Comments for renrutkram http://renrutkram.com theology, life, culture, and miscellany Tue, 15 Nov 2011 21:45:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ Comment on Mythbuster Monday: Myth of Experience by Wisdom Comes With Experience, Not Age | Moving On Up a Little Higher http://renrutkram.com/2011/10/17/mythbuster-monday-myth-of-experience/#comment-764 Tue, 15 Nov 2011 21:45:11 +0000 http://renrutkram.com/?p=1639#comment-764 [...] Mythbuster Monday: Myth of Experience (renrutkram.com) [...]

]]> Comment on Racism and the Gospel by Heather Weatherly http://renrutkram.com/2011/10/14/racism-and-the-gospel/#comment-751 Mon, 24 Oct 2011 03:21:22 +0000 http://renrutkram.com/?p=1643#comment-751 Phenomenal and refreshing. I want to be the truth lived out.

]]> Comment on Am I a recalcitrant pagan if I use CE rather than AD? by David Moles http://renrutkram.com/2011/10/12/am-i-a-recalcitrant-pagan-if-i-use-ce-rather-than-ad/#comment-735 Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:38:35 +0000 http://renrutkram.com/?p=1632#comment-735 I am not by the way categorizing proponents of the BC/CE conversion as terrorists. My bad for not being clearer. I was just attempting to draw the extremes in negotiation situations where “compromise” might work and might not work. The secular proponents of the BCE/CE conversion are somewhere between my two posited positions.

]]> Comment on Am I a recalcitrant pagan if I use CE rather than AD? by Kristopher Stoker http://renrutkram.com/2011/10/12/am-i-a-recalcitrant-pagan-if-i-use-ce-rather-than-ad/#comment-734 Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:14:03 +0000 http://renrutkram.com/?p=1632#comment-734

Mark Turner :
Sometimes the words you use can prevent someone from hearing the more important concept you are trying to explain. Insider language can actually be an impediment to the gospel!

Sure, couldn’t you also say that even in it’s smallest form, the usage of BC & AD is confirming the presence of Christ in world culture. As BC & AD are the more widely used choices, couldn’t you use that as a conversation starter regarding the wide-spread and 1500 year perpetuating momentum of acknowledgement of Christ’s (approximate) birthday?

]]> Comment on Am I a recalcitrant pagan if I use CE rather than AD? by David Moles http://renrutkram.com/2011/10/12/am-i-a-recalcitrant-pagan-if-i-use-ce-rather-than-ad/#comment-733 Wed, 12 Oct 2011 18:02:14 +0000 http://renrutkram.com/?p=1632#comment-733 If the early Christians had done in Rome what the Romans were doing then many would not have died in the colisseum and they wouldn’t have had to live underground in the catacombs. Would Christianity have survived if its followers had chosen to live like the Romans. Perhaps in marriage survival means compromise but in negotiating with terrorists are they ever satisfied with compromise? Furthermore even the secular proponents of BCE/CE have had to suspend their intellectual credulity since what is a “common era” and who we have it in common with lacks any sort of intellectual precision or substance. What should we do when they wish to change the number of the year too as it is perhaps even more “religious” due to that which it refers? Should we compromise and split the difference and say its 1006?

]]> Comment on Am I a recalcitrant pagan if I use CE rather than AD? by David Moles http://renrutkram.com/2011/10/12/am-i-a-recalcitrant-pagan-if-i-use-ce-rather-than-ad/#comment-732 Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:46:27 +0000 http://renrutkram.com/?p=1632#comment-732 If you follow the objectivity and non-advocacy position to it’s logical conclusion at some point the years themselves will have to go too. It is a problem for the secularist who advocates saying 2011 CE since what now is implicit only needs a bang drummer to point out that the referent point of Christ’s birth is too religious. The French Revolutionary crowd for some 14 years if memory serves me correctly changed the names of the months of the year as well as the date. They dated everything from the start of their revolution. A truly secular position will not stop with the removal of AD and BC. The only question is when will that take place.

]]> Comment on Supporting the Troops but not the War? by vortigernlex http://renrutkram.com/2010/08/30/supporting-the-troops-but-not-the-war/#comment-731 Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:29:55 +0000 http://renrutkram.com/?p=1239#comment-731 If you do not support the goal that the soldiers are working towards then how can you support them without merely supporting a fiction. Its like a botanist who has trained all his life to look at daisies and all the support he receives is focused on going to the zoo. He needs wellies and his mother gives him a sandals.

We have to at least accept the war and engage with its broadest goals. If we can not do that, if say the actual goal of the war was genocide then we must oppose both the war and the soldiers as many of our brothers and sisters did in Nazi Germany and are still doing today in horrible regimes around the world.

]]> Comment on Am I a recalcitrant pagan if I use CE rather than AD? by vortigernlex http://renrutkram.com/2011/10/12/am-i-a-recalcitrant-pagan-if-i-use-ce-rather-than-ad/#comment-730 Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:13:06 +0000 http://renrutkram.com/?p=1632#comment-730 On the face of it there is nothing wrong using CE rather than AD but if there was nothing in it the secularists and humanists would not be interested in it. I think it reflects there desire to get religion out of everything.

]]> Comment on Am I a recalcitrant pagan if I use CE rather than AD? by Mark Turner http://renrutkram.com/2011/10/12/am-i-a-recalcitrant-pagan-if-i-use-ce-rather-than-ad/#comment-729 Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:53:33 +0000 http://renrutkram.com/?p=1632#comment-729 Sometimes the words you use can prevent someone from hearing the more important concept you are trying to explain. Insider language can actually be an impediment to the gospel!

]]> Comment on Am I a recalcitrant pagan if I use CE rather than AD? by Kristopher Stoker http://renrutkram.com/2011/10/12/am-i-a-recalcitrant-pagan-if-i-use-ce-rather-than-ad/#comment-728 Wed, 12 Oct 2011 16:52:03 +0000 http://renrutkram.com/?p=1632#comment-728 A “recalcitrant pagan”? no… but should we ever intentionally _choose_ the pluralistic choice?

]]>