Self Defense

It seems, in the minds of many Christians, there is a certain confusion and cognitive dissonance regarding the principle of self defense. Naturally, Christians are like anyone else. We have an innate conviction that we have the right to defend ourselves and our loved ones. However, we also hear the voice of Christ which calls us to "turn the other cheek" and love our enemies. The issue is aggravated still more by recent church shootings. Many pastors are wondering if they should start packing a concealed weapon under their vestments or suit jacket.

I, for one, support self defense, including the defense of one's family and loved ones, as perfectly natural, biblical, and, in fact, demanded by Christian virtue. I will go out on a limb and declare absolute pacifism a cowardly, incredibly myopic distortion of the truth.

What say you?

Reopen?

I have missed the discussion in the Tavern. If anyone is still passing by now and then, let me know if you are interested in a grand reopening. There is no use reopening the doors if no one is around to imbibe.

Closed

McIntyre's Tavern is hereby closed. It was fun, but its time has come. Thanks for the good conversation.

Holy Orders

Well, it appears I passed my pastoral exam, so, it likewise appears that I am set for ordination to the Anglican priesthood on January 12. If anyone wants to attend, please send me an email.

BTW, I'll post another topic soon.

Peace to you,

Andy

Icons Are not Just Little Pictures on your Desktop

Since it came up in previous discussion, I would like to present to the floor the matter of iconoclasm. Many who are not in Reformed circles may not know that pictures of Christ are a matter of controversy in the church. Many Reformed, though not all, claim that it is a violation of the Second Commandment (as Protestants, sans Lutherans, count the Commandments). These claim that it inevitably amounts to idolatry. I have waffled on this issue in my past, so, in all fairness, I will leave it to the proponents of each view to express their opinions without attempting to summarize them here. For the record, I currently do not view pictures of Christ as a violation of the Commandment. In fact, I do not view any pictures as a violation of such, unless those pictures are an object of worship. At the same time, I do not favor pictures of the Father, as I do not see any Scriptural indication that He can be reduced to human form. Such images are, in my opinion, simply inaccurate.

Church Discipline vs. Church Tyranny

In Reformational circles, church discipline is often considered one of the primary elements of the Body of Christ. Most Christians, of most denominations, will normally admit that some level of church discipline is necessary in order to maintain and preserve the faith once for all delivered unto the saints. One need only turn their attention to the doctrinal and moral atrocities being committed in many mainline Protestant churches to witness the natural result of extreme tolerance. My question for the tavern is, at what point does discipline become tyranny? At what point does shepherding become meddling? What is the building block upon which a pastor/priest/rector can build a healthy practice?

Harry Potter AKA Satan's New Mousetrap?

And now for a bit of practical/pastoral theology...I have heard a lot of Christians condemning the Harry Potter books in the last few years. With the release of the final work, the condemnations are at a high point in some circles. When I was a child, many Christians demonized Star Wars, claiming that it would turn our generation into New Age pantheists. Perhaps I'm just not in the hip crowds, but I still have yet to meet a fellow Gen Xer who calls upon George Lucas as his theological compass. Isn't it just fiction? I mean, I hate to reveal the cosmic secret, but...pssst...all that magic stuff, dragons, and what not...it's not real. If a person were actually to aspire to become a witch or warlock, frolicking through ghostly castles on a flying broomstick, I would wonder more about his sanity than his religion. With all of the utterly disgusting, depraved literature, television programming, and internet content available today, I think Harry Potter ranks relatively low in the "spiritually dangerous" category. Perhaps I am missing something here.

What say you?

Religion and Public Office

Due to the candidacy of Romney (although it seems to be severly tanking), religion has become a hot topic in American politics. Some say it simply does not matter what religion one espouses when running for public office. Others say it is a fundamental question.

To start it off with a bang, I will say that I would never vote for a Mormon.

What say you?

Just as a reminder to all patrons, past discussions never close. So, keep commenting as long as your interest is piqued.

Union with the Divine

I apologize for the lack of activity in the pub lately. Things have been hectic, and I just returned from vacation.

The question for the floor is -- What is union with God?

Yes, admittedly, it is a broad question and difficult to answer on a forum such as our virtual pub. Nevertheless it is both intellectually stimulating and incredibly relevant. Extreme dualists basically assert that union with God is impossible. God is the absolute Other and can only commune with man on a level lower than His eternal Being. Mystics claim that union is found in an ineffable spiritual quietness, normally achieved through a suppression of thought. Many modern Evangelicals describe union with God in romantic terms (e.g. we walk with Him and talk with Him along life's narrow way). The Reformed often tie union to doctrine. Fellowship with God is to believe in the things revealed in Scripture. There is some similarity between all of these positions, and other options, but they are also quite different both in doctrine and practice.

What say you?

Christ and Culture

The question of the interaction or, perhaps, clash between Christianity and culture is a perennial debate. Some would sound the charge and call us to claim all lands, men, and ideas for the cause of Christ's kingship. Others would sound the retreat and call us to fall back within the walls of safety, disengaging from the world around us in order to strengthen the few ranks which remain for the final thrust of the Evil One. I tend to think the truth lies somewhere in the middle, but I suppose that comes with the territory of Amillenialism.

What say you?

The Act of Faith

Kierkegaard makes much of the existential crisis presented to Abraham and his absolute leap of faith when he agrees to sacrifice his son to the Lord. Although the situation was utterly unique and unrepeatable, I often wonder what I would do if I were given the same command. In our modern sensibilities, we tend to think of such faith as extreme, or even rabid. Yet, it is presented as a great testimony to the beloved patriarch. I can think of nothing more inhuman, more terrifying, more heinous than killing one's own son. Then again, it is also quite divine, for the Father has did nothing less at Golgotha. So, the question is, what exactly was commendable in Abraham's willingness to slay his son? I think the key is to understand the event as teaching the supremacy of the eternal perspective over the temporal and the ideal of selfless sacrifice, as opposed to absolute, blind obedience.

What say you?

Assurance/Certainty

Honest questions.

Are you certain that you have eternal life? If so, how do you know? What part does doubt play in the life of faith?

The Israel of God?

I find that modern dispensationalists are obsessed with the nation of Israel and Judaism as a whole. In fact, they are often more accepting of Jewish people who completely reject Christ than their own Christian brethren who may have a differing Eschatological view or a differing style of worship. It is truly one of my pet peeves.

Of course, I am no antisemite, as I harbor no hatred for anyone on the basis of their race. But I believe that the church is the new Israel of God and the heir of all promises. I believe that race or nationality has nothing to do with the New Covenant, which has rendered the economy of the Old Covenant completely obsolete. Thus, although I may render some special honor to the Jew out of respect for the patriarchs, I am under no illusions that they are the people of any living covenant unless they repent of their false religion and turn to Christ, just as the Gentile. I do not believe the Nation of Israel has anything to do with the coming culmination of human history. I believe that I said "believe" too many times for one paragraph.

What say you?

Unmerited Predestination

By popular demand...

Unmerited predestination is one of the more debated topics in the church today.

Step forward, take a shot of good Scotch, and make your mark.

I, for one, am for it. I quote from the 17th Article of the Anglican Church:

Predestination to life is the eternal purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he has consistently decreed by his counsel which is hidden from us to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he has chosen in Christ out of mankind and to bring them through Christ to eternal salvation as vessels made for honor. Hence those granted such an excellent benefit by God are called according to God's purpose by his Spirit working at the appropriate time. By grace they obey the calling; they are freely justified, are made sons of God by adoption, are made like the image of his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ, they walk faithfully in good works and at the last by God's mercy attain eternal happiness.

The reverent consideration of this subject of predestination and of our election in Christ is full of sweet, pleasant, and inexpressible comfort to the godly and to those who feel within themselves the working of the Spirit of Christ, putting to death the deeds of the sinful and earthly nature and lifting their minds up to high and heavenly things. This consideration establishes and confirms their belief in the eternal salvation o be enjoyed through Christ and kindles a fervent love towards God. But for inquisitive and unspiritual persons who lack the Spirit of Christ to have the sentence of God's predestination continually before their eyes is a dangerous snare which the devil uses to drive them either into desperation or into recklessly immoral living (a state no less perilous than desperation). Furthermore we need to receive God's promises in the manner in which they are generally set out to us in holy Scripture, and in our actions we need to follow that will of God which is clearly declared to us in the Word of God.

What say you?

Speaking of Regulation...

The regulative principle has always been hotly debated in Protestant circles. Most Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox believers probably would not be familiar with the principle as such, but I am sure they have their own disagreements over certain practices in liturgy and over the basis upon which they should be allowed. So, in some sense, I think it applies to everyone.

Traditionally, Protestant churches have taken one of four positions regarding worship and liturgical practice. These are, of course, generalizations and simplifications.

1. Anything should be permitted that is properly approved by the officers of the church and not directly contrary to Scripture (e.g. Lutherans and Anglicans).

2. Nothing should be permitted that is not explicitly commanded in Scripture (e.g. Reformed Presbyterians and Church of Christ, more or less).

3. All elements of liturgical practice must be commanded and/or justified explicitly in Scripture (e.g. Most Reformed/Presbyterian fellowships).

4. If it feels good do it (e.g. Many, though not all, Charismatic/Pentecostal fellowships).

Personally, I think 1 and 3 are very similar, although many in the groups mentioned would disagree as to the biblical justification of certain practices. Thus, I agree with 1 but I tend to meld into 3, insofar as 3 does not meld into 2.

What say you?

Christian Economics?

Descending from the ivory tower to the market place, let us consider economics. Some Christians claim that capitalism encourages the biblical idea of personal responsiblity. Other Christians claim that it encourages greed, selfishness, and cruelty. Some Christians claim that socialism is the most effective means to fulfill the Scriptural command to care for the poor. Other Christians claim that it merely ensures the increase of poverty through lack of opportunity resulting from a lack of motivation to produce.

What say you? Is there such a thing as "Christian Economics"?

Clear as Mud?

From prophetic musings to arcane, mind numbing philosophical speculation:

I have always been intrigued by St. Anselm's ontological argument and its later formulation by Rene' Descartes, although I think the latter adds some unnecessary premises. Some have declared it unanswerable. Others have laughed it to scorn.

Briefly, his argument develops as follows:

God is that Being greater than which nothing can be conceived.

If God is that Being greater than which nothing can be conceived, He must not exist in our mind alone, for if He did, we could conceive of Him existing in reality, which is greater than existing in the mind alone.

Therefore, by definition, God must exist in reality. Or, to put it differently, we cannot rationally conceive of God not existing in reality, for it would be equivalent to saying that that Being greater than which nothing can be conceived is not that Being greater than which nothing can be conceived. Thus, to say that God does not exist in reality is a logical absurdity.

Clear as mud, right? What say you?

I realize this one might not be so popular, although I could be wrong. If not, remember, the other topics remain open.

Not So Prophetic Musings

As an interesting rabbit trail, I often wonder how world Christianity will change in the next 100 years.

My prediction - Roman Catholicism will gain strength in all continents, including Europe and North America, perhaps even retaking some lands lost to the Reformation. Pentecostalism will also grow in the global South and flood the lands of the North. In Africa and Europe, contention with Islam will force a more solidified Christian identity, although various banners will persist. Western liberal churches will continue to bleed members until they are rendered largely irrelevant if not extinct. Small, conservative, Protestant churches will continue to struggle for survival, some will die, some will merge, and some will be absorbed into the Roman Catholic Church as a result of concessional reforms. Ultimately, I see a reunification (or at least a confederation) of the world church under a conciliar framework, including East and West, although this may take more than a century.

Then again, I am no prophet.

What say you?

Pub Songs

Please note the new feature in the left sidebar. I am adding a Celtic pub song of the week, which will feature artists who graciously allow their work to be distributed on the internet. Please honor the rights posted and enjoy. If you visit their sites or purchase their material, tell them McIntyre's sent you. If you don't like Celtic music then kindly keep your opinions to your inferior self and remember, if its not Scottish/Irish, its crap!

On Eric Cartman and Christian Ethics

And now for a bit of lighthearted musing. Humor. If you think about it, humor is probably the most distinctly human of all senses, and probably the most varied and idiosyncratic. It is used for everything from mindless entertainment (e.g. The Three Stooges) to incredibly profound philosphical derision (e.g. Voltaire's Candide) . What one person finds simply hilarious, another abhors. Humor is an almost thoroughly intellectual sense. That is, what one finds funny depends greatly on one's worldview, environmental conditioning, and interests. Then again, humor is also an emotional reaction depending greatly on the inner disposition of the heart. Indeed, humor is a funny thing.

The question often arises in my mind whether or not crass, dark humor is allowable for the Christian.

Let us consider, as an example, the humor of South Park, or a show like it. Do you love it or hate it? Why? Is it a moral preference? What part does morality play in one's sense of humor?

What say you?