last, I have read the third installment of the not-yet-widely-known Cradleland Chronicles by Douglas Hirt, Fall of the Nephilim, despite my best efforts to stretch my time spent over the space of five days, since my special order arrived on Tuesday.

As with the previous two volumes, I was gripped, and still awed and inspired by the amount of (un-bragged-about!) research and informed conjecture put into this three-installment epic.

As one well-versed in Biblical creation-based science theory, even the novels’ “minor” elements like the Earth’s magnetic field deterioration and the meanings of crop circles are tremendous fun to find.

As one who very much enjoys great storytelling, the impact of the characters and circumstances will last a lifetime. And toward the end of Fall, I did not even need to try to grieve, my disbelief fully suspended, over the loss of the antediluvian world and the way it could have been. Instead, those reactions came naturally to me. And again, the account of Noah in Genesis 6 – 9 loses its air of first-grade Sunday-school “flannelboard fiction” and takes added dimension, becoming all the more Real.

Would that more readers have discovered this world, its characters, its cultures and technologies! And yet, alas, I’m forced to feel giddy seemingly all by myself, as would someone who’s discovered an obscure but brilliant musical group.

I’m telling others about the trilogy. Perhaps Leenah’s long-lost story can indeed be found and spread to the world.

Thanks to Douglas Hirt for writing this like they would never make it a movie. A Christ-following reader’s imagination provides film enough for this wonderful story.



Mr. Incredible vanquishes the syndrome of 'dork dad' stereotypes

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 08:14 PM ET , Tuesday, Jun 20, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Columns, Media: Film and DVD, Deep Doctrine Magic

The Incredibles Recommended
The Incredibles
Craig T. Nelson (Voice), Holly Hunter (Voice)


(Originally written for print publication Dec. 5, 2004.)

Once upon a time, TV dads were stereotypical, but in sort of a good way. Andy Taylor, Ward Cleaver and even Mike Brady were near-perfect fathers. They went to work mostly off camera, they taught their kids about values during the show’s running time, and rarely did anything remotely ridiculous or denigrating.

Evidently when feminism got more popular, that characterization shifted just a little — then went clear to the opposite extreme. Suddenly in popular culture, it was Mom who knew everything and did most of the moral value-teaching at home. Whereas media dads became total idiots. Or, just not there.

Show of hands: who remembers The Berenstein Bears? Lots of you — I thought so! And who was the foil of that vast empire of illustrated children’s books? Why, good old Paper Bear. His head looked pretty much like the rest of the Bear Family, but with considerably less brain capacity.

Paper Bear stuffed his face with junk food right along with the kids; Mama Bear had to teach them all the virtues of healthy consumption. When Paper Bear and the kids had a bad addiction to TV; Mama Bear had to teach them how to exercise instead. And when Brother and Sister Bear got into a fight one rainy afternoon, Papa Bear just joined right in and screamed uselessly; Mama Bear had to shut them all up.

Moral of the stories: Papa Bear, stone-cold idiot; Mama Bear, constantly wise, all-knowing mentor.

What a great message to both Mama and Papa non-bears nationwide: Mom, you’re supposed to be smart and perfect, all the time. Dad, you’re a loser; let’s all laugh at you.

The same thing repeated itself in sitcoms throughout the ‘90s, but better media dads are slowly making a comeback.

I would count Cliff Huxtable as one of the first. He was a great dad, but the writers frequently allowed him to be lectured by his wife, mostly about his frequent eating of hoagies and other salt-intensive goodies. Rarely would he ever lecture her about anything and be right. Sure, it was funny, but a little clichéd — and slightly demeaning to fathers.

More recently, family movies have strangely come back way ahead of family TV shows, and Pixar has been at the forefront.

But Toy Story and its sequel sort of fell into the “dork dad” trap anyway: you never saw the father of Andy — Woody’s and Buzz’s owner — or got a hint that Andy once had a father. The only dads you did see were poor role models, like Sid’s dad crashed on the couch in front of the TV — or Buzz Lightyear’s dad, the Evil Emperor Zurg. Also Mr. Potato Head adopted three little green squeeze-toy Pizza Planet aliens.

Later, in Monsters Inc. and especially Finding Nemo, the nation’s good fathers at last had their movies. Sully was a caring but powerful father figure, anyway; and Marlin the clown fish was nervous and had to learn to take risks, but loved and rescued his son Nemo.

But this year Bob Parr beats them all, not only because he’s really the retired superhero-turned insurance-claims-adjuster Mr. Incredible, who has to accept a secret assignment to save the world once again, but because Mr. Incredible is anyone’s idea of an ultimate dad.

First off, he can bench-press freight engines. But in and out of the super-suit, he loves helping people, either a little old lady in his office cubicle or citizens in a burning building.

He loves his children and cares about their lives and dreams — and while he wants his children to use their natural superpowered talents, his wife Helen opposes him, and it turns out she’s the one who needs to learn from him.

When have you seen that in a movie before?

And Bob loves Helen (who’s also retired superhero Elastigirl), and they model one of the best husband-wife relationships we’ve seen in movies in a long time, animated or otherwise.

A Cosby writer — or one of those hacks writing for the 8 Simple Rules show or whatever — would be tempted to have this guy fall all over a woman not his wife. But when Mr. Incredible is hanging out with another woman on top-secret assignment, he never shows the slightest interest in her. Later, Bob reassures Helen nothing was going on. “How could I betray the perfect woman?” he asks her gently.

Unlike Claire Huxtable, Helen Parr never lectures Bob about his overeating. Instead, to fit into his old super-suit, Bob works out all on his own, without diets or supplements, and slims himself down voluntarily — now how often do we see that?

Incredibles writer/director Brad Bird did have some fun with the whole “husband's midlife crisis” thing. But having superpowers lets Mr. Incredible get over it more easily, along with top-secret jobs that result in more time to spend with the children and enough money to buy a new sports car.

But what’s more important, property or family, when the supervillain kidnaps baby Jack-Jack and is rocketing up over the Parrs’ home? Again, a stereotyped Dork Media Father would spend a second or more whining about what to do. Not here. Mr. Incredible grabs the first thing he can find to hurl at the kidnapper — that fine new sports car!

And of course, Mr. Incredible did have to learn something: he had to work with others in his family to save the world. But all of the family members learned a lesson of some kind, not just dweeby dad who exists only to laugh at.

Maybe your dad was a real jerk. Or maybe he just wasn’t there. And there are too many of those types of fathers in the world.

But maybe with the guys — and fathers — at Pixar, doing a little to regain the profession of fatherhood, all the nation’s wonderful dads can regain their honor and get rid of the true idiot in media: stupid stereotypes, for fathers and anyone else.

Next step: I recommend that the Promise Keepers organization, which exists to strengthen the character and leadership of men and fathers, adopt Mr. Incredible as their spokesman.

“Mr. Incredible is not real!” you may shout. Fine, that’s your opinion, but like in all good movies the character certainly seemed real enough to me.



Dash it all ...

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 08:44 AM ET , Tuesday, Jun 20, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Media



If I followed comic books at all, this would sound like a very interesting storyline. If AFP, in this story from last week, followed comic books at all, they would know that Spider-Man is hyphenated.

For a comic book hero, it's the ultimate taboo.

In the latest edition of the Marvel comic “Civil War” on sale, Spiderman does the unthinkable and removes his Spidey mask to publicly reveal his hidden identity.

“I'm proud of who I am, and I'm here right now to prove it,” the legendary webslinger tells a press conference called in New York's Times Square, before pulling off his mask and standing before the massed ranks of reporters as newspaper photographer Peter Parker.

“Any questions?” Parker asks in the final panel of the issue, amid a barrage of camera flashes.



Concert speeds past God-given creativity

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 10:29 PM ET , Friday, Jun 16, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Columns, Media: Music, Film and DVD, Deep Doctrine Magic: Subculture Shop



(Originally written for print publication April 20, 2005)

“They have taken the bridge and the second hall. We have barred the gates but cannot hold them for long. The ground shakes. Drums — drums in the deep. We cannot get out. … We cannot get out. They are coming.”

— Gandalf the Gray, from The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring

Yes, it’s that time of year again. The Ichthusians are back, and they’re heading out to the developed field roughly five minutes from my house, in order to yell and make some noise for the rest of an otherwise peaceful weekend.

Ichthus is a Christian rock concert that Asbury College helped start up back in the ‘70s. Its participants come here every spring and set up their huge white tents, just like tree-dwelling bagworms, for a few days of excitement, Christian ministry, celebrity bands, and often bountiful rain and mud and sometimes funnel clouds.

Last year I complained about the Ichthusians in print, mostly because of the noise. Also I’m not the Earth’s greatest “Third Day” fan. But whether I like any of the noise or not (hint: not), there it is anyway, sometimes at 10 p.m., thudding through the walls of the house, quite audible even while I have my own music (National Treasure soundtrack) on the CD player with headphones.

Then there’s the traffic clogging Harrodsburg Road that forces me to make detours down smaller country lanes, perhaps while passing mailboxes that have been dented in by baseball bats. Yes, I’m quite certain rogue Ichthusians did that one year, because not all of them are Christians. Even the Christians sin sometimes — seems there’s a bumper sticker about that.

Also, the police always set up those little mechanical boxes along the main road that monitor your speed and flash it at you; otherwise the boxes do nothing, and I’ve been tempted to speed past one of them just to see if a swarm of tiny mechanical hovercraft cops will fly out of a trap door and give chase.

But seriously, this time, I’d like to go a little deeper into this aspect of the Christian subculture — just as last year I suggested Christian music could go deeper into Biblical truths.

I get irritated by the Ichthusian style not just because of the noise, but because these talented musicians are very likely selling their true abilities short, in order to pattern off secular musical styles.

Unfortunately, if you’ve ever gone into a Christian bookstore or picked up a catalog you’ll see a lot of this problem there, too: books, gifts and t-shirts that simply play off of “secular” trends or products. Some of the catalogs are quite unashamed about it. “For fans of Destiny’s Child,” or some such band, accompanies the description for a new CD. Or, “For fans of John Grisham” and “For fans of Stephen King” on novels — reminiscent of the labels on generic products at Winn-Dixie: “If you like ‘Captain Crunch,’ try me!”

Christianity’s favorite quasi-children’s crossover media craze, VeggieTales, has especially fallen into this trap.

For years since the 3D-animated Biblical principle-teaching vegetables hit video stands, the guys at the Chicago-based Big Idea Productions seem only to be getting their big ideas from movies, books and TV shows they like. Along with the usual Bible-story-adaptations-with-a-modern-twist approach, they’ve stolen stuff from Gilligan’s Island, Star Trek, Disney, Batman, i>Bonanza, Rocky, Dr. Seuss, The Three Stooges and so on, and their future videos promise more loads of really original fun by stealing stuff from Indiana Jones and Lord of the Rings.

(Only they call stealing stuff a “tribute.” That’s how you get away with stealing other people’s ideas, in books, movies or cartoons: you call it a “tribute.”)

I realize I’m sounding quite elitist. Almost everything in music or media has been partially inspired by something else. It all depends on how much you either hide your creative sources or add original stuff.

But the whole Christian rock festival idea, stolen directly from Woodstock, and a whole lot of Christian products and media that just steal from other slogans and shows, only serve to make secular observers sneer.

I should know better: the secularists are probably going to sneer no matter what. But while they’re sneering at Christian beliefs, they might as well be buying up Christ-honoring stuff left and right because it’s awesome and original — like works by the very Christian C.S. Lewis or J.R.R. Tolkien, who defied the popular conventions and realism-based literature of their time by writing something very new: fantasy.

The person of faith who believes Christ influences everything in his or her life will naturally want to glorify God fully in every creative expression, be it music, drama, art or writing. Ripping off of others’ work, especially “secular” products, is not only artistic cheating, but it’s selling yourself short — and on a spiritual level, it’s not exactly doing your best work for God, pointing others toward Him and His truths.

Ehh … more power to the Ichthusians, though. As I’ve written about before, I in no way expect my own definition of Perfection. Although God often prefers to speak in that “still, small voice,” I know He will sometimes use anything to communicate with people, even horrendous noise expelled through amplifiers the size of small Caribbean resorts.

But next week you’ll have to use one of those amplifiers to communicate to me, because I plan on losing my hearing over the weekend. Perhaps that can qualify as an excused absence — these final projects will be the death of me, if the Ichthusians and their cars don’t kill me on their highway first.



Show of hands

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 09:21 PM ET , Wednesday, Jun 14, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Deep Doctrine Magic, Local News



My recent signature image on NarniaWeb, now replaced with a newer one.



Surprised by Lewis's joyful Christianity?

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 09:11 AM ET , Wednesday, Jun 14, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Deep Doctrine Magic: Cross Firings, Media: "Narnia: AWAKE"

The Chronicles of Narnia Recommended
The Chronicles of Narnia
by C.S. Lewis, Pauline Baynes


More from the ongoing NarniaWeb discussion “Narnia and Christianity? Huh?” started by a new member who seems to oppose Christ-honoring fantasy literature altogether.

This next from Coracle, NarniaWeb moddess who repeats her previous points about Lewis advocating a faith of joy, wonder, and dare I say “magic”:

You said that you don't support C.S.Lewis's Narnia books because they use Magic, which we have already explained as Lewis's fairytale version of miracles, written in the fairytale genre to help bring children into the truth and joy of knowing Jesus Christ as their Saviour, Lord and friend. Christianity is a faith of joy, excitement and wonder,.... not of rules, forbidding, and antique language. Even in 1940, children needed to know that it was relevant to their lives.

You have levelled some strong accusations such as saying that Aslan was an evil, satanic character because he did “magic”.
This is ironically similar to the way some people treated Jesus in the gospels.

Can you suggest how children might be attracted to find Jesus in churches full of old grey carvings, cold hard benches, 19th century music, hushes voices, someone insisting that they must love and respect God, and lots of (man-made) rules that ban their having any fun? Lewis said it was as if a couple of dragons were guarding the entrance to heaven and Christian faith, and he wanted to help children sneak past those “watchful dragons”.

May God bring joy, light, and wonder to all who need to get past them. May the love, truth and freedom in Christ be ours, as we grow in His grace and the indwelling Holy Spirit.



You're so vain

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 06:57 PM ET , Monday, Jun 12, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Deep Doctrine Magic: Cross Firings, Local News



If someone has the inclination to call a Christian bookstore and break the Third Commandment live on the phone line, don't be surprised if The Great Sarcastro fails to stay silent:

PHONE CUSTOMER: So you don't have the book.

MYSELF: We don't have it, sorry.

PHONE CUSTOMER: Well, Jesus Christ.

MYSELF (beat): Is the book you're looking for about Him?



Sarcastro (from The Tick)



Does 'Narnia' endorse un-Biblical witchcraft?

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 03:13 PM ET , Sunday, Jun 11, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Columns, Media: "Narnia: AWAKE", Deep Doctrine Magic: Cross Firings, Life Applications

The Chronicles of Narnia Recommended
The Chronicles of Narnia
by C.S. Lewis, Pauline Baynes


A new member on the NarniaWeb discussion forum has some objections to finding Christian symbolism in the famous Chronicles.

I am sorry, but I don't see anything Christian about Narnia. A lot of people say that their is an allegory in Narnia, when Aslan gives his life to save Edmund. I'm a Christian, and I love seeing Christian references in movies, but how in the world are you supposed to represent Christ with a wizard? The bible says that wizards are evil, and I'm 100% sure you can't make an allegory when it praises something evil.
Personally, I enjoy the movie, but I can't sugar coat it and call it Christian.


Here is my response, adding to the several great rebuttals already written by other members:

Interestingly, one's perspective on this issue is directly rooted in how one views the nature of God and His role in creativity that honors Him — or otherwise.

Is God sovereign over everything? Or are certain things invariably “secular,” over which He has little to do?

Christ-following authors, such as Lewis and Tolkien, have created parallel worlds based on supposals, not allegory. Lewis himself only sought to create a story at first, based on images in his mind since his youth. Then, “Aslan came bounding in,” as the famous quote goes, and he began to wonder, If there was a world like that, how might God interact with it?

Would you have preferred Lewis to write a story that does not involve God to any capacity — such as a fairytale akin to Cinderella or Peter Pan, in which God never even makes a cameo appearance? Or might it be better to honor the Creator in even fantasy stories such as Narnia or Lord of the Rings as preeminently involved in these imaginary aspects of His creation? even though it is only a story?



As for magic, as [NarniaWeb member] The Black Glove said, you may want to familiarize yourself with the rest of the Chronicles. It is easy to confuse the “magic” of Narnia and Lord of the Rings with the mysticism derivative from New Age and Wicca-like belief systems and such. Many articles on the internet and in Christ-honoring periodicals outline the profound differences.

“Magic” in Narnia is not a general force that can be harnessed by its practitioners for any purpose. It is power to work certain acts, controlled only by Aslan, and made accessible in certain “cheaper” forms to some of Narnia's creatures. Villains, such as the White Witch, also practice perversions of this power — just as Satan is able to work “signs and wonders” through his allies, human and otherwise.

“Magic” in Narnia is akin to our real-life laws: gravity, energy, movement. It has nothing to do with our Earthen prohibitions against consulting demons or the occult.



Again, I strongly suggest you consider the rest of the Chronicles before rendering this judgment of them as upholding evil in some form.

Also, perhaps you may wish to re-evaluate your regard of the Devil as being this powerful. Though he is indeed the most dangerous force on Earth, and a highly intelligent trickster of humanity, he is not so mystically powerful. Seen through Heaven's eyes, he is pathetically predictable.

If your assertions, however, are true about this series weakening Christendom's mandated avoidance of the Devil's influence, you would see dozens, perhaps hundreds of Christians familiar with Lewis and the Chronicles driven to study witchcraft, soothsaying and the like.

Can you produce an example?

Likely not.

Instead, these readers, myself among them, are frequently driven toward further love for their Creator/Savior, and often even deeper understand of his attributes. The spiritual fruit of Lewis's subcreations is sweet.



Game over?

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 07:00 AM ET , Thursday, Jun 08, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Deep Doctrine Magic: Cross Firings, Subculture Shop, Media: Books

Left Behind: A Novel of the Earth's Last Days (Left Behind No. 1) Recommended
Left Behind: A Novel of the Earth's Last Days (Left Behind No. 1)
by Tim F. LaHaye, Jerry B. Jenkins


This is most interesting: the Thinklings, a blog similar to FaithFusion (though clearly they got here first) has some observations about the most recent — argh — Left Behind-themed video game.

This is beyond kids figuring out how to get all the animals onto Noah’s Ark before time runs out or dodging the whip-wielding Egyptians to get, Frogger-like, across the Red Sea. It’s even, I would venture to say, different than playing as an angel battling a demon (although the theology in such a scenario could be just as tenuous).
This is a video game about the second coming and the great tribulation. I’m an “entertainment guy” and that still strikes me as . . . well, inappropriate is the word, I guess. Disrespectful, maybe.

But it’s to be expected from a church culture that brought the Left Behind phenomena forth in the first place. When speculative fiction became an endless supply of endlessly derivative ancillary products — so that you might commemorate the upcoming rise of the antichrist and the eternal damnation of all unbelievers with a handsome Rayford Steele coffee mug and snuggly Left Behind afghan — our consumerist zeal washed over our Spiritual foundation.


I am slightly divided on this issue. This perspective sounds to me to be slightly akin to “Lexus Christianity” — that is, considering the faith so precious and so sacred that you will never ever let it out of the garage and actually drive it around in the real world to mud-intensive locations.

The Second Coming will be a messy event (if you believe in that eschatological perspective) and the events leading up to it (if you believe in that eschatological perspective) are certainly video game-esque.

Similarly, one could easily — and accurately — assemble a “first-person shooter” video game based on the exploits of the ancient Judges in Israel. Your mission is to kill as many Moabites / Assyrians / Hittites / whatevers as possible, for it is God's command. And recall that yes, it was God's command, for the Creator described in Scriptures is a God of Love but also necessarily of Justice.

If Christians adopt a “hands-off policy” to media such as video games because our stuff is just too sacred, the secular world will be more than happy to fill in with its own perversions. And then Christian game-players will be only further drawn, perhaps subconsciously, into the false dichotomy between “faith” and “real world.”



‘The Rapture’ has only a little take- away value

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 09:46 AM ET , Wednesday, Jun 07, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Columns, Media: Books, Deep Doctrine Magic: Biblical Theology, Christian Novels



With one lunch break, a spare evening and some more free time the next morning, one can easily finish the most recent Left Behind book. Like the previous 14 in the series, including two prequels, it’s rather thick and hardback and all very impressive until one considers that because of the huge text and ample margins inside, this must be the Large Print Version.

No, readers, it’s for civilians like you — the third in the prequel series by Biblical prophecy wonk Tim LaHaye and scene scribbler Jerry Jenkins.

My first admission here is that I’ve followed these men since their first novel. I read Left Behind in 1997, two years after its release, and quickly obtained the sequels, and then settled in for what turned out to be seven years of my own tribulation, awaiting each new release.

Now, one college degree and several jobs later, I’m actually on the other side of the Christian bookstore counter, retailing the newest book, actually handling it in advance of the Street Date, and otherwise seeming extremely cool and awesome if only were the year-2000 version of myself to suddenly materialize into the nearby Vacation Bible School section.

Only when I have actually gained this selling superpower do I find it no longer impresses me. For several years ago, starting at about Desecration, my interest in the series began to fade — as it evidently did for other readers. With the year 2000 past, I suppose the collective enthusiasm for prophecy began to wane slightly. But I was also growing past the rather shallow writing style of the stories. Soon, not only did I enjoy moving on to more-complex fiction (both reading and writing it), but I had also fairly well decided that concentrating so hard on a specific interpretation of Biblical prophecy was unnecessary.

Heresy? No. I believe I am still a pre-millennialist. It’s simply that I now re-realize Hell alone is scary enough to be a warning for people, not merely forecasted events on Earth.

We must warn people of what is to come! some will say. All right, then, warn them of Hell — it’s spelled out much more clearly in Scripture.

God is going to judge the world soon! goes the contention. Very well, I believe that, too — but then comes Hell, much more frightening and torturous than anything the Antichrist could come up with.

And yet, despite my current reluctance to take the pre-millennial or pre-Tribulation view as absolute Gospel, one can certainly enjoy the Left Behind series as a supposal. What if that view is true? What if end-times events really followed this course? if the Rapture happens before the Tribulation and an Antichrist named Nicolae Carpathia engineers a takeover of Romania and then the globe altogether?

With that in mind, even atheists can enjoy the Left Behind story — and many of them have, the authors have found.

The series is gripping, and unlike certain other religious-seeming novels (e.g. Da Vinci Code) which get all manner of credit for being so suspenseful and engaging, the Left Behind series actually fulfilled those adjectives. Despite trouble spots and horrible villains who grew increasingly comical in later installments, its characters and action generally held together.

However, it’s one thing to portray the events of the End Times from an Earthen perspective. Christ-followers, real and feigned, have been skilled at this for years. Our best and brightest (and otherwise) own the apocalyptic fiction genre.

But what might it be like to portray an event like the Rapture as it happens, from the perspective of one actually going up? And what might the splendors of Heaven truly be like?

Surprisingly I found, that in this latest episode, The Rapture, in 33 chapters, 345 pages (not including LaHaye’s eschatology crash-course appendix), and multiple perspectives from remnant characters either in Heaven or on Earth: LaHaye and Jenkins utterly fail to answer this question.

Who can answer it? one might say. Very apt! — for the Apostle Paul tells us in 2 Corinthians 2:9 that we might as well give up on trying to figure out our Father’s home.

However, a highly skilled writer, with more time on his hands and a wilder, more fantastic imagination, might have been more effective at presenting the joys of the Celestial. The prolific Jenkins is a good writer, but not that highly skilled — and yet who could honestly blame him either for shortfailings, after he’s been slogging through this series for more than a decade now.

Continued ...



The Young and the 'Godless'

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 10:58 PM ET , Tuesday, Jun 06, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Columns, Media: Books, Politics: The Left Wing, Get A-CLU!

Godless: The Church of Liberalism Recommended
Godless: The Church of Liberalism
by Ann Coulter


It's 06.06.2006, and only the naive, and those unfamiliar with who originated the calendar system — it wasn't directly God, or the Devil — will think that actually means anything.

For the record, I've felt no unusual hauntings, unease or troubling of spirit from Beelzebub recently — no more than usual, anyway.

Two books released today, both highly anticipated by their audiences, and both by prolific conservative authors.

The first is The Rapture, the fifteenth installment in the almost-finally-gone Left Behind series, and also the third prequel in the series, by the seemingly ubiquitous Jerry B. Jenkins (who actually writes the material) and Tim LaHaye.

The second is the nonfiction Godless by conservative pundit Ann Coulter, who is quite visible on the front, looking much more alluring than does, for example, Joyce Meyer on the cover of her books, yet somehow giving the impression that the volume's topic is physical fitness (and low-edging necklines) instead of its given subtitle: The Church of Liberalism.

I hope to have a review forthcoming, as soon as I complete it. But for now, how about a glance at its first chapter?

1 ON THE SEVENTH DAY, GOD RESTED AND LIBERAL SCHEMED
They exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creation rather than the Creator. . . . Therefore, God gave them up to passions of dishonor; for their females exchanged the natural use for that which is contrary to nature.

--Romans 1:25-26
Liberals love to boast that they are not “religious,” which is what what one would expect to hear from the state-sanctioned religion. Of course liberalism is a religion. It has its own cosmology, its own miracles, its own beliefs in the supernatural, its own churches, its own high priests, its own saints, its own total worldview, and its own explanation of the existence of the universe. In other words, liberalism contains all the attributes of what is generally known as “religion.”

Under the guise of not favoring religion, liberals favor one cosmology over another and demand total indoctrination into theirs. The state religion of liberalism demands obeisance (to the National Organization for Women), tithing (to teachers' unions), reverence (for abortion), and formulaic imprecations (“Bush lied, kids died!” “Keep your laws off my body!” “Arms for hostages!”) Everyone is taxed to support indoctrination into the state religion through the public schools, where innocent children are taught a specific belief system, rather than, say, math.

Liberal doctrines are less scientifically provable than the story of Noah's ark, but their belief system is taught as fact in government schools, while the Biblical belief system is banned from government schools by law. As a matter of faith, liberals believe: Darwinism is a fact, people are born gay, child-molesters can be rehabilitated, recycling is a virtue, and chastity is not. If people are born gay, why hasn't Darwinism [sic; Darwinian evolution?] weeded out people who don't reproduce? (For that, we need of theory of survival of the most fabulous.) And if gays can't change, why do liberals think child-molesters can? Pedophilia is a sexual preference. If they're born that way, instead of rehabilitation, how about keeping them locked up? Why must children be taught that recyling is the only answer? Why aren't we teaching children “safe littering”?

Ouch.

And that's just the first page of material.

No opening introduction, dedication to editors and consultants and friends; nothing. (Only a two-word dedication: For George. She gets into it quickly.)

Might I again repeat this from my July 15, 2003, by-radio conversation with the author?

Dr. Ransom: [...] I found the ending chapter of Treason especially interesting, in which you finally got to explaining why elected Liberals defended America’s enemies. In your words, it’s because conservatives believe in God, generally, and Liberals are generally humanists who believe they are god. ...

Ann Coulter: Right …

Dr. Ransom: … They don’t believe in objective moral standards. I fully agree, and, could you elaborate on that last chapter a little bit more? To me, that sounds like a great subject for your next book.

Ann Coulter: Yes, I’ve actually sort of thought of that [...]



Josh Harris: Taking the New Attitude Back To Reality

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 07:54 AM ET , Tuesday, Jun 06, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Columns, Deep Doctrine Magic: Biblical Theology, Evangelism, Life Applications, New Attitude



On the last morning, May 30, of the New Attitude 2006 singles conference in Louisville, Ky., author and pastor Josh Harris took to the podium for his second message, and laughed at himself.

We need two podiums, he said — one for a short guy like me. A young woman from our church named Janelle recently told me, “‘You are so tiny but God is so big!’” and He’s using you anyway. Harris kept going, to continual laughter: “‘You’re like David, you’re small in stature, but you’re among giants!’”

And by this point, I’m cracking up while listening to her, Harris said. “This is killing me, because I had no idea there were so many synonyms for short. A little shrimpy man for Jesus!”

With that, the shrimpy man announced the formation of New Attitude 2007, same Bat-time, same Bat-channel. “We’re so thrilled that John Piper has agreed to come next year!” he shouted, to tremendous applause. “Finally, his schedule worked out. So finally, Piper, NA ‘07.”

At this point, can you take any more messages containing so much? Harris asked. “There’s definitely been some truth gluttony that’s taking place, as we’re just packing it in, message after message. Some of you are like, If you share one more message with me, I’m just going to — whomph — barf, New Attitude, all over.”

But we have one more to go, Harris said. This message will be a review “of all that we heard — not everything, but to grab most of the significant things and consider together what it means to take this home. And that’s what’s so important about all that we’ve done: it’s meaningless unless we take it home … apply it to our lives, work it into our lives, and review it.”

Continued ...



The finer points of a charismatic's sword drill

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 10:59 PM ET , Monday, Jun 05, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Deep Doctrine Magic: Charismaticism

Charismatic Chaos Recommended
Charismatic Chaos
by Dr. John F. MacArthur


Recently I've found Bible teacher John MacArthur's 1992 book Charismatic Chaos nonetheless relevant in the current church climate — just change the names here and there, and the same tricks are still around.

MacArthur, of course, is very serious throughout his criticism of charismatics and defense of “cessationism” — the idea that “higher” Holy Spirit gifts such as speaking in tongues, prophesies and miracles have ceased with the end of the Apostolic Age. Yet that sober assessment doesn't prevent him from having a little fun, with evidently at least one late-'80s/early-'90s version of Joel Osteen:

I watched in horror a couple of years ago as a guest on a charismatic television network explained the “biblical basis” of his ministry of “possibility thinking.” “My ministry is based entirely on my life verse, Matthew 19:26, ‘With God all things are possible.’ God gave me that verse because I was born in 1926.”

Obviously intrigued by that method of obtained a “life verse,” the talk show host grabbed a Bible and began thumbing through excitedly. “I was born in 1934,” he said. “My life verse would be Matthew 19:34. What does it say?” Then he discovered that Matthew 19 has only thirty verses. Undeterred, he flipped to Luke 19 and read verse 34: “And they said, The Lord hath need of him” (KJV).

Thrilled, he exclaimed, “Oh, the Lord has need of me! The Lord has need of me! What a wonderful life verse! I’ve never had a life verse before, but now the Lord has given me one! Thank you, Jesus! Hallelujah!” The studio audience began to applaud.

At that moment, however, the talk show host’s wife, who had also turned to Luke 19, said, “Wait a minute! You can’t use this. This verse is talking about a donkey!”



More New Attitude 2006: The Gospel of the John

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 07:45 AM ET , Sunday, Jun 04, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Columns, Deep Doctrine Magic: Life Applications, New Attitude, Local News



On Tuesday morning, between the last New Attitude singles conference “family group” and main session, this was overheard in a Kentucky International Convention Center men's room:

PARTICIPANT 1 (from inside echoic restroom stall): How's it going?

PARTICIPANT 2 (locked in adjacent restroom stall) (after loaded hesitance): Ah, going fairly well — considering.

PARTCIPANT 1: Considering what?

(Another pause.)

PARTICIPANT 2: What I'm about to do.

PARTICIPANT 1 (doesn't even laugh): Hey, nothing is hidden from God. Someday we won't have to do all this. We'll just be with Him, always, worshiping His Name and learning.

PARTCIPANT 2: Yes. Very true.

(About a minute later:)

PARTICIPANT 2 (after exiting stall): Ah, Godspeed, man.

PARTICIPANT 1 (still inside): You too, brother.



A young man, wearing nothing but a linen garment, was following Jesus. When they seized him, he fled naked, leaving his garment behind.

Mark 14: 51-53 (NIV) (emphasis added)



Parents judges in the courtship?

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 10:20 PM ET , Saturday, Jun 03, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Deep Doctrine Magic: Legalism, Life Applications

A Matter of Basic Principles: Bill Gothard & the Christian Life Recommended
A Matter of Basic Principles: Bill Gothard & the Christian Life
by Don Veinot, Ron Henzel, Joy Veinot


Just written for the ongoing NarniaWeb discussion about Boy Meets Girl, in response to an adherent to Bill Gothard's “Advanced Training Institute” (ATI). Gothard's teachings stress heavy parental involvement in courtship (preferably after age 30), and “authority” structure as a go-between for the child (even if grown to adulthood) and God, which will more supposedly, more effectively, prevent the younger member from harm.

victorycoalitio wrote:

1.) Yes. I'm in ATI. What gave it away?

Why, your capitalization, of course. It's ATI-approved.

Seriously, perhaps it was the emphasis on Authority structure which is very recognizable — and, I would submit, very different from other Christ-followers' opinions on being raised in Grace and then acting as children of God themselves as maturity increases, rather than continuing to rely on human mediators between themselves and their Creator / Savior.

There is only One Who does that, and He does not share power (1 Timothy 2: 5-6)!

I fully agree with [NarniaWebber Preserved] Billy's take on this one!

Billy, preserving logic, wrote:

Frankly, if a parents are still “directing” their marriageable kids like that, then they either:

1. Messed up when the kids were small.
2. Feel a need to control other people.

I would add to that and suggest that it may show the parents fail to trust 1) their grown child's own judgment, 2) their own parental insight and earlier emphasis on Christ's Grace to motivate righteous living and not merely Rules.

victorycoalitio wrote:

Let's assume, no matter how hard that may be ( JK) that you will find this one amazingly suitable bride, and let me pose a hypothetical which I do not wsh upon you at all: what if her parents ask her to please not marry you? Will you advise her to go with what her parents ask, or would you counsel her to go contrary to their preference, and marry you anyway?

This is, indeed, rather hypothetical. Best-case scenario, instead, is that the child, having grown in a home that holds to Biblical truth powered by Grace, will develop into a mature, Christ-following adult who will naturally — because of the Savior within him or her — seek marriage with someone similarly mature — someone the parents will definitely approve of as well.

Of course, this does not mean that misunderstandings, human error or even eventual family schisms will not happen.

But if the child has grown into adulthood attempting often to follow the Rules and please the parents, while stifling not only God-given individuality and his or her own accountability before God without human mediators — family schisms, human error and such may be even more likely.

'Tis also outside the pattern of Scripture — God drawing us to Himself not because of our best efforts, but in spite of them!



Eric Simmons: Visualizing the Big Picture

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 07:46 AM ET , Saturday, Jun 03, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Columns, Deep Doctrine Magic: Biblical Theology, Evangelism, Life Applications, New Attitude



During the second-to-last session of the four-day New Attitude singles conference in Louisville, Ky., Eric Simmons, singles pastor at Covenant Life Church in Gaithersburg, Md., began drawing the previous days’ imagery together into “the big picture.”

It’s so easy to lapse into drudgery, lumping aspects of the Christian walk right along with menial daily tasks such as taking out the trash, and other menial chores, Simmons said. By doing this, they lose sight of joy. Their life in Christ becomes a list of gottas: I gotta read the Bible, I gotta go to church, etc.

In the book of Colossians, Paul, even while sitting in a prison, writes how he was thrilled that the Gospel was advancing. “The Kingdom of Christ has come!” Simmons exclaimed. It bore fruit in the first century, and it’s bearing fruit now. Paul was thrilled, and so should we be.

“If you’ve been saved by Grace within the past five years, please stand,” Simmons asked.

About a half-dozen people rose. The previous night, the conference leaders, these strongly Grace-based, Reformed, conversion-method-avoiding Christ-followers had given a near-Baptist-style altar call. They made it clear to potential respondents that walking down an aisle won’t save you; repentance and responding to God’s call for redemption will.

(And once upon a time, I almost thought Reformed theology was a natural barrier to evangelism.)

The auditorium burst into applause. How must it feel, I wonder, to be a new Christ-follower in these circumstances? Does it at all seem as if you’re receiving too much attention? Or do the newly redeemed not even care about that, so lost that they are in Grace and community?

Have a global vision, Simmons said. The Kingdom is here, and we get to help further its domain!

Continued ...



They're taking it back

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 06:46 AM ET , Saturday, Jun 03, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Deep Doctrine Magic: Life Applications



Nearly a week after the New Attitude conference's beginning, it seems everyone has finally made it home. So they're closer to internet access and can check out the New Attitude blog, which ran throughout the conference with live updates.

It's especially enjoyable to read the comments of the most recent item.



Justin Taylor: Evaluating the ‘Emerging Church’ movement

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 06:50 PM ET , Friday, Jun 02, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Columns, Deep Doctrine Magic: Biblical Theology, Cross Firings, Divergent Church, Evangelism, New Attitude



Mass inner groans must have resulted after author and speaker Josh Harris announced the formation of seven “breakout sessions” at the New Attitude 2006 conference on May 30.

Why? Because all seven sounded very interesting — and it just didn’t seem fair to have to choose only one.

I myself was torn between a session with Dr. Al Mohler about Biblical worldview and sexual ethics, and another one hosted by Justin Taylor, editor, blogger and former research assistant to John Piper. Actually, speaker Eric Simmons said when introducing Taylor, he was former theological director to John Piper.

“How did you direct John Piper?” Simmons asked.

Taylor responded, “I didn’t.”

Because I heard this exchange, it’s clear I finally opted for Taylor’s message — mostly because I’m less familiar with the “emergent church” movement (ECM) than I am with the Bible’s views on sex. (The latter is somewhat easier to learn, at least in theory. For example, one can easily skip all the don’ts and save time by simply proclaiming the Bible’s dos in simplified summary: wait until marriage, then sure, have at it, and have fun.)

Taylor has edited several books by John Piper, Simmons said, including Reclaiming the Center and Sex and the Supremacy of God. Regarding the latter, Simmons quickly amended for the crowd of singles — “Well, they can read it later.

“He is trying to bring sound doctrine to a level that’s readable to people like us,” Simmons said. And Taylor blessedly evenhanded about the ECM, Simmons added — he’ll outline not only its problems, but the very legitimate questions their leaders have raised about the effectiveness of the American Church in today’s culture.

“My hope today is that Justin would give you some Biblical discernment about certain twisted truths that leaders of the emerging church movement want to get out there,” Simmons said. “I hope people become equipped to represent humble orthodoxy. We’ve only received these truths through God and past generations.”

Continued ...