Movie: The Invention Of Lying

Patrick: I like what my cousin Tom has written about a recent movie.

Movie Review: The Invention of Lying

Reading reviews of "The Invention of Lying" informed me that it mocks the idea – or, I should say, naive ideas -- of God and Heaven, etc. Reviews praised the movie and also tempted me to “dare” the movie to shake my faith. (See, for example, Roger Ebert's review .) I gave in to that temptation and took my wife to see it.

The religious ideas it mocks are pathetically simplistic ideas about God and world events and the afterlife. On the way home, and afterward, Shelley and I talked about how people need to grow up in their faith instead of give it up.

There are childish ideas of God and Heaven which need to be abandoned instead of defended. For example:
1. That God is a “man in the sky.”
2. That he has promised good people “mansions” after they die.
3. That those who commit enough “big sins” are doomed to live forever in “the other place.”
4. That God is “in control” of everything that happens on earth.

God is not a “man in the sky.” He's spirit (John 4:24) and not confined to one place (Psalm 139: 7-10). He fills the universe with his presence (Jeremiah 23:23-24). Certain biblical writers use anthropomorphisms (describing God and his actions in human sounding ways), but informed readers should know not to take those as literal descriptions. God is spirit.

To speak of “our Father in Heaven,” does not mean God lives in the sky. The word “heaven” or “heavens” can apply to the sky where the birds fly (Genesis 1:20 NASB), or to what we call outer space (Genesis 1:14,17). But, the “place” (or could we say “dimension”) where God manifests his presence fully is called the “third heaven” (2 Corinthians 12:2), or “Paradise” (12:4). It is not the sky (first heaven), or outer space (second heaven), but is beyond the space-time universe.

In John 14, Jesus said, "In my Father's house are many rooms," not "mansions" (even though the King James Bible uses that unfortunate rendering). In other words, Jesus assured his disciples that there'd be plenty of room for them in “the Father's house” (i.e., in Heaven). I do believe that. I don't believe we’ll live in mansions.

Nor do I believe that we will be disembodied souls or spirits forever. The New Testament speaks of our being resurrected in an immortal body (1 Corinthians 15:20, 42-44) -- modeled after that of the risen Christ (2 Corinthians 4:13-14). And I believe in Jesus' resurrection because of the eyewitness testimony of those who saw him alive from the dead (Acts 1: 8,21; 1 Corinthians 15:3-8); and because he's changed my life (2 Corinthians 5:17).

When the Bible speaks of God's sovereign “control” of things (e.g., Daniel 4:34-35, etc.), it doesn't mean he's micromanaging everything on earth. It means God is superintending the overall flow and outcome of history -- like a cruise ship captain who's "predestined" his ship for Hawaii, but, along the way, a lot of unplanned stuff could happen on board because of the choices of the crew and passengers.

In the same way, God has a goal for world history ("thy kingdom come"), but in the meantime, a lot of awful stuff can happen that's positively against his will.

The Pollyanna Theology that thinks God is making everything happen that happens, and that it's all somehow OK, deserves to be mocked. Lots of things are evil and unjust and grieve or anger God. Just read the Bible! And look at Jesus' response to injustice, evil, selfishness, and suffering. His reaction mirrors the Father's response (cf. John 14:9-11).

The movie’s main character tells people that the “man in the sky” will send them to “the other place” if they do at least three really bad things, such as murder, rape, and hurting people on purpose. That is not, of course, what the Bible says. It speaks good news to those of us who’ve done more than our quota of bad things: it says God will forgive everything when we respond to the good news of God's saving grace in repentance and faith (cf. Acts 3:19; 10:43).

I don't believe those who reject God’s grace will live forever in some other place; I believe the Bible says they'll eventually be destroyed and cease to exist completely (Matthew 10:28;
2 Thessalonians 1:7-9). Eternal life is a gift from God, not some kind of natural possession (Romans 2:7; 6:23).

For Christians who are fairly firm in their faith, “The Invention Of Lying” is a movie that could be a good conversation starter with non-Christian friends. (Be forewarned that it has some sexual references that may be offensive to certain viewers.)

Besides being very thought provoking, it has a heart-warming love story and a lot of funny moments. I give it a “thumbs up,” and I give the religious ideas it mocks a “thumbs down.”

Tom P. Warner 11/21/09

Sarah Palin on Jewish Settlements

In an interview with ABC News' Barbara Walters, Sarah Palin weighed in on the settlement issue.

She said, "I believe that the Jewish settlements should be allowed to be expanded upon, because that population of Israel is, is going to grow. More and more Jewish people will be flocking to Israel in the days and weeks and months ahead. And I don't think that the Obama Administration has any right to tell Israel that the Jewish settlements cannot expand."

J Street, the pro-Israel pro-peace advocacy group in Washington organization issued a public response to Palin's remarks on settlements.

Jeremy Ben-Ami, Executive Director of J Street, said, "J Street rejects Sarah Palin's comments attacking President Obama's sensible policy on Israeli settlements in the West Bank… For decades, American presidents have held that Israeli settlements in the West Bank are an impediment to peace. They are joined by the majority of Israelis and pro-Israel Americans who view the growing settlement enterprise as a threat to Israel's very future as a Jewish democracy."

The J Street statement in turn was attacked by Abraham Foxman, head of the Anti-Defamation League, who questioned whether J Street should be considered "pro-Israel."

Ben Ami responded to Foxman that unlimited expansion of settlements in the West Bank would mean the two state solution is no longer feasible, and if the two state solution collapses, Israel will face a South African-style struggle for voting rights.

Resources:

"Jeremy Ben-Ami responds to Abe Foxman's Palin comments", J Street, November 20, 2009

"Foxman blasts J Street on Palin, questions its 'pro-Israel' slogan", Eric Fingerhut, Jewish Telegraphic Agency, November 19, 2009

The above article is from the newsletter of Churches for Middle East Peace (www.cmep.org)

Patrick: If you click on the "interview" link in the first sentence you'll hear Sarah Palin speaking authoritatively on foreign policy regarding Israel and the Palestinians. Behind her view one can sense that she buys into the Fundamentalist/Dispensationalist idea that Palestinians should not be allowed to have an independent state on the land that God gave to Abraham. Such a position, if followed by the Jewish state, will surely result in more and more conflicts.

The Fundamentalist/Dispensationalists actually believe that Israel's future (this side of the return of Christ) will include a massacre that will leave 2/3 of the population of Jerusalem dead. (They get this from their futuristic interpretation of Zechariah 13:8-9.) If Sarah Palin's supporters ever succeed at getting her into the White House, with her theology, she'll be more dangerous to foreign policy than the neo-cons who got us into the Iraq War, and wanted us to bomb Iran, under Bush-Cheney.

What's the point of the Afghan War?

I have lost understanding of and confidence in the strategic purposes of the United States' presence in Afghanistan ... I have doubts and reservations about our current strategy and planned future strategy, but my resignation is based not upon how we are pursuing this war, but why and to what end.

- Matthew Hoh, a former Marine captain with combat experience in Iraq, in a letter resigning his State Department Foreign Service post in Afghanistan. Afghans, he wrote, are fighting the United States largely because its troops are an unwelcome occupier backing a corrupt national government. (Source: The Washington Post)

Scott Ritter on Afghanistan
"McChrystal Doesn’t Get It, Does Obama?" -- President Obama may have won the Nobel Peace Prize, but if he allows himself to be bullied into supporting Gen. Stanley McChrystal's foray into Afghanistan, he will reveal himself as the worst kind of warmonger.


...McChrystal operates under the illusion that American military power can provide a shield from behind which Afghanistan can remake itself into a viable modern society. He has deluded himself and others into believing that the people of Afghanistan want to be part of such a grand social experiment, and furthermore that they will tolerate the United States being in charge. The reality of Afghan history, culture and society argue otherwise. The Taliban, once a defeated entity in the months following the initial American military incursion into Afghanistan, are resurgent and growing stronger every day. The principle source of the Taliban’s popularity is the resentment of the Afghan people toward the American occupation and the corrupt proxy government of Hamid Karzai. There is nothing an additional 40,000 American troops will be able to do to change that basic equation. The Soviets tried and failed. They deployed 110,000 troops, operating on less restrictive lines of communication and logistical supply than the United States. They built an Afghan army of some 45,000 troops. They operated without the constraints of American rules of engagement. They slaughtered around a million Afghans. And they lost, for the simple reason that the people of Afghanistan did not want them, or their Afghan proxies...

The Victims of Pornography
By Chris Hedges

AP / Jae C. Hong

Adult film stars pose for photos at the AVN Adult Entertainment Expo in Las Vegas.

Hell - a more biblical, believable version

After seeing glimpses of God's glory (in the burning bush and on Mt. Sinai when the radiant "fire" of God's presence appeared), Moses asked the LORD, "Please show me your glory," (implying that he knew there was more to see,
and he'd only seen glimpses of that beautiful, but veiled, glory). Exodus 33:18ff.

God told Moses no man could see his face and live. I take that to mean that a mortal human can't see God in his unveiled glory; it would kill him. We're assured, however, that someday the saints will be made immortal and shall see God's face, i.e., his unveiled glory (Matt.5:8; Rev.22:4). So, God proclaimed his virtuous/glorious character as his fiery glory passed by Moses, who was protected in the cleft of a rock. Again, Moses saw only the veiled glory of God, but he came back down the mountain literally glowing -- like he had some kind of spiritual sunburn. Ex.34:29ff. :-)

In Jesus, we see the glory of God revealed more completely than ever before. And it transforms us. 2 Cor.3:7-18; 4:6. For now, the glory of God's presence resides in our mortality, like a beautiful diamond in a plain clay jar. But someday
all of God's redeemed people will be glorified in a resurrected, immortal form -- a form that's suitable for God's glorious presence.

When Jesus returns "in the glory of his Father" (Matt 16:27), the unveiled glory of God will be visible (in "flaming fire," 2 Thess 1:7), and it will consume those who are not raised immortal (Heb 10:26-27;12:29).

God's unveiled glory will be an awesome, beautiful sight for those who are redeemed and immortal; it will be the Beatific Vision. But for those who have rejected God's truth and grace to the bitter end, it will be too much to endure.

Cf. Isaiah 33:14 (Amplified) The sinners in Zion are afraid; trembling seizes the godless ones. [They cry] Who among us can dwell with that devouring fire? Who among us can dwell with those everlasting burnings?

Those who are finally condemned will be destroyed body and soul (Matt 10:28), blotted out of existence, literally, forever. The process of their destruction will last as long as the justice of God determines for each one (Luke 12:47-48); but the result will be total, irreversible, eternal destruction.

Cf. Malachi 4: ¹ "For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven, when all the arrogant and all evildoers will be stubble. The day that is coming shall set them ablaze, says the LORD of hosts, so that it will leave them neither root nor branch. ² But for you who fear my name, the sun of righteousness shall rise with healing in its wings. You shall go out leaping like calves from the stall. ³And you shall tread down the wicked, for they will be ashes under the soles of your feet, on the day when I act, says the LORD of hosts."

So, considering all of the above, it seems reasonable to me that the "fire," that destroys the ungodly may be the unveiled glory of God. The "destruction" that overtakes them will proceed from the presence [literally "the face"] of the LORD.

They "shall suffer punishment, even eternal destruction from the face of the Lord and from the glory of his might..."
(2 Thess 1:9 ASV).

^"They will suffer the punishment of eternal destruction that comes from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might... " (2 Thess.1:9 ESV alternative reading).

Our God is a consuming fire (Heb.12:29). His holiness and love will finally be seen in unveiled glory throughout all of the universe. God will be "all in all" (1 Cor.15:28). His presence won't have to be mediated to us in a veiled fashion. It will be fully revealed. That will be the greatest thrill of the redeemed and the most fearsome destructive force for the ungodly.

Take their ill gotten gains away

Legal Trouble Spreads to Madoff Family Member

Posted on Oct 2, 2009

AP / Jason DeCrow

Fallen financier Bernard Madoff’s brother, sons and niece are now in legal hot water after a court-appointed trustee filed suit against them on Friday for allegedly pocketing “ill-gotten gains” they received from Madoff’s fraudulent business ventures, according to The Wall Street Journal. —KA

The Wall Street Journal:

The trustee, Irving Picard, alleged in his suit that Mr. Madoff’s brother, Peter, his sons, Andrew and Mark, and his niece, Shana, all received preferential payments or fraudulent funds stemming from Mr. Madoff’s multibillion scheme. These funds enriched the family members, allowing them to fund personal business ventures and purchase homes, boats and cars, the lawsuit says.

Mr. Picard is seeking a return of at least $198,743,299, of which some $141 million was received by the family members in the six months leading up to Mr. Madoff’s arrest on Dec. 11, 2008, the lawsuit says.

Read more

President Obama and Ramadan

A friend sent me a youtube video about President Obama speaking to a room full of Muslims and a few others at the White House at the beginning of the Muslim season of Ramadan. Here's my response to the video:

Politically, I think that presidents often feel they have to honor people of different faiths, no matter how different their views may be. To some extent that's wise. Bush and Carter officially recognized Ramadan during their time in the White House. Politicians can develop some pretty good skills for bridging differences. Not all of which lead to good policy, of course! I'm not sure where Obama's policy toward U.S. Muslims will lead, but I predict that we will be on friendlier terms with reasonable Muslims because of his polite, friendly approach. I don't want a "bull in a china shop" president.

Historically, we are a "Christian nation," i.e., Christian influences clearly shaped our history more than any other religion. That is changing, however, as our population becomes more and more diverse. Whether we should have had such generous immigration laws (which are only partly to blame for the increased diversity) is worth debating. As you know, it was once quite controversial to allow a lot of Irish Catholic immigrants into the U.S. We lost our "protestant purity" a long time ago. (I say that with tongue firmly in cheek.)

Constitutionally, I believe that we are not formally a Christian nation. Gary North, a very conservative Christian scholar, has argued persuasively that the U.S. Constitution was quite different from the original constitutions of the various colonies/states. Most, if not all, of the latter were explicitly Christian; but the U.S. Constitution broke with that tradition and was consciously designed to be non-committal in terms of religion.

I don't think David Barton and some other "Christian Founders" lecturers clearly explain (or even necessarily understand) that distinction. They can argue about our Christian historical roots, but then they seem to skip over what Gary North has pointed out about the primary founding document of our country. The Constitution does not constitute us as a Christian nation in any formal sense.

Theologically: I accept the sincerity of President Obama's confession of faith that Jesus is the Son of God who died to atone for his sins. But, it seems that he also believes that God will show grace to others who do not hold our understanding of Jesus if they seek God according to the light they have.

As you may know, there are a number of Christians who have argued for some "larger hope" kind of theology which would see John 14:6 (Jesus saying, "I am the way") and Acts 4:12 (there's no other name besides Jesus through which we must be saved) as speaking of the "ontological necessity" of Jesus' saving mediatorship (i.e., that no one, even infants, can be saved apart from what Jesus has done on the Cross as an objective reality to reconcile us to God) rather than seeing those verses as speaking of an epistemological necessity (i.e., that one must know and believe all of what the Bible reveals about Jesus' saving work) to be saved.

Obama seems to side with the larger hope view. Whether he's right or not, I certainly don't believe that he is a Muslim or that he is plotting to turn our country over to Muslims. Some people see a video like the one we're talking about and they suspect the worst. I don't.

God bless,
Patrick

Heard the expression "holy cow"?

Robert Scheer on Hiroshima
"Truthdig Classic: The Terror America Wrought" -- This week marks the anniversary of a U.S. attack that deliberately took the lives of thousands of children on their way to school.

The Birthers

Eugene Robinson on the Birthers"The Nut Job as Political Force" -- If there’s been a more clinically insane political phenomenon in my lifetime than the “birthers,” I’ve missed it. Is this what our national discourse has come to? Sheer paranoid fantasy?

The Professor and the Police Officer: Trapped in the 'Script'

Get a free issue of Sojourners

I have been away for the last couple of weeks, first for a family wedding and reunion on a lake in northern Michigan, and then at the Chautauqua conference center in rural New York state. Neither place had great media access (always part of a good vacation) but I kept up the best I could. All of a sudden, I saw the familiar face of Henry Louis (“Skip”) Gates on all the cable news shows -- someone I know from my own teaching at Harvard, where Gates is a distinguished professor. Then I heard the story unfold and repeat about a million times, as sensational cable news stories always do, especially when they are about race.

When I returned to D.C. this weekend, the story was everywhere. Even the president had weighed in, then clarified his statements, then tried to play his role as national racial reconciler (with a beer at the White House with the principle protagonists scheduled for today).

I have a good friend who is a D.C. cab driver. He is always a good analyst of Washington politics, so we plunged into the discussion. “I have been in his shoes,” said the 60-year-old African-American D.C. native. He confirmed that many other African Americans had been swapping their own stories of being stopped on the street, pulled over in their cars, confronted in stores, or just followed around -- or worse -- by police. I remember listening to the African-American mother of a friend of mine growing up in Detroit, who told her children to hide from the police if they ever were lost, while my mother told us kids to look for a policeman if we were far away from home. That is the context of this story for every black American, especially of Gates’ generation. Gates being arrested on his front porch after a report of breaking into his own home seems both incredulous and, at the same time, not surprising to most black people in America.

And that is the script of this racial drama being played out about the professor and the police officer. What most strikes me about the story is how neither participant was able to get out of the script of the sad story of the relationship between black people and white police in America.

Of course, as the facts of the story have unfolded, it gets complicated. Most people agree that the woman who called the police when she saw two men who looked like they were breaking into a house -- as Gates and his cab driver were trying to get into his house through a broken front door after an overseas trip -- was being a reasonable citizen (though many, including me, still wonder if the call would have been made if the two men had been white in Gates’ white neighborhood). And most agree that Officer Crowley is not the typical racist white cop, but rather one with an exemplary record, and is even a police trainer on matters of racial sensitivity and profiling. Most agree that the combination of outrage, ego, and jet lag likely provoked the wrath of Skip Gates on a white cop answering a suspected burglary call and treating him like a suspect at his own home. From what we can piece together from the conflicting accounts of the angry words that ensued between them, it is clear to me that both got caught up in the script, and neither was able to extricate himself from it.

Gates’ reported behavior felt offensive and abusive to the police officer, but an immediate acceptance of Gates’ identity and residence, followed by a quick and effusive apology by Crowley, might have calmed the storm. And in any event, disrespectful behavior to a police officer is not against the law, and an arrest for disorderly conduct of a small 58-year-old man with a cane, on his own porch, when there was no threat to public safety, does appear to justify the accuracy, if not the political wisdom, of President Obama’s suggestion that handcuffing Gates was acting “stupidly.”

Police officers should get a great deal of sympathy, understanding, and support for often very tough split-second decisions where the lives of citizens, or their own lives, are at stake, but this was clearly not one of those situations. And Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson insightfully treated the charge of Gates’ alleged “You have no idea who you’re messing with” elitism when he observed that “meeting a famous Harvard professor who happens to be arrogant is like meeting a famous basketball player who happens to be tall.”

The real issue here is two men who didn’t believe the other showed him proper deference. Thus, again we have fundamental issues of power at stake -- this time between an upper-class black Harvard professor and a working-class white Boston cop. And guess what? The script took over. The Reconciler-in-Chief will likely get them both to behave better at the White House and get, if not apologies, at least a chilling out for the good of the nation. But if this incident is to become a teachable moment, there are at least two lessons to be learned.

The first is that racial profiling, whether or not it was involved in this particular case, is still real and indeed brutal in key sectors of our society -- in particular, the criminal justice system. Clear and pervasive racial discrimination still exists in law enforcement, judicial practices, and penal policies at the bottom of American life even if things are much more complicated and nuanced at the top in places like Cambridge. One of the best articles about this controversy, which draws attention to the real and structural racial injustice still present in American society, is Glen Loury’s op-ed in Sunday’s New York Times:

“Certainly, the contretemps shed no relevant light on the plight of the millions of black men on society’s margins who bear the brunt of police scrutiny and government-sanctioned coercion,” writes Loury. “Nevertheless, this is a principal source of the tension in interactions between the police and black men like me.”

But the second lesson is about the script itself and how to get out of it. The best way to defuse, diminish, and ultimately dismantle its power is to show even excessive respect in potential situations of conflict. Let’s call it “affirmative respect” as a parallel to affirmative action. Nothing defuses a potential conflict like proactively showing such respect in just these kinds of situations, and Crowley should be teaching that in his racial diversity classes. Of course, respect should go both ways, but it must be said that the burden of respect will and should be on white people. Sorry folks, but that is just the burden of our racial history. And you don’t have to be guilty of that history in order to be responsible for it. Most white people in America have benefited from racial discrimination even if they are not personally guilty of it, and are therefore obliged to now show that extra measure of respect. A new generation of black and white people with less baggage and less of a chip on their shoulders will certainly help us all. But doing our part to diminish the power of the script is all of our responsibility. Two men in Cambridge didn’t do a good job of that last week, which could teach us all to do a little better.

An Evangelical Who Doesn’t Like Sarah Palin

by Jim Wallis 07-27-2009

I was doing a workout anyway, so I decided to watch Sarah Palin’s farewell address while pumping away on the elliptical machine. The first thing I heard was CNN’s senior political correspondent Candy Crowley say that “evangelicals” just love Sarah Palin, even though most other groups (even her own Republicans) have steadily soured on the now-former Governor of Alaska. Crowley is a good political analyst who normally has intelligent things to say; but I am tired of the stereotype.

There are a lot of evangelicals, like me (and especially younger evangelicals), who are just embarrassed by Sarah Palin.

The speech was vintage Palin—absolutely awful. After some frenzied patriotism, that the United States was the BESTGREATESTEVER country in the history of the world, and that those who have any questions about any of that are just, you know, the absolutely wrong kind of people, she went on to an endless extolling of OUR MILITARY. Now, I feel a lot of pain and respect for the kids who have been put in harm’s way by the stupid decisions of the last administration, and are still there trying to fight their way out of their leader’s mistakes, but again, blind allegiance to the military and all their wars has not been one of our best national characteristics.

Then she talked about how bad the government always is, in everything, and that HOLLYWOOD STARLETS want to come up to Alaska to take OUR GUNS. So she wanted to remind America that support for the Second Amendment to bear arms comes from a deep northern tradition of WE EAT SO WE HUNT.

And finally, she got into some theology, which I guess is what Candy Crowley thinks warms evangelical hearts. She spoke of “God’s grace helping those who help themselves.” And once again, the vice-presidential candidate who continually startled Americans with an amazing lack of intellectual grasp on so many issues showed that she is also biblically illiterate. God’s “grace” is for “those who help themselves?” I wonder where Sarah thinks that text is found in the Bible. Actually, Sarah, the special love of God seems to be for those who have the hardest time helping themselves—hence they need some help from those of us who can help ourselves. In Sarah’s version of Mathew 25 it must say, “As you have done to those who can best help themselves, you have done to me.”

So from Sarah Palin today, I heard rampant super-patriotism, an uncritical support for everything military, a scurrilous attack on any notion of how government might serve the common good, an effusive defense of guns, and a completely backwards biblical theology of the haves and have-nots. So why, as an evangelical Christian, am I supposed to like her?

When I listen to Sarah Palin, I go back and forth between thinking this person is just not smart enough to be president (and our recent experience of that has been scary enough) to thinking that she is indeed smart enough to be a very effective demagogue — stoking the fears and myths of the American people to build a frightening political future. Either way, I hope she stays retired from politics. So here is one big evangelical dissent from those who reportedly like Sarah Palin. She makes me wince, grimace, roll my eyes, and even worry a little about the future.

Darth Cheney [A Cartoon From Germany]

Legal action against former Pres. Bush

Detainees vs. Bush

Finally someone is going after George W. Bush for his crimes against the world—it’s just a shame that it’s not the U.S. Congress. An Al-Jazeera journalist imprisoned for six years in Guantanamo is planning joint legal action against the former president.

When reasonable concern becomes paranoia

Pedophiles, Witches and Kids By Lenore Skenazy —

If we have reached the point in society where basic adult concern for children is mistaken for evil, we’re back in Salem, 1692.

Sojourners Quote of the Week

QUOTE OF THE WEEK

You felt like a child playing around with a magnifying glass, burning up ants. A 20-year-old kid should not be doing such things to people ... the guys were running a Wild West scene: draw, cock, kill.

- Testimony of an Israeli solider describing last winter's assault on Gaza. His account was part of interviews with 26 unnamed Israeli soldiers released by Breaking the Silence, a group formed by army reservists in 2004. The report did not identify the soldiers by name because many of those quoted were conscripts who could be jailed for speaking to the media. (Source: McClatchy)

Christian Evolutionist answers questions

New NIH Director Francis S. Collins on Faith and Science

In this audio interview, Francis S. Collins, recently nominated by President Obama to be the director of the National Institutes of Health, and author of The Language of God, talks with assistant editor Jeannie Choi about the importance of embracing all truth as God’s truth, and the inextricable link between faith and science. Also, read his commentary in this month’s issue of Sojourners.

What did you learn in Sunday School?

My three-year-old nephew was in my Sunday school class. Each Sunday we begin by reciting the "classroom rules," then work on a new Bible verse. One Sunday his mother asked him what verse he had learned. To which he proudly replied, "Sit down in your chair!"

—Angie Connin, Continental, Ohio

Amy Goodman on Health-Insurance Corruption
"Health Insurance Whistle-Blower Knows Where the Bodies Are Buried" -- Wendell Potter is the health insurance industry’s worst nightmare. He’s a whistle-blower. Potter, the former chief spokesperson for insurance giant CIGNA, recently testified before Congress, “I saw how they confuse their customers and dump the sick—all so they can satisfy their Wall Street investors.”

Christian Evolutionist Nominated By Obama

President Obama Nominates Dr. Francis Collins to Lead the National Institutes of Health

Dr. Collins is a well known scientist and also a committed Christian, who accepts evolution as the God-ordained method of creation.

http://biologos.org/news-events/president-obama-nominates-dr-francis-collins-to-lead-the-national-institutes-of-health/

The BioLogos Foundation, founded by Collins, has a website with a great Q&A series:

The Questions

http://biologos.org/questions

President's Life Threatened By Pastry Chef

WASHINGTON (AP)

Asked to reveal a White House secret, President Obama waxed eloquent about executive pastry chef Bill Yosses' to-die-for pie.

"The pastry chef here makes the best pie I've ever tasted, and that is causing big problems for me," he said. "Whatever pie you like, he will make it and it will be the best pie you have ever eaten," Obama said. "And I haven't figured out how to resist ordering pie every meal."

What's on Sarah's mind?

Patrick: Sarah Palin surprised the media and her fellow Republicans with her resignation as governor of Alaska. Some believe she has no chance of being seriously considered for President the next time around. Howard Fineman of MSNBC & Newsweek disagrees. If she runs, she'd better spend a LOT of time prepping for interviews, and ... oh, ya... the duties of being president!

Fineman: No doubt she's running for president, & don't count her out

Patrick: Geoffrey Dunn reveals some reasons for Palin's resignation. It sounds like he knows what's up.

Geoffrey Dunn The Real Story Behind Palin's Bombshell

Many Or Few Saved?

Patrick: Robin Brace lives in the U.K. He has written an extensive, persuasive article about "evangelical inclucivism." In it, he argues that many more people will be saved than lost in the end. It can be found at: www.ukapologetics.net/evinc.htm .

Evangelical Inclusivism

Patrick: Will the majority of the human race ultimately perish under God's judgment? A lot of Christians assume so. But Neal Punt and others are challenging that assumption, and they base their arguments on Scripture. Here are some links to articles on his website.

1. A Brief Introduction To Biblical Universalism
2. Biblical Fact #1, The So-Called Universalistic Texts
3. Biblical Fact #2, Those Who Will Be Lost
4. Biblical Fact #3, All Are . . . Some Are Not
5. Evangelical Inclusivism in the Old Testament
6. Isn't Faith Necessary In Light of John 3:16?
7. Objective/Subjective Salvation
8. Only One Bible for All Mankind
9. Motivation for Missions or Why Preach?
10. The Message of Missions
11. Positive Responses
12. 1 Tim. 4:10 As An Example
13. Contra Evangelical Inclusivism
14. Dr. Billy Graham and Other Voices
15. Practical Applications
16. By Grace Alone
17. Reconciled! - Past Tense

Why this tolerance for torture? - Leonard Pitts Jr. - MiamiHerald.com

May 6, 2009 ... Between 1933 and 1945, as a series of restrictive laws, brutal pogroms and mass deportations culminated in the slaughter of six million Jews ...

...You'd think people who claim connection to a higher morality would be the ones most likely to take the lonely, principled stand. But you need only look at history to see how seldom that has been the case, how frequently my people -- Christians -- acquiesce to expediency and fail to look beyond the immediate....

www.miamiherald.com/living/columnists/leonard-pitts/story/1034170.html - 69k - Cached - Similar pages -

Patrick: Mr. Pitts, a Christian himself, takes a look at several historical situations in which too many professing followers of Jesus came down on the wrong side of the ethical divide. I love this article. If every Christian would read it and take it to heart, we'd be better off.

Iraq War -- setting back the cause of Christ

World Blog: No return home for Iraqi Christians?
... In Saddam Hussein's time, there were nearly a million Christians living in Iraq, descendants of the first converts to Christianity in Mesopotamia 2,000 years ago. Legend has it that Saint Thomas, one of Jesus Christ's original disciples, brought their faith here from the Holy Land.

Today there are only about 400,000. The rest have fled abroad....

The GOP's Problems

Some thoughts on the reign of King George II. By Patrick J. Buchanan

Having lost both houses of Congress and the White House in two straight elections, Republicans are going through an identity crisis, its leaders holding town hall meetings to "listen" to the people. "What should we focus on? Should we drop the social issues? How do we get the young people back?"

Why is the party in trouble? Simple. Dubya got a hold of the keys, got high on neocon hooch, and crashed and rolled the family SUV. He launched an unnecessary war against a country that had not attacked us. With his utopian No Child Left Behind scheme and his Medicare drug plan, he did his passable imitation of LBJ, and blew a hole in the budget.

Touting globalism, he presided over the loss of one in every four U.S. manufacturing jobs and ran up $5 trillion in trade deficits. He refused to defend the Mexican border against an invasion, then pushed an amnesty for the invaders....

Patrick: It seems to me that a good case could be made for the idea that GWBush was a democratic spy, sent in to masquerade as a competent conservative.

Some Help For Your Self-Pity

If you've got a problem with self-pity, I think this may help.

Meet Connie Culp before her gunshot injury in 2004.
Attractive, huh?

Now meet her again, after her husband shot her in the face, twice.
The injury not only destroyed her face; it also blinded her.

Then, finally, here is Connie after her recent face transplant.

Connie is thankful for her new face. Do you have anything to complain about?
If so, perhaps you'll be complaining with a bit less energy.

Woman Speaks Out After Husband Shoots Her In Face - News Story ...

Feb 25, 2008 ... HOPEDALE, Ohio -- The injuries Connie Culp suffered on a late night in September 2004 are permanent. Her face is disfigured and she is blind ...
www.wtov9.com/news/15408240/detail.html - 78k - Cached - Similar pages -

Are all our troops torturers? No.

Patrick: My brother sent me photos of American soldiers playing with Iraqi children, with some captions about how they were torturing the children. I took this as a sarcastic attack on the articles against torture that I've recently posted. Here's my response to my brother:

I would never accuse all, or even most, of our troops of being guilty of torture, or other crimes. There's a lot of decent kids that get sent to war who don't want to torture (or even kill in self defense, if they could avoid it). I'm sure that many of the troops do care about the Iraqi people. However...

I'll never be convinced that we had good reasons to go to war against Iraq.

And I'll never be convinced that torture or "enhanced interrogation techniques" are OK. I'm dead set against torture, for various reasons. If some smart guy, like Cheney, asks me what would I do if I KNEW that some terrorist had information that could help me save lots of lives, I suppose I'd say,

1. "A lot of times, you may have been advising the torture of people that you didn't even KNOW were terrorists, much less KNOW that they had important information that would save lives. Don't try to fool me with your clever question, Mr. Vice President."

2. Then I might admit, "Maybe, in a moment of unprincipled weakness and cowardice, I'd give in to the temptation to torture some guy I (thought I) KNEW had important information. But I still believe it ought to be against the law."

When our laws are shaped by a mere survival instinct, we are on a road that leads to a destination that won't have much to do with the Bill of Rights, etc.

Sorry that my sense of humor is nil when it comes to torture and Bush and Cheney. I still love you, bro.

Patrick

More about Torture under Bush Administration

Greg Mitchell U.S. Soldier Killed Herself -- After Refusing to Take Part in Torture

Greg Mitchell Part II: Soldier Who Killed Herself -- After Refusing to Take Part in Torture

Paul Begala Yes, National Review, We Did Execute Japanese for Waterboarding

Shepard Smith Uncensored: "We Are America, We Do Not Torture!" (VIDEO)

Patrick: I'm pleasantly surprised that a Fox journalist was allowed to speak out against enhanced interrogation techniques (Orewellian for "torture").

CIA Official: No Proof Harsh Techniques Stopped Terror Attacks

"Daily Show" Takes On Torture Supporters (VIDEO)

Hannity Offers To Be Waterboarded For Charity (By Charles Grodin!)

Patrick: Please, somebody, give Sean what he asks for!

Howard Schweber:
Torture and the Problem of Constitutional Evil: The Way Forward

AP

Howard Schweber: Based on the evidence that is publicly available, I have no hesitation in asserting that Judge Bybee should be subjected to impeachment proceedings, and that Bybee, Yoo, Addington et al. should face disbarment proceedings to determine whether they have violated their fundamental professional responsibilities. Not because the actions they justified were evil, and not even because the actions they justified were unconstitutional, but because they used their art to creatively discover hitherto unknown ways to find justifications for evil and unconstitutional actions. Click here to read more.

Cenk Uygur: What if Khalid Sheikh Mohammed Had Died?

I know what conservatives are screaming into their computers: "But he didn't die! None of them died. So, your question is an absurd hypothetical." In fact, many of them did die.

Bob Cesca: The Tortured Logic of the Torture Superfans

If we can't protect ourselves with our morals intact, we don't deserve to be protected in the first place.

What's the message? Pure hatred?

The Constitution Party sent me an email asking me to send a letter to CNN protesting the bias of one of their reporters. Here's the beginning of it, with the video link:

Tell CNN Bosses Bias Is Bad for Business

By now you've probably seen the Youtube video of CNN's Susan Roesgen, a reporter who harrassed and goaded attendees at Thursday's Chicago Tea Party.

CNN Reporter Slams "Tea-Bagger" For Obama/Nazi ...

Here's my response: It seems obvious that the reporter was very upset by the Hitler poster of Obama. After that, she lost her objectivity. The poor girl was in shock and unable to act in a professional manner after seeing that display of pure hatred. She shouldn't have gotten so emotionally involved; but I can understand her reaction.

If tax-protesters and other conservatives want their message heard, they'd better remember Marshall McLuhan's theory that "the medium is the message." If you present the message in a mean, ugly manner, it will just be heard as meanness and ugliness. Tax protesters should have taken a lesson from Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee in how to protest and smile at the same time.

Conservatives will never win the hearts and minds of others by using Hitler analogies. Why not write something about THAT!

Patrick Mulhaney

Here are some examples of the ugly, mean-spirited message in posters (see below). Such displays of hatred will eventually, I'm afraid, go way beyond poster-making. And they won't win any debate about important issues.

Head Joins the Body: Ex-Korn Guitarist Brian “Head” Welch Tells His Story
by Troy Anderson for Christianity Today (8.13.07)

With Easter fresh on our minds, read how heavy metal rocker Brian “Head” Welch experienced new life by an encounter with Jesus Christ.

Welch, 37, now lives in Arizona, where he spends time with his 9-year-old daughter while writing enough Christian songs to fill three albums. The first album is expected to release in late 2007 under Welch's name. A number of other famous musicians contributed to the album, including Josh Freese (Nine Inch Nails), Trevor Dunn (Mr. Bungle), and Tony Levin (Peter Gabriel). The songs are about his spiritual transformation, and one called "Save Me from Myself" is specifically about how God set him free from drugs and alcohol.

Welch today with 9-year-old Jennea

Happy Easter!

THE RESURRECTION OF THE SON OF GOD

by N. T. Wright

N. T. Wright takes us on a fascinating journey through ancient beliefs about life after death from the shadowy figures who inhabit Homer's Hades, through Plato's hope for a blessed immortality, to the first century, where the Greek and Roman world (apart from the Jews) consistently denied any possibility of resurrection. We then examine ancient Jewish bekiefs on the same subject, from the Bible to the Dead Sea Scrolls and beyond.

This was the scene for a full-scale examination of early Christian beliefs about the resurrection in general and that of Jesus in particular, beginning with Paul and working through to the start of the third century. Wright looks at all the evidence, and into it — aross the board — significant modifications?

To answer this question we come to the strange and evocative Easter stories in the gospels and ask whether they can have been late inventions. Wright seeks the best historical conclusions about the empty tomb and the belief that Jesus really did rise bodily from the dead, recognizing that it was this belief that caused early Christians to call Jesus 'Son of God'. In doing so, they posed a political challenge as well as a theological one. These challenges retain their power in the twenty-first century.

Book Contents

Antony Flew, N. T. Wright, and the Resurrection of Jesus ...

Antony Flew, N. T. Wright, and the Resurrection of Jesus. Craig Blomberg's picture. By Craig Blomberg - Posted on March 12th, 2008 ...
blog.bible.org/primetimejesus/content/antony-flew,-n.-t.-wright,-and-resurrection-jesus - 24k - Cached - Similar pages -

Quick overview of N.T. Wright’s case for the resurrection ...

I thought I would just go over a paper from N.T. Wright, whose multi-volume case for the historicity of the bodily resurrection of Jesus seems to be getting ...
winteryknight.wordpress.com/2009/03/24/quick-overview-of-nt-wrights-case-for-the-resurrection/ - 51k - Cached - Similar pages -

A New Creation: Reflections from Isaiah 65
from Mennonite Central Committee

In Isaiah 65 there is a picture of the new heavens and the new earth that is promised to all God's redeemed people. Watch a slideshow that brings those promises to life.

Loving the Despised

Your ePistle for April 8, 2009

Despised and rejected, sick and suffering, brokenhearted and alone: Today, within your reach, a person fitting this description struggles to face another day. At this very moment—in your neighborhood, in your place of work, in your congregation—someone suffers alone. But it doesn’t have to be that way.

Jesus, who experienced virtually every hardship during his earthly life, understands their struggle. Jesus’ own people, troubled by his unconventional teaching, avoided him and accused him of insanity: “He has a demon and is out of his mind. Why listen to him?” (John 10:20) And Jesus, who reached out time and again to those society rejected—the demon-possessed, the diseased, the corrupt, the compromised—expects us to reach out to these same people, on his behalf, today.

(If you’d like to read more, click here.)

Kristyn Komarnicki
Editor, Christ & Culture, PRISM Magazine

Jacob Heilbrunn: Obama's Bold Iran Move

AP

Jacob Heilbrunn: The Obama administration's announcement today that it will directly participate in meetings with Iran about its nuclear program is not appeasement or capitulation or kowtowing or any other unflattering term that holdouts on the right will deploy. Instead, it is an overdue move. It isn't America that's put on the spot by Obama's policy shift. It's Iran. As the New Yorker reports this week, Iran is in ferment. With elections coming up, the religious hardliners are in a tough position. They can't simply reject Obama's overtures out of hand. In essence, Obama is calling the regime's bluff. Click here to read more.

April 07, 2009 March Madness, 1939 By Patrick J. Buchanan

On Sept. 1, 1939, Hitler's panzers smashed into Poland. Two days later, an anguished Neville Chamberlain declared war, the most awful war in all of history.

Was the war inevitable? No. No war is inevitable until it has begun. Was it a necessary war? Hearken to Churchill: "One day, President Roosevelt told me that he was asking publicly for suggestions about what the war should be called. I said at once, 'The Unnecessary War.' There never was a war more easy to stop than that which has just wrecked what was left of the world ... ."

But if the war need not have happened, what caused it? Let us go back to Munich.

Click here to continue reading Pat Buchanan's column