home | archives: September 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







 



Forming Widescreen Fiction, part 1: Seeing past Christian story stigmatisms

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 12:00 AM ET , Saturday, Sep 30, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Columns, Media: Books, Deep Doctrine Magic: Christian Novels, Subculture Shop, Storytelling



It’s just slightly difficult to be a neo-sci-fi guy at the American Christian Fiction Writers 2006 conference last weekend in Dallas, Texas.

Actually, it’s even more difficult to be a guy altogether, at the American Christian Fiction Writers 2006 conference.


Intro: An ACFW Aftermath

Some estimated the conference’s attendance at about 95 percent women. I think that’s about right, so long as one doesn’t count the hotel bellhops and the concierge. Also, leave out the imaginary males who probably inhabit most of those writing women’s fiction works, whether published or not. Those males, of course, are quite dashing and handsome and just the sort of chaps who can ease the loneliness filling women’s hearts on the barren prairie.

Ah, but this is facetious. Not all the novelists, male or female, were purveyors of the Prairie Romance. Some were purveyors of cozy romance, inspirational romance, Scottish/Irish romance, World War II-era romance, romantic comedy, romantic suspense, chick lit romance, contemporary romance …

Here I even more speak the truth: after the first day, they doubled the first-floor restroom space for women, giving them the men's restroom too, which of course resulted in a 100 percent cut in facilities for the males in attendance. I, as a male, adapted well; others were more annoyed, including author Randall Ingermanson (City of God series, Oxygen, The Fifth Man) who I heard secondhand was tempted to go in there nonetheless.

However, another rumor held that most women, understandably, didn’t want to go in the men’s room anyway. I would think half of the implements therein would likely be useless to the women no matter what — and that’s all I have to say about that.

Well, I suppose it hasn’t been too long since the organization changed its named from American Christian Romance Writers. Inevitably there would be a lag time.


Vital storytelling statistics

Readership in the Christian Booksellers’ Association (CBA), the catch-all term for Christian publishing, is just a little more balanced: most put it at 80-20, still slanted toward women. Secular publishers have about the same ratio, though, so this isn’t unique to Christendom.

Guys read more nonfiction, one of the conference’s organizers told me. Fine, that is sensible, I say, but that still fails to explain the smashing success of the nonfiction (ahem) author and decidedly-non-Alpha-Male-ish Joel Osteen.

With this general market from which to draw, it’s understandable that Romance and all its related modifiers would prove the more popular genres. Behind the counters of a Christian bookstore myself, I have seen these customers: they are mostly middle-aged and older women, and often members of a certain denomination (Southern Baptist) who much enjoy this sort of thing in their reading material.

So, one really can’t “blame” the publishers for frowning upon alternative genres, such as the neo-sci-fi story I advocate and the fantasy / sci-fi hybrids underway by many other Christ-honoring writers.

After all, that sort of thing just won’t sell, claimed one editor during the publisher’s panel the first afternoon. And after a sneaked-in question (another ahem) about whether the hugely increased popularity of Tolkien and Lewis was affecting the CBA’s offerings at all, David Long, editor from Bethany House and Faith*in*Fiction blogger, was quite direct: “No” — instantly prompting raised imaginary phasers and magical battle staffs from the outraged fantasy / sci-fi warriors.

Ergo, sci-fi and fantasy are genres with a stigma — their own sub-stigma within a “niche market” that itself has long been stigmatized in the publishing world.

Yet Lord willing, both of those stigmas may be changing.


Breaking through former genre border patrols

Friday afternoon’s class-type session with Tyndale House Publishers editor Karen Watson proved to be among the most intriguing. Substituting for the session's original speaker, she explained all about the CBA’s origins story — and what turned out to be an in-depth question-and-answer session carried the topic even further.

Where would the CBA go from here, some asked, especially now that more secular publishers are buying up Christian publishers?

Watson’s answer was encouraging. The big guys will know not to mess with a good thing, she told her audience. They know it’s the content of the novels that helps them sell, not merely the adjective label of Christian on their covers or their places on Christian bookstore shelves. Water down their messages too much, and genre readers will — or should — complain mightily.

Besides, one woman in the audience added, we already have “Christian” books whose themes are far less Christian than one would expect, and secular publishers had nothing to do with that.

The whole idea of “Christian” as adjective is either far overdone or else underdone. Books with incredible Christ-honoring and Biblical-worldview themes — The Chronicles of Narnia, of course, The Lord of the Rings and countless novels among the classics — contain far deeper messages about Christ and His truths than many new “Christian” books out there. That would of course include whatever Christian-in-name-only book the above-described woman mentioned reading, whose author, she said, basically added going to church in the story’s middle as a subplot device and that was it for religion.

A truly Christian book could of course be contemporary/chick-lit/cozy romance or whatever; few would get rid of those genres even if that were possible. They will always have an audience. And I’m sure multiple authors are capable of embedding deeper themes about the Christian’s journey of faith in their stories.

But it’s long past time to de-stigmatize what I call Widescreen Fiction — that is, stories with epic themes, good versus evil and growth in the Christ-following life. This story category can encompass science fiction, or “futuristic drama/thriller,” as I term the story I’m writing. This can encompass fantasy. And this has already encompassed outright thrillers, supernatural and otherwise, such as the groundbreaking works of Frank Peretti, Ted Dekker, and even those ubiquitous novels by those Left Behind guys.


A fantastic future for widescreen formats?

Still, at present, most fantasy / sci-fi, despite their genres’ overwhelming popularity in the secular realms, remain stigmatized in the CBA.

“Yet hope remains, if company is true.”

Those big publishing houses buying up the Christian ones surely won’t maintain a total hands-off policy. Perhaps some compromises in message will be made in some ways, but again, it’s not like a softened-doctrine problem would be brand-new for Christian publishing. More likely, I submit these new arrangements and attitudes could just result in the further hybridization of markets, and more chances for “crossover” novels, perhaps mostly for authors who don’t write solely to drive their main “characters,” and by proxy their non-Christian readers, to Salvation.

Thus, Christian publishing just may become less-stigmatized. As the market becomes broader, as competition increases, that just may drive authors toward developing better and more in-depth stories in all genres. And as the former book borders are broken through just a little — science fiction and fantasy may at last become de-stigmatized as well.

It may take even a generation of work, perhaps working to undo the vast errors of previous eras of Christendom — a theory I’m working on now, and will begin outlining in the next installment of this new Forming Widescreen Fiction series.

Until then, I will begin extending this offer to any C/I/S/I/WW2/C/S/CL/C romance readers (or writers) I meet, either coming into the Christian bookstore, or widely available at the American Christian Fiction Writers 2007 conference (hosted by author James Scott Bell, who, I hear tell, is male). My offer will be phrased something like this:

“I’ll read your C/I/S/I/WW2/C/S/CL/C romance novel if you’ll read my widescreen sci-fi/fantasy novel.”

You never know — someday they’ll finally give in.

And perhaps in another generation those blesed older women will be coming into the bookstores, perhaps in Starfleet uniforms, and snapping up the latest in a Christian seven-volume series with dragons and fair maidens and battle staff flashes and things like that, all over the covers. Then an underground coalition of disenfranchised Prairie Romance writers can form and begin pushing for publishers to favor their long-neglected genre, and the Great Circle of Life can continue.

Or perhaps we can mostly follow the standard set by the Master Author in His original Novel — which, I may hasten to add, is only available in Widescreen format.



Stephen Lawhead: expanding fiction frontiers

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 12:32 PM ET , Thursday, Sep 28, 2006

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



Writer Both Goddard has published part 1 of her exclusive interview with author Stephen Lawhead, whose recent release Hood and other novels have been published — and some republished! — by Thomas Nelson's Westbow imprint.

Lawhead, like some other Christ-honoring writers whose numbers are growing, is clear that he's not out to Push A Message. His ideas begin with images, like his genre predecessor C.S. Lewis. Any worldview tenets flow naturally from that basis, and not that of Message Pushing.

I'm not trying to impose anything on anyone; that is, I’m not writing propaganda. On the other hand, it’s my book, so it’s going to come from my point of view. Like any writer, I naturally take up what I know or what I’m interested in. In Hood, for example, I liked exploring the distinction between these highly organised, politicised, corporate-type Norman priests ... and the more disorganized, unsophisticated but often more spiritual Celtic clerics.




Terri Irwin: 'I've lost my prince'

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 10:01 AM ET , Thursday, Sep 28, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Media, Science



Last night's ABC News (U.S.) 20/20 program consisted of Barbara Walters interviewing Terri Irwin, the now-widow of the late Steve Irwin. I am sure that thousands of women viewing this program not only gained more insight into this wonderful woman, but felt just a few pangs of either jealousy or regret as well.

“I've lost my prince,” Mrs. Irwin sobbed ...

And prince he was, to her. Though the chance always exists that TV or publicity may present things in a far better light, I think it's clear Steve Irwin was a great husband, father and worker, absolutely devoted to his wife, children and career. He wasn't just a Nice Guy — he was passionate about his cause, publicly praised his beloved, and played with and taught his children (also often in public ).

The night before he asked for her hand in marriage, they journeyed to a swamp-like region in Australia where he had just caught a crocodile. While wading in the water, he always kept between her and the deeper areas, in case of danger. Not only did that win her heart even more, but through this “test” Steve saw that she was willing and excited to follow him anywhere — even into a mosquito-, bat- and crocodile-infested swamp, and embrace his same passion for wildlife.

Walters asked Mrs. Irwin what the latter would miss most of all about Steve.

“This is going to sound selfish,” Terri Irwin answered, close to tears again. “But he was fun. He was just fun.” He didn't sweat the small stuff, she continued; he saw the bigger picture, taught her how to sing in the rain, splash in mud puddles, get dirty even when it wasn't absolutely necessary.

Of course I'm watching this and I'm thinking, wouldn't it be great for every single person to be united someday with someone like either of them?



Bill Clinton's lie during appearance on Fox News Sunday

Avatar by DaveLoneRanger at 11:02 PM ET , Tuesday, Sep 26, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Media: Left-Handed News, Rebuttals, War-cast, Politics: The Left Wing



Transcript: William Jefferson Clinton on 'FOX News Sunday'

The interview touched off a buzz across the internet. YouTube received hundreds of thousands of hits for the preview, and Fox News Sunday received the highest rating in three years.

The following is part of the crossfire in which Bill Clinton accuses Chris Wallace of unfairly harsh questions which he did not offer to Bush administration officials.

CLINTON: So you did Fox's bidding on this show. You did your nice little conservative hit job on me. What I want to know is ...

WALLACE: Well, wait a minute, sir.

CLINTON: No, wait. No, no ...

WALLACE: I want to ask a question. You don't think that's a legitimate question?

CLINTON: It was a perfectly legitimate question, but I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked this question of.

I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked, “Why didn't you do anything about the Cole?”

I want to know how many you asked, “Why did you fire Dick Clarke?”

I want to know how many people you asked ...

WALLACE: We asked — we asked ...

CLINTON: I don't ...

WALLACE: Do you ever watch “FOX News Sunday,” sir?

CLINTON: I don't believe you asked them that.

WALLACE: We ask plenty of questions of ...

CLINTON: You didn't ask that, did you? Tell the truth, Chris.

WALLACE: About the USS Cole?

CLINTON: Tell the truth, Chris.

WALLACE: With Iraq and Afghanistan, there's plenty of stuff to ask.

CLINTON: Did you ever ask that?

You set this meeting up because you were going to get a lot of criticism from your viewers because Rupert Murdoch's supporting my work on climate change.

And you came here under false pretenses and said that you'd spend half the time talking about — you said you'd spend half the time talking about what we did out there to raise $7-billion-plus in three days from 215 different commitments. And you don't care.

WALLACE: But, President Clinton, if you look at the questions here, you'll see half the questions are about that. I didn't think this was going to set you off on such a tear.

CLINTON: You launched it — it set me off on a tear because you didn't formulate it in an honest way and because you people ask me questions you don't ask the other side.

WALLACE: That's not true. Sir, that is not true.

CLINTON: And Richard Clarke made it clear in his testimony...

WALLACE: Would you like to talk about the Clinton Global Initiative?

CLINTON: No, I want to finish this now.

WALLACE: All right. Well, after you.

A simple Google inquiry is all it took to uncover yet another of Clinton's lies. In a fit of anger, sometimes one does not think about the veracity of accusations one is hurling, but Mr. Clinton should have thought about that before he went on national televison.

Just a simple Google is all it took.




Sept. 19: Global Talk Like A Pirate Day!

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 10:17 AM ET , Tuesday, Sep 19, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Columns, Media, Local News



(Originally written last week to start the NarniaWeb thread of the same name.)

Avast, mates, sea dogs, landlubbers, hearties and bucklers of swashes!

'Tis a fine time for National Talk Like a Pirate Day, arrr! And 'tis even finer still that I be rememberin' this most august occasion on time this year, havin' been ignorant of it last year, arrr.

Ye be asking me now, what be National Talk Like a Pirate Day?

Well, I shall be tellin' ye the tale, as the dead men could not tell me.

It'all started nearly three year'n ago, it did, when Dave Barry, who be writing humor columns, he was, until late 2003, it was, passed along the new idea from two landlubber column readers who be wastin' their time a lot.

But now I be lettin' Dave explain in his own words, arrr.

John Baur and Mark Summers [. . .] have come up with a concept that is going to make you kick yourself for not thinking of it first: Talk Like a Pirate Day. As the name suggests, this is a day on which everybody would talk like a pirate. Is that a great idea, or what? There are so many practical benefits that I can't even begin to list them all.

Baur and Summers came up with this idea a few years ago. They were playing racquetball, and, as so often happens, they began talking like pirates. And then it struck them: Why not have a day when EVERYBODY talks like a pirate? They decided that the logical day would be Sept. 19, because that — as you are no doubt aware — is Summers' ex-wife's birthday.

Since then, Baur and Summers have made a near-superhuman effort to promote Talk Like a Pirate Day. As Baur puts it: "We've talked like pirates, and encouraged our several friends to, every Sept. 19, except for a couple where we forgot.''

And yet, incredibly, despite this well-orchestrated campaign, the nation has turned a deaf shoulder to Talk Like a Pirate Day. In desperation, Baur and Summers turned to me for help. As an influential newspaper columnist, I have the power to ''make or break'' a national day. You may recall that almost nobody celebrated Thanksgiving until I began writing about it in the 1970s.

I have given Baur's and Summers' idea serious thought, looking for ways to improve it. One variation I considered was Talk Like a Member of the Lollipop Guild Day, on which everybody would talk like the three Munchkins in the film version of The Wizard of Oz who welcome Dorothy to Munchkin Land by singing with one corner of their mouths drooping down, as though they have large invisible dental suction devices hanging from their lips. But I realized that would be stupid.

So I have decided to throw my full support behind Talk Like a Pirate Day, to be observed this Sept. 19. To help promote this important cause, I have decided to seek the endorsement of famous celebrities, and I am pleased to report that, as of today, Tom Cruise, Julia Roberts, Britney Spears, Brad Pitt, Oprah Winfrey, the Osbournes, Tiger Woods, Ted Koppel, the Sopranos, Puff Doody and the late Elvis Presley are all people who I hope will read this column and become big supporters. I see no need to recruit President Bush, because he already talks like a pirate, as we can see from this transcript of a recent White House press conference:
REPORTER: Could you please explain either your foreign or your domestic policy?

PRESIDENT BUSH: Arrrrr.

Anyhoo, now ye be understandin' the origin. But other websites and peoples all over the world, not just in America, arrr, are celebratin' the occasion too. The whole thing has 'specially proven quite popular, it has, with Australians and the British!

What do we do, Cap'n Ransom? ye be askin'.

And the answer is simple: Ye talk like a pirate, ye scurvy dogs!

Why? ye may be askin' further.

Because if not, ye'll be walkin' the plank! But an even better answer, says I, would be this: Why not?

Say somethin' piratey, ye hearties, and have fun with it. Websites all over be presentin' their own ideas for what pirates would say in landlubber places like yer work office, eatin' out, goin' to school, or e'en at the movies. Ah, but the sea — that be whar the best of phrases be risin' up from the depths of Davy Jones' Locker.

(But watch what websites ye be keelhaulin' from the depths fer lookin' at, mates. Not all of 'em're havin' things for polite pirates to say.)

So begin preparin' for Sept. 19, ye swabs, in the week we have until then!

And whate'er happens, me hearties, never forget to clean yer (s)words.

Arrrrr.

- (Cap'n) Dr.Elwin Ransom
Buckler of Swashes
Chief Engineer
Starfleet Admiral
Captain of the Pirate Frigate
U.S.S. Jack Sparrow




'Time' magazine on 'osteentacious' American evangelicals

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 12:45 PM ET , Friday, Sep 15, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Deep Doctrine Magic: Biblical Theology, Cross Firings, Megachurchianity, Media: Books



Incredible. Time magazine, in its cover story this week, offers an in-depth look at the Prosperity Gospel and its prolific proponents, among them the aptly named “Creflo Dollar” and of course the Big Chief of all, Joel Osteen.

From “Does God Want You to Be Rich?” (requires first viewing ad):

In three of the Gospels, Jesus warns that each of his disciples may have to “deny himself” and even “take up his Cross.” In support of this alarming prediction, he forcefully contrasts the fleeting pleasures of today with the promise of eternity: “For what profit is it to a man,” he asks, “if he gains the whole world, and loses his own soul?” It is one of the New Testament's hardest teachings, yet generations of churchgoers have understood that being Christian, on some level, means being ready to sacrifice--money, autonomy or even their lives.

But for a growing number of Christians [. . .] the question is better restated, “Why not gain the whole world plus my soul?”

[. . . In Joel Osteen's Your Best Life Now,] Jesus is front and center but not his Crucifixion, Resurrection or Atonement.

[. . .]

[Christian c]ritics see it as treating God as a celestial ATM. “God becomes a means to an end, not the end in himself,” says Southwestern Baptist's [theology Professor Ben] Phillips. Others are more upset about what it de-emphasizes. “[Prosperity] wants the positive but not the negative,” says another Southern Baptist, Alan Branch of Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Kansas City, Mo. “Problem is, we live on this side of Eden. We're fallen.” That is, Prosperity soft-pedals the consequences of Adam's fall--sin, pain and death--and their New Testament antidote: Jesus' atoning sacrifice and the importance of repentance.

Just a few examples of the two authors' solid understanding of real Biblical theology — much more deep than their media counterparts, and far deeper than that of the your-best-life-now types they discuss.

And say what you will about Rick Warren's supposed shallownesses — this subject is not among them:

Fellow megapastor Rick Warren, whose book The Purpose Driven Life has outsold Osteen's by a ratio of 7 to 1, finds the very basis of Prosperity laughable. “This idea that God wants everybody to be wealthy?”, he snorts. “There is a word for that: baloney. It's creating a false idol. You don't measure your self-worth by your net worth. I can show you millions of faithful followers of Christ who live in poverty. Why isn't everyone in the church a millionaire?”

[. . .]

A recent Sunday at Lakewood gives some idea of the emphasis on worldly gain that disturbs Warren. Several hundred stage lights flash on, and Osteen, his gigawatt smile matching them, strides onto the stage of what used to be the Compaq Center sports arena but is now his church. “Let's just celebrate the goodness of the Lord!” Osteen yells. His wife Victoria says, “Our Daddy God is the strongest! He's the mightiest!”

And so it goes, before 14,000 attendees, a nonstop declaration of God's love and his intent to show it in the here and now, sometimes verging on the language of an annual report. During prayer, Osteen thanks God for “your unprecedented favor. We believe that 2006 will be our best year so far. We declare it by faith.” Today's sermon is about how gratitude can “save a marriage, save your job [and] get you a promotion.”

Anyone who's ever watched this man on TV can identify: Osteen is quite the showman. Just the sort to proclaim loudly unsound teachings for “itching ears” (2 Timothy 3:4) and rehashed versions of old you-can-do-it “irreverent, silly myths” (1 Timothy 4:7).

Little Joel himself — they did interview him — “osteens” his way past the writers' question. (“To osteen,” a lato bork“: New Verb Alert!)

“Does God want us to be rich?” he asks. “When I hear that word rich, I think people say, 'Well, he's preaching that everybody's going to be a millionaire.' I don't think that's it.” Rather, he explains, “I preach that anybody can improve their lives. I think God wants us to be prosperous. I think he wants us to be happy. To me, you need to have money to pay your bills. I think God wants us to send our kids to college. I think he wants us to be a blessing to other people. But I don't think I'd say God wants us to be rich. It's all relative, isn't it?”

Oh, yes — and then immediately Time's writers get him good:

The room's warm lamplight reflects softly off his crocodile shoes.

Ooooh! Look out for that razor-sharp wit, folks — it bites.

Albert Mohler on Wednesday gave his own excerpts and additional thoughts.

The problem with prosperity theology is not that it promises too much, but that it promises so little — and promises that so falsely.

And indeed, the very title of Joel Osteen's book offers one of the most pathetic “promises” imaginable. Your Best Life Now?! How about Your Best Life Later, in the World to Come — when all turns to silver glass, and the Creator remakes His universe, merging the New Heavens with the New Earth? How much more incredible a promise is this!




The Devil's Borg-like adversity to human diversity?

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 02:34 PM ET , Tuesday, Sep 12, 2006

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

The Screwtape Letters Recommended
The Screwtape Letters
by C. S. Lewis


Mere moments ago, the memory of an experience I underwent just last night, late last night, returned to me. That happens often, most people know, when the memory is made in the form of a dream.

And I saw in my dream, a book of some sort. It began talking. In harsh guttural tones — the kind you would expect demons to make.

Either I or someone else attempted to shut them up in Jesus' Name, then asked what their name(s) was/were.

In true Biblical fashion, they replied in unison:

“My name is Legion, for we are many.”

Matthew 5:9 (ESV)

I don't recall if I/we managed to cast them out of the book (a book? ). But at that moment, in dream-time, I was struck with a clear realization. Some of this, actually, I had written about after viewing the film Star Trek: First Contact several weeks ago.

To us [the devil Screwtape, writing on behalf of all demons] a human is primarily good; our aim is the absorption of its will into ours, the increase of our own area of selfhood at its expense. But the obedience which the Enemy demands of men is quite a different thing. One must face the fact that all the talk about His love for men, and His service being perfect freedom, is not (as one would gladly believe) mere propaganda, but an appalling truth. He really does want to fill the universe with a lot of loathsome little replicas of Himself—creatures, whose life, on its miniature scale, will be qualitatively like His own, not because He has absorbed them but because their wills freely conform to His. We want cattle who can finally become food; He wants servants who can finally become sons. We want to suck in, He wants to give out. We are empty and would be filled; He is full and flows over. Our war aim is a world in which Our Father Below has drawn all other beings into himself: the Enemy wants a world full of beings united to Him but still distinct.

[. . .]

Merely to over-ride a human will (as His felt presence in any but the faintest and most mitigated degree would certainly do) would be for Him useless. He cannot ravish. He can only woo. For His ignoble idea is to eat the cake and have it; the creatures are to be one with Him, but yet themselves; merely to cancel them, or assimilate them, will not serve.

-- C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters

Note the word assimilate. Meanwhile, consider the Borg, introduced in Star Trek: The Next Generation's second season and one of the primary villains of the Star Trek universe.

They are a race of creatures, at first diverse, and then forced to become part of a collective consciousness and will by the most horrifying cybernetic implants and mind-brainwashing methods imaginable. They do not defeat their enemies by use of force. Rather, those who oppose them meet with the chilling and rather famous admonition:

“Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated. Your life as it has been, is over. From this time forward, your culture will adapt to service us. We are the Borg.”

Even in the dream, this resulted in this realization (or re-realization):

The Devil and his minions oppose individuality. They cannot understand the seeming paradox of the Creator wanting to bring people to Himself and also allow them to retain their separate personalities; they dismiss this as “an ignoble idea.”

Satan is the great Assimilator. He wants all things to become part of a collective consciousness, to eventually be absorbed into himself.

Might it be true that some authors', including Frank Peretti's, depictions of demons as separate personalities who even sometimes have conflicts with each other, are incorrect? Though they may hope to absorb each other with a survival-of-the-fittest mindset, as Screwtape wants for Wormwood, perhaps they more share the same “mind” as their father the Devil than we may think. Might they be locked into a collective consciousness with the master Demon of all?

This idea doesn't seem to be anti-Biblical, but it is extra-Biblical ... just as are some of Peretti's fictionalizing of the spiritual dimensions.




Sept. 11: Half a decade hence

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 12:27 PM ET , Monday, Sep 11, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Columns, War-cast, Politics: History, Local News



Image courtesy of NarniaWeb forum member “Stars_Daughter”

Image courtesy of NarniaWeb forum member Stars_Daughter


My Tuesday class ran from 9 a.m. to 10:15 a.m. Upon exiting and walking down the hallway, I ran into a commotion near one of the computer rooms. Employees were pushing a TV into the area and soon had it turned to a very grainy CBS local affiliate.

I saw one of the World Trade Center towers, smoke billowing upward as if sourced by brimstone.

The thought was horrible: Weren't there two of those?

I asked a student what was happening.

“We're being attacked,” he answered grimly.

Chills overwhelmed me.

I called home. My mother was tearful. My brother was in the background, passing along information from Fox News. I wandered into the building foyer, theorizing. Terrorists, obviously. Perhaps masterminded by Usama bin Laden.

My brother began shouting in the background. Something about it going down.

I returned to the TV room. The image was projected on a screen.

Even more smoke rose. And the second of the two towers had already crumbled.

Students whispered. Completely confused, in the first stages of grief.

One young man was at a computer, already writing something about the experience. An email, perhaps. No ... a journal entry, I recall. I should have spoken with him. He evidently wrote his innermost thoughts, easily readable to me standing nearby. Something like, I want to do something. I want to understand this, and then I want to make the attackers pay.

My, how it all comes back.



Classes were not cancelled. They should have been.

I skipped my math class — one of the few class sessions I ever intentionally passed up.

Reactions were nearly universal. In those days, solidarity existed. People were unified in grief, and some anger.

Only later did I learn about the Pentagon crash, Flight 93 and its incredible story, and the exact nature of the attacks. Air Force One was diverted. The Capitol evacuated. Unconfirmed reports: plane hits the Capitol, plane on its way to the White House, president in D.C., president not in D.C. ...

The deaths of firefighters and New York City officers. Ash and smoke, like a volcanic avalanche, flooding through the streets. People's bodies and hair bleached with the fallout, staggering like zombies ...

I'm tearing up, now. Thought I would. Perhaps it's time to end.

Indeed ... never forget. Just because it's been half a decade doesn't mean the impact should fade.




Pett-y 'cartoon' mockery descends to even lower depths

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 11:49 PM ET , Sunday, Sep 10, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Columns, Rebuttals, War-cast, Politics: The Left Wing




“Cartoon” by Joel Pett, Lexington Herald-Leader, Sept. 6, 2006



Mr. Pett,

You know how to make thought-provoking cartoons — or at least two, following the deaths of the shuttle Columbia astronauts in early February 2003, or the passing of Christopher Reeve. Politics had nothing to do with those, and you recognized that.

But now, in the second Bush term, it seems no subject is off-limits for your appropriation, to hurl more of your juvenile insults at the president.

Clearly, that includes the heartrending death of Steve Irwin, not only a television celebrity but a wonderful person known worldwide.

Forget “poor taste” and all of those clichéd generalizations that will only further your victim complex. Those who are truly wise enough to understand liberals’ natures know that every angry letter you receive — this one included — will only increase your smug, self-religious sense of persecuted “rightness” in your own eyes. You sit back and smile, face locked in a grin, ego safely secure in the accomplishment of stirring readers up again. And perhaps you silently, wryly, nod assent to my correct guesses just now.

Bush is Evil: that is your creed. Therefore, you believe anything, anything, is useful merely to point out this “fact” in a new and “provocative” way.



We both know you won’t be fired or anything silly like that.

Why? Because your form of antique media is currently flailing about for meaning in a new era; and therefore, they believe one surefire method to get more attention is to be pettily nasty and outrageous, like spoiled-brat children. So now you’ve merely fulfilled the tenets of that often-subconscious manifesto.

Therefore, the Herald Leader will accept letters for a time in the name of fairness, print many of them, and perhaps write an editorial supporting your First Amendment right to free speech — as if they could not censor you if they wanted to.

And in a week or so, they will then issue their ordinance from on high that now is the time to “move on.”



Oh, so much you have to be proud of. You have used a world-beloved man’s death in the name of Punditry and Free Speech. So creative. So original.

The government cannot stop you; nor should it. Yet common sense, an inner sense of actual morality, and least of all thousands of readers can only attempt to speak some sense into your corrupted mind.

Go ahead and try whining about your First Amendment Rights. But those enraged by your pathetic, wholly noncreative “art” have just as much right to speak out. Unlike you, sir, truth and decency is on their side.




Wisdom of the 'poor'?

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 10:19 AM ET , Wednesday, Sep 06, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Columns, Politics: Warfare and Welfare, Local News



This next counts as a guest blog column from NarniaWebber Preserved Billy, a friend of mine, and only slightly edited from his original post.

His mini-essay and personal anecdote on someone we may hope is not a typical example of the American “poor,” comes in response to this statement from NarniaWebber Giliell, who continues to provide very interesting viewpoints from her homeland of Germany:

Being poor usually means having a bad education and living in bad and dangerous parts of town with only very, very few having any chance of escape.

So they need all the help we can give.

Who's this “we”? Is it “we” as individuals, or “we” as represented by our respective governments?

I don't know about your country, Gilliel, but there's nothing in the U.S. Constitution about helping people in financial need. There is only one type of government which attempts to provide every essential item to everyone, and that is a socialist government. Sadly, that is what our country has become (okay ... becoming, maybe).

Charity is the province of individuals, not the corporate leadership (government) of men. Basically, it shouldn't be the government's job to ensure that everyone gets three square meals a day, a roof over their head, and clothes to put upon their body. Those sort of essential needs should be handled on a community level, where there is accurate knowledge of the poor person(s') position/need.

I've had recent experience with this, working as a cashier at a local store.

A couple weeks ago, I had a woman whiz up in a sporty little car, and came bouncing in the store with a smile that said, “life is beautiful.” Okay, I like cheerful people, and this woman had seemed to have had a very good day ... good for her.

She picked out a soda, and came bouncing to the counter, and said: “Do you take Food Stamp cards?”

Now, for those that aren't in “the know,” Food Stamps (which are now tracked by a credit-type card) can be used in place of money, to buy certain approved grocery items. Unfortunately, not all stores are setup to take food stamp cards, and mine is one of them.

I informed the woman that we did not accept food stamp cards, at which she replied, “Oh, well, I won't get this soda then. I'll just buy some lottery tickets instead.” Since she couldn't spend her charity-money on liquid sugar, she decided not to purchase the soda with her money. Not only this, but she simultaneously decided (with real money-management skill ...) to use her money to purchase tickets for the state-run lottery (which is, essentially, a voluntary tax).

I actually felt physically ill after she left. She didn't even take the time to return the soda, but left it on the counter for me to replace.

This is the type of undeserving poor we Americans see everyday. And it doesn't matter whether someone “deserves” poverty, but rather whether or not they “deserve” help. Some people don't, but they get it anyway, from an undiscerning governmental system.

[All ellipses in original.]



Osteen's odd o-mission

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 04:09 PM ET , Monday, Sep 04, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Deep Doctrine Magic: Cross Firings, Megachurchianity



The Thinklings had this as their fifth item on “a few interesting reads for the long weekend”:

5. Joel Osteen examines the role of suffering in the Christian life.

Just reserve your possible affirmation and click it. ...



Steve Irwin: Feb. 22, 1962 – Sept. 4, 2006

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 09:56 AM ET , Monday, Sep 04, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Media





From News.com.au



Tears spring to my eyes reading this now, from the story linked on Drudge.

[. . .]

I don't know why ... I haven't even viewed his television programs and specials for a long time, and yet this affects me a lot more than I thought.

Maybe I'm just tired ... and the coffee hasn't kicked in yet.

But this guy's utter enthusiasm and pure joy about what he did was contagious. An extrovert to the extreme. A lover of God's creatures and their ways. A family man, and (based on our observations, anyway) totally in love with his wife. An explorer at heart, a thrill-seeker, a man of the wild and yet gentle whenever needed. A tender warrior. And even his political views were cool. ...

As of 10 a.m. EDT, the Crocodile Hunter website remains down.

Australia has lost one of its best ... and even now it still seems unbelievable. At times he seemed invincible.

Next will likely come the suggestions from his home country to make a memorial, and perhaps even rename Australia Zoo. I submit, from this side of the globe, that all these suggestions are well-deserved.

And as World magazine will undoubtedly headline it in their next issue:

Man knows not his time.




Salvation by works — of Christ alone

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 12:05 AM ET , Sunday, Sep 03, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Columns, Deep Doctrine Magic: Churchianity, Evangelism



On April 30, 2006, a young collegian and decade-long church member, baptized, known to dozens, and frequent participant in missions and teaching positions, prepared to stand before a church congregation and tell them about his only recent redemption by Grace.

First, Pastor David Prince summarized his own forthcoming message and prefaced Moore’s testimony.

Let me give you a little brief background. Jacob’s been in this church many years. There are people here this morning who are here as Christians because Jacob Moore spoke the truth of the Gospel to them. He’s been involved in mission projects; he’s been involved in serving and leading and teaching and all kinds of different ministries in the life of this church.

And yet he’s here today to tell us that though he was rigorously active in the life of this congregation — that he had never genuinely believed the Gospel.

And what I’m overjoyed about today is that his testimony is not that he realized he wasn’t doing this, that or the other, and so he could not be a Christian.

But his testimony is: When I really saw how good the Gospel really is, I knew that I never really trusted in that.

The goodness of the Gospel captures another heart.

And sometimes it’s hard for us to have a category for that; those of us who’ve been around a while, well: if there’s anybody we know who’s a Christian, it’s Jacob Moore!

Now.

So it’s with great joy that I invite our brother in Christ to come share his heart this morning.

The following is the Jacob's unabridged testimony. I’ve transcribed his entire message, truncating only to account for false starts, ums, rare grammar errors and such. Since then, Jacob has become absolutely certain of his true redemption, and has continued his mission work out of love for Christ and His glory — not to add points to his own scorecard of spirituality.




A 'next-generation' education; policing the Church's own

Avatar by Dr Ransom at 02:11 PM ET , Friday, Sep 01, 2006

Permalink
Categories: Columns, Deep Doctrine Magic: Cross Firings, Education, Subculture Shop



Just posted in the NarniaWeb.com Problems with Christian(TM) culture. discussion.

First, a German NarniaWebber gave some mild criticism to the concept of Western homeschooling and mentioned her country's ban on home education.

The German government, she said, maintains that “all children should have the same access to all kinds of knowledge and a choice in their own beliefs,” and voices her understanding of this rationale — as if any government-sponsored education is inherently “neutral” and will fully give the children the Right to Choose “their own beliefs” with no external input whatsoever.

To this I outlined an observation of recent Western homeschooling trends:

One of the only safe generalizations to make is that it's rarely safe to generalize, about any particular demographic. Homeschoolers do exist who prefer to teach only one viewpoint and whose children, if they attend college at all, either head for “safe” schools, or attend secular universities and there find it difficult if not impossible to understand, and interact with those who advocate, different belief systems.

However, such a species of homeschoolers seems to me to be largely fading, replaced by what I call Homeschoolers: The Next Generation.

Homeschoolers: The Original Series concentrated on home-grown things, were occasionally legalistic and stressed elements like family businesses, apprenticeships and such (and very often the spiritual benefits of near-poverty).

However, Homeschoolers: The Next Generation often recognizes the necessity of learning presuppositions and worldviews, classical literature, interaction with those of different beliefs even while remaining grounded in a firmly founded Christian faith.

Whereas the Originals, as courageous as they were, sometimes preferred their children to grow up and help with the family business or something like that, the children of the Next Generation go on to become American congressional interns, attorneys, large business owners or participants, computer programmers, even journalists.


And, further about the Subculture's idiosyncrasies:

The Black Glove wrote:

(H)aving a “Christian” product doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a chicken coop makes you a chicken.

This strong point is worth elaborating. I argue in a forthcoming column, for example, that Christians' yelling at The Da Vinci Code and its author is hardly worth it, when there is so much more junk published from within Christendom that even more needs to be purged from the face of the Earth.

I shan't elaborate on the exact persons I have in mind here, but suffice it to say that specifically within the realm of nonfiction, these authors' books advocate either just short of or direct heresies. The Gnostic “conspiracy” often “exposed” in the DVC hype is hardly a conspiracy if everyone knows about it; whereas so many “Christian” authors are advocating a message far removed from the truths of the Bible.

This may be another reason why the Christian Subculture is actually more insidious than a mere irritant.

Why?

Partly because it studiously avoids participation in the “marketplace of ideas” that many philosophers, and American Supreme Court justices and such, have advocated — instead, it eliminates most ideological competition afforded by other religions from the scene.

Thus, hideously bad Christian authors, of novels and nonfiction, are able to get away with more. Quality control, of theology and artistic value, is replaced by a rationale that goes something like, “Well, it's Clean, and not nearly as bad as the Secular Things that are out there!”

To this I protest vehemently! — Most Christians can easily spot the “evil secular” culture aspects. But to discern subtly anti-Biblical material from within the Church is far more difficult.