Essays

A Very Serious Statement Concerning Pulpit and Pen

The following are simply some random thoughts that have been rattling about my head of late and that I’d like to let out — a little house cleaning, if you will. One of the first facts we should face is that Pulpit and Pen is an opportunist. That is, it is an ideological chameleon, without any real morality, without a soul. An old joke tells of the optimist who falls off a 60-story building and, as he whizzes past the 35th floor, exclaims, “So far, so good!” But it is not such blind optimism that causes Pulpit and Pen’s coadjutors to think that they can promote mediocrity over merit. Pulpit and Pen embraces conformism with open arms. And if that seems like a modest claim, I disagree. It’s the most radical claim of all.

I use such language purposefully — and somewhat sardonically — to illustrate how Pulpit and Pen keeps trying to legitimize the fear and hatred of the privileged for the oppressed. And if we don’t remain eternally vigilant, it will really succeed. No one that I speak with or correspond with is happy about this situation. Of course, I don’t speak or correspond with quasi-devious, jaded rotters, Pulpit and Pen’s deputies, or anyone else who fails to realize that Pulpit and Pen’s prevarications are not an abstract problem. They have very concrete, immediate, and unpleasant consequences. For instance, solecism is not merely an attack on our moral fiber. It is also a politically motivated attack on knowledge. If you’ve read this far, then you probably either agree with me or are on the way to agreeing with me. Call me a cynic, but it is singularly apt that I haven’t the foggiest idea why Pulpit and Pen wants to rally for a cause that is completely void of moral, ethical, or legal validity. The mere mention of that fact guarantees that this letter will never get published in any mass-circulation periodical that Pulpit and Pen has any control over. But that’s inconsequential, because only the impartial and unimpassioned mind will even consider that the picture I am presenting need not be confined to Pulpit and Pen’s manifestos. It applies to everything it says and does.

What a cunning coup on the part of Pulpit and Pen’s slaves, who set out to overthrow democratic political systems and got as far as they did without anyone raising an eyebrow. Pulpit and Pen does, occasionally, make a valid point. But when it says that it is not only acceptable, but indeed desirable, to commit confrontational, in-your-face acts of violence, intimidation, and incivility, that’s where the facts end and the ludicrousness begins. Pulpit and Pen loves getting up in front of people and telling them that it is the ultimate authority on what’s right and what’s wrong. It then boasts about how it’ll impose ideology, control thought, and punish virtually any behavior it disapproves of one day. It’s all part of the media spectacle that is Pulpit and Pen. Of course, it soaks it up and wallows in it like a pig in mud. Speaking of pigs and mud, Pulpit and Pen’s worshippers claim to have no choice but to remove society’s moral barriers and allow perversion to prosper. I wish there were some way to help these miserable, dim-witted dunderheads. They are outcasts, lost in a world they didn’t make and don’t understand. I challenge you to ponder this subject with the broadest vision possible.

Essays

“Grid girls” ban reveals motives, blurs cultural lines

Formula One announced yesterday that they have now banned the practice of using “grid girls” during Grand Prix weekends. The move follows similar recent actions from the World Endurance Championship and Formula E.

For the very uninitiated, Formula 1 is widely considered the peak level of single-seater, open cockpit, open wheel auto racing. It races in twenty-one countries annually, garners an annual television viewership of 350 million people, and is worth $8 billion USD (just the corporate ownership, not including the teams). F1 might seem to be small fry in the United States. Worldwide, especially in Europe, it commands much attention. Continue reading

Essays

Does Romans allow for the “Carnal Christian”?

TL/DR: The theology concerning the existence of a “carnal Christian” holds that a person can realistically come to true saving faith in Christ and continue to live free of repentance and sanctification for the full remainder of his or her life.  This paper examines Romans 7:14 and 8:1–14 to demonstrate that Romans knows no such concept.  In Romans 7:14, Paul identifies even himself as one who struggles with the flesh.  In Romans 8:1–14, there are only two kinds of people in view: the natural and the spiritual.  It makes no mention of a middle category. Continue reading

Essays

Patrick of Ireland — Theologian, Missionary, Social Activist

Let me also provocatively say this before you start reading the rest: Patrick was not Roman Catholic. Not even close. There.

This post is adapted from a paper I wrote for a world missions class.

A short survey of Patrick’s writings reveals a character that frankly is in very close imitation to Paul.  Although Patrick’s beginnings were very different from Paul’s — having been “a most simple countryman” who was kidnapped by pirates at age 16.[1]— his writings reveal a humbled sinner, a deep theologian, a heart for the lost people of Ireland, a sound understanding of scripture’s admonitions against evil, a prayer warrior, a heavy fear of God, and a passion for the Gospel.  Though now seemingly lost in the cultural smoke of drunken revelry, the historic Patrick was a true theologian, evangelist, and missionary.

Continue reading