Skip to content

No Blog is an Island – 1.21.11

01.22.2011

So I started a new job this week (a temporary rotation until late spring/early summer), and there’s a LOT less opportunity for blogging on my lunch break.  I’m going to make every effort to keep to my schedule, but if I miss a day or fall slightly behind, I promise it’s not because I’m losing interest in the blog.  This has become one of my favorite rituals, and I am committed to keeping it up.  To make up for the fact that the 1.21 links are coming on 1.22, I’m making them super-sized.  Enjoy!

  • Derek Ouellette is doing yeoman’s work over at Covenant of Love, blogging through the KJV in 90 days.  I’ve saved so many because I want to reference them for my own work and/or pass them along in this forum.  I can’t describe them all here, so just trust me when I say to read his posts on Lev 1-14 (Why is Leviticus so boring?), Num 22-36 (Does God change His mind?), Deut 1-8 (What is the Covenant?), Deut 9-22 (Grace in the OT), Deut 23-24 (Love and obedience), Josh 1-14 (Ethnic cleansing?), Josh 15-Judg 3 (Failure).  I’ve heard it said (and I agree) that the greatest compliment one writer can pay another is to say, ‘I wish I’d written that.’  Well, these posts are an example of what I wish this blog were.
  • Damaris Zehner at Internet Monk has a great post on how, without turning Jesus into a self-help guru, we can move beyond the need to be saved and start Chapter 2 of the Christian Life, how to live in a way that glorifies God and furthers His kingdom.
  • Trevin Wax at Kingdom People asks which counterfeit gospels are the most prevalent.  Interestingly, I think we see a lot of both the activist gospel (social change, not evangelism) and the quietist gospel (soul change, not politics) in our culture.
  • At Near Emmaus, Brian LePort takes a look at the question of whether the virgin birth was really prophesied.
  • Read Aquinas, and read Augustine.  These greats are great for a reason: they’re great!
  • While I think I’ll pass on actually watching the movie (too grueling and twisted for me, thanks), First Thoughts has an interesting review of Black Swan and how it portrays the contrast between the Law and the Gospel.
  • In response to a scuffle between two ‘family tree’-style representations of church history (I think they’re both wrong because they’re both right.  From my understanding (mainly from reading McCullough), I don’t think it would be fair to list either Rome or Constantinople as the ‘original’ church.  There wasn’t as much of a settled hierarchy from which one or the other broke away.  As the church institutionalized, authority began to center around the Roman and Eastern traditions, and they eventually went their own separate ways (which isn’t to call it an amicable split, mind you, just one in which there was no clear predecessor and/or branch-off).  However, I link it here mainly as context for this AWESOME graph that tries to set everyone straight.  I present, from Scientia et Sapientia, the Baptists’ version of church history:

westernthm.files.wordpress.com
Advertisements
One Comment
  1. Marc Cortez permalink

    I’m glad you liked the chart. I thought it was important to set the record straight and make sure people know how church history really worked. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: