Sturtz Stuff

You can read online James N. Anderson and Greg Welty’s paper, “ The Lord of Non-Contradiction: An Argument for God from Logic ,” Philosophia Christi 13:2 (2011): 321-338. Here’s a summary: In this paper we offer a new argument for the existence of God. We contend that the laws of logic are metaphysically dependent on the existence of God, understood as a necessarily existent, personal, spiritual being; thus anyone who grants that there are laws of logic should also accept that there is a God. We argue that if our most natural intuitions about them are correct, and if they’re to play the role in our intellectual activities that we take them to play, then the laws of logic are best construed as necessarily existent thoughts — more specifically, as divine thoughts about divine thoughts. We conclude by highlighting some implications for both theistic arguments and antitheistic arguments.

The following review comes from the former women's ministry leader at Mars Hill church where Mark Driscoll is the Sr. Minister. Here is her review . . . . I haven't mentioned Mark Driscoll or Mars Hill on this blog in the 4 years since I stepped back from leading women's ministry there. By conviction, I've addressed principles, not people here, especially in a negative sense. However, in Real Marriage, Mark and Grace recall personal events as the foundation of the book, and they project their conclusions from these personal events onto those reading it. They have brought these things into the public arena and revealed much about intimate areas of their life that affected many people in their public ministry. In light of this, silence on these issues no longer seems the righteous choice. Keep reading . . .

New research shows how believers tailor Christian teachings to fit their own political viewpoint . . . Read More

Roger Olson sure is , and he articulates (perhaps better than I would) one of my own struggles: I read Yoder and Niebuhr and find myself saying 'Amen' to both of them a lot, despite the fact that they disagree with each other a lot. When it comes to Christian social ethics I have two heroes, but the problem is they are widely considered antithetical. John Howard Yoder and Reinhold Niebuhr. Much of Yoder’s reputation is gained from contradicting Niebuhr. And of course, much of Niebuhr’s reputation was gained from contradicting pacifism. Admittedly, the pacifism Niebuhr was against was not Yoder’s. He even tipped his hat to Anabaptists as a needed witness. He was against the liberal Protestant pacifism of the social gospel movement (people like Edwin Dahlberg). Nevertheless, insofar as Niebuhr thought ALL pacifism is wrong and Yoder thought pacifism (Christocentric like his or liberal) is right, they are opposites on that and many other issues. Yoder has in recent years en...

So football is not the story we often get feed. How the gladiators of our day enjoy a sport that is all about fair play and hard work. Just what do sports teach us? We put our kids in sports thinking they will learn responsibility, team work and the reward of practice. Yet is what they really learn? Not suggesting that kids should not play sports. Just asking what do sports really teach and say about our culture? Ban the 'bounty' bums, but blame culture

If you have not read the book Jesus for President by Shane Claiborne now would be a good time. I read it a while back and with all the presidential politics going on - it is a good time to read it if you haven't or re-read it if you got it.