Recently, I posted my Spider-Man Bible Study / Discussion Guide. Simultaneously, I dropped a few comments on some blogs that referenced a different Spider-Man Bible Study produced by Fuller Theological Seminary's professor Craig Detweiler.
Some GodBloggers have been critical of the whole "movie-based Bible study" enterprise. Not surprising, really: using Hollywood movies to teach Biblical truth is a little like using dance to teach worship, or wine to serve Communion. There may be a place for it, but it's going to generate controversy somewhere.
I've been asked before to justify how I could write a Bible study with a movie as its context. After all, if I'm writing a
I want to say a few words about the power of blogging on a personal level. And I want to challenge my fellow quiet Pentecostals and Charismatics to pick up the keyboard and begin writing.
Words have Consequences
A friend on an email message group recently asked me about the effectiveness of ministering through a blog. So I'd been thinking about that when a couple things landed in my inbox that encouraged me and seem to illustrate the answer to his question. Writing in a public forum — whether blogging, managing a web page, or crafting freelance articles for a newspaper or magazine — can have an effect.
First up, from Amber, who sent me a nice note via my online contact form:
« I just wanted to tell you how much I enjoy your blog. … Your blog is always honest and open, you don't shy away from even the hard stuff in your comments. After joining the Assemblies at 16, I soon discovered that opinions and controversy and doubt are all too often a flag for that person needing to "get saved" again.
I have just recently left the Assemblies … but a part of it is still in me, hopefully the good parts. And honestly, I think all of those good parts are what you portray here at your blog.
Thanks for being there and restoring a little of my fragile hope for humanity. »
Christianity Today finally got around to covering a story that caught my attention back in August (I wrote, “Separation of God and science?”). If you’re interested, read it here: “Admissions: Rejected: Christian school sues University of California over requirements.”
Here's an excerpt:
"The question the university must confront in reviewing these texts is not whether they have religious content," the university said, "but whether they provide a comprehensive view of the relevant subject matter, reflecting knowledge generally accepted in the scientific and educational communities and with which a student at the university level should be conversant."
For example, the university said it rejected the literature course for using an anthology as the only required text.
"It's not that we're not allowing a particular viewpoint," UC spokeswoman Ravi Poorsina said. "We're saying that we require certain disciplines that in these cases are not there."
Doesn’t seem
The Los Angeles Times is reporting that the Association of Christian Schools International (800+ religious schools in California) and the Calvary Chapel Christian School (Murrieta, California) filed a civil rights lawsuit this past Thursday against the University of California, claiming religious discrimination. I believe the suit specifically alleges that UC discriminates against students who are taught creationism. According to the LA Times, UC won't recognize high school science courses using textbooks based on creationism, or that challenge Darwinistic theories.
Aparrently, UC believes it is impossible to teach real science when matters of faith are at stake. Has anyone in the admissions office there looked up the definition of "theory" lately? Among the high school courses rejected by UC are:
Christianity's Influence in American History Christianity and Morality in American Literature Special Providence: American Government
Those sound like reasonable course titles, to me.
I found this especially compelling in light of some of