jeffreymark

ALL THAT JAZZ

One of my favorite online learning tools is the Teaching Company. On numerous occasions I have purchased their lectures and listened to them while I drive. The discs provide an abundance of entry level courses designed to inspire students to launch out into the deep. Recently I purchased the course on Jazz. This particular series provides an introduction and history to the development of the Jazz genera. One can go here to discover more about this American phenomenon whose roots sprouted from the African-American culture. Provided in this link are other links to rare Jazz recordings.

EVANGELICAL MANIFESTO II

For the umpteenth time evangelical characterizations incessantly fall into the hands of secular pundits who know little about, nor possess the spiritual eyes to comprehend, evangelical faith. Liberal Christian historian extraordinaire Martin Marty, uses the recently publicized Evangelical Manifesto as a springboard for offering a salient description of this often maligned group. From a historical perspective Marty summarizes evangelical beliefs this way:

1. Always central is focus on Jesus Christ, affirming that the human Jesus, the rabbi of Nazareth, is also the ascended Lord. Unitarians respected Jesus but did not keep the Jesus-focus, and many liberal Protestants wavered or wandered or progressed beyond it.

2. Evangelicals have high views of biblical authority. In the fundamentalist and neo-evangelicals many attached this to a philosophical view which contended that there could be no "errors" in God's word. They disagreed with each other on many things that should have been agreeable-to in the inerrant Bible, but they agreed on its inerrancy. Today's evangelicals continue to have a high view of biblical authority, but many find the inerrancy approach confining and not true to the scriptural teaching itself.

3. The key theme of the "evangel" is God' grace, the call for faith, and not depending upon human "works" to please God.

4. Evangelicals stress a conversion experience--each believer certifies an experience or at least a process of turning, powered by the Holy Spirit.

5. Fundamentalists knew how the world would end, and wanted no one "Left Behind." Many evangelicals have apocalyptic views and all believe that the End of History is in God's hands, in Christ. But they don't hold to a single defining and confining literalism about the end.

6. And this is huge, and being recovered: evangelicals believed and believe that, after being "saved by grace through faith" they were and are to make faith active in love, through works of mercy and, though less clearly, works of justice. Today many new energies--including embrace of environmental and justice issues--moves evangelicals.

That's a short list, but I think I can find these wherever people call themselves evangelical or get called that.

Marty's description sounds more like traditional Biblical Christianity than it does 1920's fundamentalism. Elsewhere I commented that evangelicals inherit a tainted label from the secular media's political encounters with the group. Having associated with evangelicals now for more than 30 years I would venture to guess, and this is simply a hunch mind you, that approximately 98% of the group cares very little for involving themselves in any political endeavor. Most go about their daily routines, working, worshipping, and quietly voting without anyone other than family and business cohorts ever hearing a peep from them. Furthermore, end times pundits such as Tim LaHaye and John Hagee represent a shallow pop cultural form of religion called dispensationalism that makes for good high-tech movies, but receives no credibility among evangelical scholars. For more on Marty's fair and balanced assessment go here.

WHY ARE OIL PRICES RISING?

Since I'm Economics 101 challenged I do not know why prices continue to skyrocket. But a few pundits like Gateway Pundit put forth a few reasonable questions today concerning the matter:

Over the past 30 years:

Which party blocked the development of new sources of petroleum?-- Democrat
Which party blocked drilling in ANWR?-- Democrat
Which party blocked drilling off the coast of Florida?-- Democrat
Which party blocked drilling off of the east coast?-- Democrat
Which party blocked drilling off of the west coast?-- Democrat
Which party blocked drilling off the Alaskan coast?-- Democrat
Which party blocked building oil refineries?-- Democrat
Which party blocked clean nuclear energy production?-- Democrat
Which party blocked clean coal production?-- Democrat

Read the rest of the analysis here.

EVANGELICAL MANIFESTO

Evangelicals come in all shapes and sizes. That truth emerged publicly last week in a new document produced by a host of evangelical leaders with diverse sociopolitical persuasions. The document's steering committee boasts of true theologians who part company with the more visible, yet misguided pop culture evangelicals. I will comment on the document at some point in the near future following a heavy reading of the material. In the meantime, however, I applaud this point from the manifesto establishing evangelical identity and perhaps refuting stereotypical images produced by a secular media:

Our first task is to reaffirm who we are. Evangelicals are Christians who define themselves, their faith, and their lives according to the Good News of Jesus of Nazareth. (Evangelical comes from the Greek word for good news, or gospel.) Believing that the Gospel of Jesus is God’s good news for the whole world, we affirm with the Apostle Paul that we are “not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation.” Contrary to widespread misunderstanding today, we Evangelicals should be defined theologically, and not politically, socially, or culturally.

Indeed evangelicals walk down all roads of life. Some choose politics of both liberal and conservative persuasion, while others remain true to preaching purely from the Bible and allowing the chips to fall wherever they may. Sadly, political involvement has adulterated the truth about this deeply religious group.
Read the manifesto here.

EINSTEIN AND GOD

In this day and age it seems fashionable to separate intellect from a belief in God. Well meaning pseudo intellectuals fancy themselves independent thinkers free of God, man, and beasts. Often when faced with mortality, however, these pinheads, secretly pray, if not for any other reason than to get out of hell if indeed hell truly exists. The great comedian and public cynic W.C. Fields got caught reading the Bible on his deathbed. When asked why he replied, "I'm looking for loopholes."

Today the agnostic crowd discovered a compelling mascot with this report from Breitbart news services:

Albert Einstein described belief in God as "childish superstition" and said Jews were not the chosen people, in a letter to be sold in London this week, an auctioneer said Tuesday. The father of relativity, whose previously known views on religion have been more ambivalent and fuelled much discussion, made the comments in response to a philosopher in 1954.

As a Jew himself, Einstein said he had a great affinity with Jewish people but said they "have no different quality for me than all other people".

"The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish.

"No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this," he wrote in the letter written on January 3, 1954 to the philosopher Eric Gutkind, cited by The Guardian newspaper.

The German-language letter is being sold Thursday by Bloomsbury Auctions in Mayfair after being in a private collection for more than 50 years, said the auction house's managing director Rupert Powell.

In it, the renowned scientist, who declined an invitation to become Israel's second president, rejected the idea that the Jews are God's chosen people.

"For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions," he said.

"And the Jewish people to whom I gladly belong and with whose mentality I have a deep affinity have no different quality for me than all other people."

And he added: "As far as my experience goes, they are no better than other human groups, although they are protected from the worst cancers by a lack of power. Otherwise I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them."

Previously the great scientist's comments on religion -- such as "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind" -- have been the subject of much debate, used notably to back up arguments in favour of faith.

Powell said the letter being sold this week gave a clear reflection of Einstein's real thoughts on the subject. "He's fairly unequivocal as to what he's saying. There's no beating about the bush," he told AFP.

Yet, when one reads other sources who delve into Einstein's religiosity they discover a byzantine journey that finally settled for simplicity. During his teen and formative years, Einstein researched his Jewish roots and adopted a a devout attitude. Later he rejected the Jewish faith and planted his feet firmly in a sort of Jeffersonian deism. Walter Isaacson of the Aspen Institute offers a window into Einstein's faith in his fairly recent book entitled Einstein: His Life and Universe In fact Isaacson contradicts this recent revelation if not in substance, at least atmospherically, declaring:

But throughout his life, Einstein was consistent in rejecting the charge that he was an atheist. "There are people who say there is no God," he told a friend. "But what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views." And unlike Sigmund Freud or Bertrand Russell or George Bernard Shaw, Einstein never felt the urge to denigrate those who believed in God; instead, he tended to denigrate atheists. "What separates me from most so-called atheists is a feeling of utter humility toward the unattainable secrets of the harmony of the cosmos," he explained. In fact, Einstein tended to be more critical of debunkers, who seemed to lack humility or a sense of awe, than of the faithful. "The fanatical atheists," he wrote in a letter, "are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who--in their grudge against traditional religion as the 'opium of the masses'-- cannot hear the music of the spheres."

Thus, given the fashionable penchant toward pseudo intellectual agnosticism and atheism one must view articles such as this latest from Breitbart with a skeptical and critical eye.

IT'S ALL OVER BUT THE CRYING

The Dallas Stars down 2 games exhibited some hopeful moments during the second period in their third game against the Red Wings. Detroit, however, simply over powers Dallas in every phase of the game. With 8 minutes to go in the game Detroit leads 4-2. I predict Detroit takes the series 4 straight. Stars live bloggers summed the night up with this telling observation:

The Stars seemed to be happy with a moral victory following their 2-1 Game 2 loss to the Red Wings on Saturday in Detroit. They were pleased that they played better and only lost by a goal.

Wonder what they'll think after this loss tonight? Maybe they'll be happy that they finally scored two goals against the Red Wings.

PRAYER WALL

In need of prayer? Post your request on a United Methodist prayer wall and join hundreds of praying Christians.

OBAMA'S 57 STATES AND A FEW MORE WANNABES

Power Line posts a map of the 57 states Obama claimed to have visited. The map includes Canada's more liberal provinces, 18 states that voted for Kerry, and Mexico. Other maps reveal a couple of states that might provide enthusiastic support for Obama as well.

THE STRANGE APPEAL OF DR. OBAMA

In my opinion Barack Obama epitomizes this hideous fascination we have with pop culture. Never before have so many people been so crazy over a presidential candidate of whom they know so little about. Cartoonist Michael Ramirez provocatively illustrates the point in this old cartoon.

TOM WOLF IN THE SPOTLIGHT

Last week I linked readers to part one of Peter Robinson's compelling interview with best selling author Tom Wolf. One can find the entire interview here. Peter Robinson is a true intellectual and asks challenging questions to which he receives challenging answers from Wolf. Obviously Wolf is well versed in a variety of subjects from Freud to politics. Forget Matt Luaer and Larry King. Robinson offers substantive stuff. Here is Robinson's synopsis of the Wolf interview:

Tom Wolfe begins by discussing the written word, in its popular forms. The master novelist and journalist says the novel is dying a horrible death, although non-fiction work will continue and the memoir will never die. He then talks about the subject of his latest novel (still in progress): immigration.

Tom Wolfe says the ideas for his novels grow out of conversation — from what’s really happening. His critics have pounced on this, calling his novels more journalism than literature. But Wolfe shrugs this off: He says he doesn’t write for the “charming aristocracy” — the aristocracy of taste that believes the novelist must aspire to things the masses cannot understand.

Darwin, Marx, Freud, (E.O.) Wilson? Tom Wolfe says the common thread there is the power of the word — of ideas that change human history in large and obvious ways.

Tom Wolfe says evolution ended when man learned to speak — with the dawn of homo loquax. Where status for the beast of the field is determined by power, for man it is determined in innumerable ways because of language. And it is language that gives us rational thought. Wolfe asks, “Have you ever see an animal shrug?”

Tom Wolfe and America? He loves the place, a position that puts him at odds with much of the charming aristocracy. He’s also an optimist about America — and American greatness. “The biggest problem,” says Wolfe, “is all the people who see a problem.”

A MCCAIN/CLINTON TICKET?

Conservative radio talk show host Mike Gallagher reports than one of his listeners suggested a most preposterous scenario for John McCain. He raised the possibility of a McCain/Clinton ticket. Gallagher continues by elaborating on similar thoughts from best selling author David Frum:

He [David Frum] makes a compelling case that if the GOP has any chance of retaining power in D.C., the party should realize that this isn’t our father’s Republican Party anymore. Instead of hearing all the supposed stories of Republican voters willing to support Barack Obama (a bizarre concept that I still can’t understand), why not produce a GOP candidate that Independents and even Democrats can support? He seems to think McCain might be that guy.

And that's the rub so to speak-not our father's party. So we acquiesce and say goodbye to any sort of politically institutionalized conservatism? Frankly I like the polarization of conservative/liberal thought. I cringe at the idea of opportunistic compromise. Using that logic compels us to consider compromising with terrorists. I mean if you can't beat 'em join 'em. Conceding one's principles for a so called higher cause implies the original principles held no noble purpose. If I believe strong Christian families(yes I said Christian), federal budget cutting, and bolstering national defense, enhance freedom, thus encouraging individual creativity, why would I surrender to a political philosophy that enslaves, belittles, and dehumanizes? This is precisely the issue that bothers conservatives when considering a McCain presidency. If he's smart, he will choose a true conservative as a running mate. Although I disagree with Republicans who threaten to capitulate, I believe McCain stands to lose an even greater number of former Republicans if he continues to thumb his nose at them by placing a Democrat on the ticket.

GAS PRICES MAY BENEFIT POLITICAL CANDIDATES

Because I am an economics 101 challenged person I will leave the analysis of rising gas prices to the more knowledgeable pundits. Since I spend much time on the road, however, I must take a serious look at downsizing my vehicle-something I hate to do. While I fidget and cringe over high prices Robert Schroeder of the W$J informs me that a few unlikely folks are profiting from the gas price spike:

But the closeness to the election is as much of a potential peril as it is an opportunity to energize voters. Just ask Hillary Clinton, whose proposal to suspend the 18.4-cent-a-gallon gasoline tax this summer apparently didn't gain her enough traction with voters after economists almost universally panned the idea. McCain is floating a similar idea. Obama has rejected it. It's difficult to influence energy prices from Washington in the short term. But that hasn't stopped Clinton or McCain from talking about it. "It makes for really good headlines," says Matt Klink, vice president at Los Angeles-based Democratic strategist Cerrell Associates. Voters should take heart, though, since there's no shortage of proposals to bring down prices in the long term, and boost U.S. energy independence at the same time. Now the question is -- in an election year -- can the candidates agree on anything? "Whenever you get a critical mass of Democrats and Republicans working together on an issue, you get a solution," says Klink -- who adds that he hasn't seen any real bipartisan effort yet.

NO FLOWERS PLEASE

Hard working mothers today would rather receive a more lasting gift than flowers on Mother's Day.

After the most desired gift, a card (which is far more personal than an e-mail, maybe even more so than a phone call), moms said they would like “a day of no chores or responsibilities.” So much for flowers and candy. (I’ve actually never understood why flowers are such a popular gift. They expire in days, and a meaningful Mother’s Day gift should be timeless.) But a fine dinner at a fancy restaurant ranked highest among gift selections from their husbands. From these selections, it appears that moms don’t need lots of bows and ribbons to know gratitude and affection -- just something from the heart.

Outside of a day off and a good steak dinner, (Tex-Mex food if one lives in Texas) I believe a nice piece of jewelry makes a fitting gift. Never give a microwave oven or anything else mom can use on you. Make it personally significant.

Read more here.

DORTHY WHERE ARE YOU WHEN WE NEED YOU

This from Move America Forward:

The anti-military organization, Code Pink, is bringing witches out to the Berkeley Marine Recruiting Center this Friday to:

"cast spells, weave magic, invoke the foremothers, share wisdom, lead rituals to banish war and violence and to bring peace to the MRS, to protect our youth from the powerful spells of pro-war forces, to lead the men of the marine recruiting station off into the oceans of peace!"

So we here at Move America Forward decided to have a counter-event. We're calling it a "Witch-Hunt" and we ask you to join us this FRIDAY, May 9th at the Berkeley Marine Recruiting Center. We'll be out there from 8:00 AM - 12:00 Noon and ask you to come and join us for part of the time, or all of the time if you can spare the time.

Bring your buckets of water tomorrow and melt em' down.

LIVE BLOGGING STARS/REDWINGS

With 4:23 left in the second I'm still waiting for Dallas to show up. Detroit 4-Dallas 0. I quit.
Go here for Dallas Morning News live blogging.

EVER CHANGING VIEWS OF EVANGELICALS II

Evangelicals traditionally vote conservative. Some pundits, including Steven Waldman of Beliefnet, look into their crystal ball and see the tablets crumbling:

...if he’s the nominee, Obama has a real chance at winning substantial evangelical support.

First, evangelicals are in a period of de-alignment from the Republican Party. The leading evangelical pollster George Barna found that only 29% of “born again” Christians now say they support Republicans, compared with 62% in 2004. That doesn’t mean they’ll flock to Democrats -– they could end up voting Republican just as much ever -– but large numbers are up for grabs.

Second, Sen. Obama has been working harder for their support than any other Democrat in recent memory. In his book “The Audacity of Hope”, instead of describing the religious right as a grotesque, right-wing power grab (as many on the left do), Sen. Obama said that its rise stemmed from Christians “feeling mocked and under attack.” Far from casting them as bigots, he declared that “most evangelicals are more tolerant than the media would have us believe.”

Sen. Obama has ripped Democrats for their failure to tap into the moral and even religious underpinnings of their views. “If we progressives shed some of our own biases, we might recognize the values that both religious and secular people share when it comes to the moral and material direction of the country,” he wrote.

Third, he sounds evangelical. In an interview with the leading evangelical publication Christianity Today, he said, “I am a Christian, and I am a devout Christian. I believe in the redemptive death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. I believe that that faith gives me a path to be cleansed of sin and have eternal life. But most importantly, I believe in the example that Jesus set by feeding the hungry and healing the sick and always prioritizing the least of these over the powerful.”

In the end many evangelicals will scrutinize the reverend Wright affair, and try to assess the depth of the relationship between he and Obama. We must also remember, evangelicals traditionally view abortion as a litmus test for choosing political leaders.

Continue reading here.

REASONS TO VOTE FOR MCCAIN

We may not like his liberal maverick demeanor, and we certainly remain skeptical concerning his fiscal and social policies, but as Ankle Biting Pundit suggests:

Today GOP voters, especially conservatives had cause to be a bit schizophrenic, as John McCain reminded them of the things they like about him, as well as the reason why at times, they can’t stand him, and swear they will never vote for him in November. If, however, you are in that last group, let me give you the “good”, and allow you to ruminiate on why it is necessary that neither Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton become President. Today, John McCain gave a major policy speech on the philosophies that will guide him in selecting judges. Our pal Jim Geraghty has a good recap of some parts of the speech.

The old proverbial lesser of three evils comes to mind when contemplating the McCain vote. I don't like him, but gosh darn, he sure beats the hell out of "god knows what he stands for Obama" and the "flippin and a floppin'" Hillary.

THEY GROW 'EM BIG IN TEXAS

This is an old image, (April 2008) but it is indicative of Texas sized spring weather. Just another balmy day at the office.

DEM'S WORTHLESS TENURE

Courtesy of Freedoms Watch

OBAMA'S CIRCLE

The old saying, "You can tell a man by the company he keeps," incessantly pops up as the days go by and we learn more about Obama's circle. Pundits today published this bit from retro land concerning Bill Ayers and his audacious desecration of the American flag.

My good friend Anne Leary of Backyard Conservative, a fabulous North Shore blogger, tipped me off to this picture, which I've heard rumors about, of Bill Ayers stepping on a US flag in 2001.

I believe it's from Chicago Magazine, and it accompanied an article in which Ayers was peddling his terrorist memoir, Fugitive Days.

At the time this photograph was taken, Obama and Ayers were serving together on the board of the Woods Fund. It was in 2001 when Ayers donated $200 to Obama's State Senate campaign fund.

"Guilty as sin, free as a bird, it's a great country" is one of the Ayers quotes in the top clipping.

Go here to read more and follow other links.

TOM WOLF ON CULTURE

Novelist, writer, and social commentator Tom Wolf predicts the end to novels and then discusses his new novel here. Difficult to accept Wolf's prognosis as gospel when the local Barnes & Noble seems to sell an infinite number of novels each year.

PREACHERS AND THEIR POLITICIANS

Politicians employing spiritual advisors runs the gamut of history. From Isaiah's hobnobbing with Hebrew Kings to Billy Graham's near fatal endorsement of Richard Nixon to Obama's dubious relationship with the reverend Wrong (Wright) both prophets and Kings have been seared when touching the hem of each other's garments. John McCain's association with fundamentalist and end times pundit John Hagee, once again raises eyebrows particularly among vengeful left wing types seeking to settle the Wright/Obama score. One such pundit, New York Times columnist Frank Rich, causticly exhorts voters to apply the same arbitrary standard of judgement to McCain as Obama suggesting:

BORED by those endless replays of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright? If so, go directly to YouTube, search for “John Hagee Roman Church Hitler,” and be recharged by a fresh jolt of clerical jive.

What you’ll find is a white televangelist, the Rev. John Hagee, lecturing in front of an enormous diorama. Wielding a pointer, he pokes at the image of a woman with Pamela Anderson-sized breasts, her hand raising a golden chalice. The woman is “the Great Whore,” Mr. Hagee explains, and she is drinking “the blood of the Jewish people.” That’s because the Great Whore represents “the Roman Church,” which, in his view, has thirsted for Jewish blood throughout history, from the Crusades to the Holocaust.

...Mr. McCain has been shocked to learn that his clerical ally has made many other outrageous statements. Mr. Hagee, it’s true, did not blame the American government for concocting AIDS. But he did say that God created Hurricane Katrina to punish New Orleans for its sins, particularly a scheduled “homosexual parade there on the Monday that Katrina came.”

Mr. Hagee didn’t make that claim in obscure circumstances, either. He broadcast it on one of America’s most widely heard radio programs, “Fresh Air” on NPR, back in September 2006. He reaffirmed it in a radio interview less than two weeks ago. Only after a reporter asked Mr. McCain about this Katrina homily on April 24 did the candidate brand it as “nonsense” and the preacher retract it.

Mr. McCain says he does not endorse any of Mr. Hagee’s calumnies, any more than Barack Obama endorses Mr. Wright’s. But those who try to give Mr. McCain a pass for his embrace of a problematic preacher have a thin case. It boils down to this: Mr. McCain was not a parishioner for 20 years at Mr. Hagee’s church.

That defense implies, incorrectly, that Mr. McCain was a passive recipient of this bigot’s endorsement. In fact, by his own account, Mr. McCain sought out Mr. Hagee, who is perhaps best known for trying to drum up a pre-emptive “holy war” with Iran. (This preacher’s rantings may tell us more about Mr. McCain’s policy views than Mr. Wright’s tell us about Mr. Obama’s.) Even after Mr. Hagee’s Catholic bashing bubbled up in the mainstream media, Mr. McCain still did not reject and denounce him, as Mr. Obama did an unsolicited endorser, Louis Farrakhan, at the urging of Tim Russert and Hillary Clinton. Mr. McCain instead told George Stephanopoulos two Sundays ago that while he condemns any “anti-anything” remarks by Mr. Hagee, he is still “glad to have his endorsement.”

I must admit, I reluctantly agree with Mr. Rich's concern over Hagee's skewed Biblical hermeneutics. Hagee represents a group think mentality that has long dominated both clergy and laity alike. Relatively few if any theologians embrace Hagee's dispensationalist world view. A year ago I wrote a series entitled The Middle East: Is This The End? Elaborating specifically on the issue of dispensationalism I wrote:

DISPENSATIONALISM AS A WORLD VIEW

A couple of weeks ago we mentioned the role our “world view” plays in understanding the Bible. A world view is that which tells us why things are the way they are. Within that world view we form premises. A premise consists of a pre conceived idea we hold about a particular subject before we really study the subject or issue. We formulate a premise by what goes before. A teacher, preacher, parent, book, etc... aids in the development of a premise. Often we configure a system from our premises. A system is “an assemblage of things (objects, ideas, rules, axioms, etc...) arranged in a coherent order (of subordination, or of inference, or of generality etc... ) according to some rational or intelligible principle (or plan, or scheme, or method). (Dictionary of Philosophy by Peter Angeles; p.287) Theology places Bible themes into a system such as sin, atonement, soteriology, and more.

One particular system espoused by a legion of Christian leaders today we call Dispensationalism. Pop culture Christianity unwittingly embraces this system . The Left Behind series emerges from Dispensationalism. Billy Graham, Hal Lindsay, and a legion of the contemporary churches out there embrace this system. Dispensationalism arose not from a careful exegesis of the scriptures, but from a genuine pastoral concern about unfulfilled prophecy. It has been wed with the American gospel of success and many Messianic Jews embrace its teachings. The teaching originated in 1830 when a young girl from Glasgow, Scotland named Margaret MacDonald, attended a healing service. She supposedly received a vision about a two fold return of Christ. She envisioned a pre- tribulation and a post-tribulation. Later a British preacher named John Nelson Darby heard MacDonald’s story and spread the news. Darby coined the term rapture, found nowhere in the Bible, and centered his teachings around the term. The idea actually came from I Thess. 4:17 where Paul uses the term arpadzo, which translates “caught up.” Darby made several evangelistic trips to the U.S. from 1859 to 1877. He won many converts during these war torn years from those seeking an escapist theology. A rapture promised a distressed American that they could avoid the great tribulation. Darby believed that God divided all of history into seven distinct dispensations or ages. God held a different set of rules in each of these dispensations, for dealing with people and the situation at hand.

The greatest single tool for spreading Darby’s theology was a reference Bible published by Cyrus I. Scofield in 1909. Scofield placed all kinds of charts and diagrams in his Bible that aided in understanding the rapture and time periods leading up to the event. His theology made him a rich man. People continue to read his Bible even today. Few people know the truth about Scofield. He was an embezzler, and a forger, who left his wife and children, even doing jail time after his conversion to Christianity. No scholar touched Dispensationalism. The theology took its shape among pastors and lay people. In 1924 a Presbyterian named Lewis Chafer founded Dallas Theological Seminary. The newly formed seminary came into being as a way to institutionalize and protect their belief.

Essentially, Dispensationalism proposes two different programs and two different destinies for God’s people-theocratic and earthly for Israel, spiritual and heavenly for the church. Historically the Bible proclaims God did indeed deal with people contextually according to their times and circumstances. Yet, Dispensationalism presupposes God’s original dispensation with the Jews failed. Therefore, he declared a new dispensation for the Gentiles. At the same time he continues to try and salvage the old one made with the Jews.

Dispensationalism raises some problematic issues. First of all the system inverts sound Biblical interpretation. A woman receives a vision about the second coming. Followed by a few pastors and laymen who tried to proof text the vision with scriptures. Dispensationalists formed their system around the vision instead of letting the scriptures become the vehicle that launched the vision. Cults arise because of this type of faulty interpretation. Any Joe /Jill can get an impression and form a doctrine around it. We form our doctrine not from whimsical, feeling oriented impressions, but from a careful, inductive study of the Bible. Inductive Bible study gathers the evidence and draws a conclusion from that evidence. Deductive Bible study, which is the way most of us study, forms a conclusion or a premise, then finds the evidence to support that premise. This method may work well in a court of law. When it comes to Bible study, however, a deductive method leaves the student vulnerable to error.

Another problem exists for Dispensationalists. They mistake prophetic poetry for prose and they turn the figurative into the literal. We discussed types of literature in another place.
When Jesus was talking about this generation in Matthew, he meant his generation, not 21st century America.

A third problem arises within the context of the prophecy itself. Dispensationalists disregard the prophet’s audience. The prophet wrote and spoke to his people. It’s the only world he knew.

The most emphatic error in this writer’s opinion is the two dispensation theory- one for the Jews and one for the Gentiles. This idea fails to recognize the covenant motif that merges the Old Testament and the New into one salvation story. God made a covenant with Abraham. He promised Abraham that if he followed God in faithful living, God would bless him and his offspring. The Old Testament reveals a God who protects that covenant at all costs. The covenant finds its ultimate fulfillment in Jesus Christ and his Church, the body of Christ. Paul declares that the real Jew (God pleaser) is authenticated by heart circumcision and not literal circumcision. No distinction now exists between Jews and Greeks. They all get into heaven aboard the same faith train. Christ’s atonement fulfills the Abrahamic covenant by blessing all those who live faithfully. Abraham’s offspring is figurative. All who enter God’s covenant by faith through Christ are descendants of Abraham.

(Resources for this article are:
The Problem With Evangelical Theology by Ben Witherington; pp.93-102
The Last Things by George Eldon Ladd p.9

Mr. Rich unwittingly acquiesces to the vogue secular-think in relation to faux theologians such as Hagee. He interprets Hagee's anti Catholic bigotry as hate speech complete with seeds of violence. Since its inception dispensationalism has implicated the Roman Catholic church in anti-Christ activity. Dispensationalist, in my opinion, possess a skewed apocalyptic ecclesiology. Yet, in all my years as a minister who rubs shoulders with dispensational populists I never once heard one person, not one, suggest retribution for perceived Catholic heresies. Contrastively, Reverend Wright stirs up bitter emotions from the black community related to the sins of our fathers-sins of which we neither sanctioned nor intentionally connected ourselves.

Furthermore, Hagees' salient issue with McCain revolves around abortion. Evangelicals of all stripes, long ago etched in stone this grave sin as the litmus test for conservative political legitimacy. In addition, one assumes a free thinking maverick such as McCain supports Israel, not for theological reasons, but for a kindred political philosophical spirit called Democracy. Mr. Rich rightly pegged Hagee's words, but failed to comprehend the music.

DALLAS STARS GOT US SWEATIN' BULLETS

Four overtimes, 3 Advils, and one bottle of Valium later, fans survived what I consider as one of the greatest hockey games ever played. The Dallas Stars and San Jose Sharks battled it out in a must win 6th game Western Conference semifinal for the Sharks. The off ice mild mannered, unassuming Brenden Morrow, however, turned into a monster and almost single handedly picked off the Sharks one by one. Even though Morrow scored the winning goal, his star shown brightest when he put this bone crushing hit on the ever dangerous Milan Michalek.

Read more Dallas Stars here.

LIVE BLOGGING DALLAS STARS GAME 6

Dallas Morning News bloggers give Dallas the first period despite the fact that both teams put 8 shots on goal and the game remains scoreless.

But it's 0-0. Great action and the Stars really came out with the pressure. They have to keep it up and the Sharks need to find some more legs if they want to go back to San Jose for Game 7.

Razor called the Stars' first period fabulous. Indeed they approached the first period with much more intensity than in game 5. Time for goalie Marty Turco to prove to the world he can win with the greats. We shall see what we shall see during the next 40 minutes.

HOW LOW WILL PEOPLE STOOP TO GET A PIECE OF THE TAX REBATE PIE?

Mike Lester