1. A pastor friend of mine just tried to take his life.

Is it just me, or does it seem that people everywhere are in more pain and depression than “normal”? Although it does not seem that there is much of a connection between suicide and profession, I would like to think that those in my profession are the least likely to take their own lives. However, I don’t know.

2. A discussion about the The Political Rift Within Evangelicalism that is worth taking a look at.

3. The date of the earth just changed again.

This is part of the reason why postmoderns have a hard time leaning too much on scientific “conclusions.” People love and enjoy science, but its fluidity must always give us pause with regard to its ability to accurately interpret nature. Add this to the list of changes in science.

4. The guys at “To Be Continued,” a blog that argues for the continuation if the supernatural sign gifts (tongues, prophecy, healings, etc) have just finished a well done response to my “Why I am Not Charismatic.”

5. Here is a nice graph for the traditions within Christianity.

Though understandably lacking a lot, it gives a good overview of where we came from. If I were to add “Evangelicalism” into this, I would say that it is a sap that finds its way into many traditions to varying degrees.

6. I for one will pray for Christopher Hitchens.

He is my favorite atheist.

7. YMCA changed their name.

First, “Young Men’s Christian Association.” Too chauvinistic.” Next, “YMCA.” But the “C” is still there. Too exclusive. Now “The Y.” That’s what we all call it anyway!

8. The oldest writing ever discovered found in Jerusalem.

9. Sheesh. Its no wonder college tuition is so high.

I need to change my business. Do seminary profs get paid that much? 🙂

10. Is Christianity really good for the world? Andrew Perriman answers.

11. The Romans study I am teaching is progressively being posted here in MP3.

12. Our online (and onsite) theological bootcamp will take place on the 31st of this month.

Tim Kimberly and I will be teaching. But hurry and enroll. We really do only have a limited amount of people was can have online.

Here is a description:

“Attention! [pronounced Ahhh-Tennn-Shun] The upcoming Boot Camp is all about being grounded in the major training topics of the Christian faith. This is done in one day on Saturday, July 31st from 9am-3pm. We promise you will learn things you wish you would have known 10 years ago. Boot Camp is geared for both teenagers new to the faith and seasoned citizens who have faithfully read the Bible every day for decades. Both will be enriched as we open up the Scriptures, learning about the foundations of the faith. If you have a pulse this event is for you. You will have a great time while your heart and mind are stretched to the glory of God.

C. Michael Patton, Th.M. and Tim Kimberley, Th.M. will be our teachers for this Boot Camp.

Major Training Topics include: the Trinity; Scripture; the Person of Christ and Mankind”


C Michael Patton
C Michael Patton

C. Michael Patton is the primary contributor to the Parchment and Pen/Credo House Blog. He has been in ministry for nearly twenty years as a pastor, author, speaker, and blogger. Th.M. Dallas Theological Seminary (2001), president of Credo House Ministries and Credo Courses, author of Now that I'm a Christian (Crossway, 2014) Increase My Faith (Credo House, 2011), and The Theology Program (Reclaiming the Mind Ministries, 2001-2006), host of Theology Unplugged, and primary blogger here at Parchment and Pen. But, most importantly, husband to a beautiful wife and father to four awesome children. Michael is available for speaking engagements. He can be contacted at [email protected]

    19 replies to "Theology Around the Web, 7.16.10"

    • whoschad

      Percentage change in the age of the earth from the old view to the new view: .98%

      Percentage of change necessary to match up with Young Earth Creationism: 99.9998%

      Almost there!

    • ScottL

      I don’t know if this post has gone live yet, but #4 should read To Be Continued. And the link to our articles is not correct. It should be here.

    • Marv

      Michael, I do most heartily appreciate your putting this on your Theology Around the Web, and linking to our humble little blog. Juuuust a couple o’ things:

      1. Too many o’s in “Too Be Continued.” The site is “To Be Continued.” Do be a do bee and make that note.

      2. [Deep sigh] If you can read our stuff and still characterize it as arguing “for the continuation if the supernatural sign gifts… alas…

    • Marv

      Looks like Scott got in there while I was typing.

    • Dave Z

      #5 – An evangelical “….is a sap that finds its way into many traditions to varying degrees.”

      Hey! I resemble that remark!

    • Cesar Vigil-Ruiz

      Hello Mr. Patton,

      I really appreciate the mention of #8 (including your series on the top 10 biblical discoveries in archaeology). I was wondering what books are best in giving a survey of biblical archaeology. I have no idea which are best. Thank you for your continued ministry through this blog. It has been of great help.

    • Mike

      I agree, terrible cover choice for F. F. Bruce’s book!

    • Chuck

      The article at “To Be Continued” was 36 pdf pages of “good cop, bad cop” routine, or maybe to be more accurate in terms of the exact sequence of their article, “bad cop, good cop”.

      In terms of content, I would agree with you that it was a thorough repsonse to your original article, but the tone of half of it was so off-putting that it was hard to read sympathetically and the snarkiness of “that half” was of no service toward persuading me to further consider their point of view. Instead, it only perpetuated my impression that those who practice the sign gifts believe that they have achieved some higher level of holiness, which unfortunately lands for me with the dull thud of self-righteousness.

      On the upside, it was a wonderful case study in shared authorship, alternating between polemics and irenics.

    • C Michael Patton

      Marv,

      The supernatural sign gifts designation is still how I think it is best expressed (esp for someone who holds to cessationism as I do). I don’t know why you would think I would abandon it. While I appreciated your response, it did not convince me enough to change in that regard.

    • Marv

      Michael,

      Yeah, I understand you define Cessationism in terms of “the supernatural sign gifts” having ceased.

      As a Continuationist I say “that’s wrong.”

      If you say, “Oh you believe the supernatural sign gifts continue?” I’d say “No, that is not my position.”

      So because you define your position in a certain way, are you therefore justified in (knowingly) misstating my position?

      BTW, I hope I don’t come across quite as snarky as Chuck suggests. I do adopt a more chit-chatty tone with those four posts than is my wont. I don’t perceive myself as getting in any way nasty–just telling it like I see it. Of course, I am no great judge of my own objectivity.

      We really didn’t do that much coordination, Scott and I, I guess one of us (yours truly) is just naturally a bigger jerk. As far as holiness is concerned, let me put it on record that I ain’t got much. In my perception, I think Michael’s got me beat there hands down.

      Besides, what have my posts got to do with “holiness”? I was talking on the level of Scriptural and rational argument.

      Still, well, I guess I ought to take heed.

      Anyway, feel free to broach the subject again, Michael. Bring ’em on!

      Bad cop Marv

    • ScottL

      Chuck –

      In terms of content, I would agree with you that it was a thorough repsonse to your original article, but the tone of half of it was so off-putting that it was hard to read sympathetically and the snarkiness of “that half” was of no service toward persuading me to further consider their point of view. Instead, it only perpetuated my impression that those who practice the sign gifts believe that they have achieved some higher level of holiness, which unfortunately lands for me with the dull thud of self-righteousness.

      Marv addressed it already, but he was being more humorous than anything.

      I should have put a third disclaimer on the page following the title page, to go along with the other two disclaimers.

    • Mike Beidler

      #3. The date of the earth just changed again.

      I guess we theistic evolutionists (or evolutionary creationists, if you will) need to start labeling ourselves “younger-earth creationists.” 😉

    • C Michael Patton

      The point about the changing date of the earth is the inconclusiveness of science for postmoderns. I use these as examples in Introduction to Theology to help people understand postmodernism. I know a lot of you guys live in the creation debate, but I don’t. It is an epistemic issue that needs to be understood and thought through. Man’s observation about nature is not something to hang your hat on too tightly.

    • Lisa DeLay

      Hi Michael,

      That diagram is GREAT. Insightful and something I always hoped to see. I have linked to it on my blog.

      The only trouble is….if you didn’t create it, where did you swipe it from?

      An attribution would be really helpful.

      Thanks,
      Lisa

    • Buks van Ellewee

      Michael, every time you get into an aircraft you probably “hang your hat” pretty tightly on the sience of aeronautics! But, I agree – science is continually adjusting as it learns more about it’s own methodologies and pre-suppositions. In about the same way as we adjust our understanding of scripture as we learn more about our methods and presuppositions? 🙂

    • EricW

      Marv:

      FWIW, I didn’t detect a hint of snarkiness in your speech or mannerism when we had lunch together. Quite the opposite, in fact.

      On the other hand, I sometimes manifest the Jekyll-Hyde syndrome when I cloak myself with my Web persona. I.e., while I’m usually a toothless dog in person, some of my online remarks/comments can come across as being in Full Lawrence Talbot Mode.

      “Even a man who is pure in heart and says his prayers by night….”

    • Lucian

      A very famous Romanian singer (of whom you’ve obviously never heard of) has just recently taken her own life also. 🙁 It was down-right sad and devastating…

    • CH

      Claiming that scientific conclusions can’t be trusted because the estimated age of the earth was revised from 4.537 down to 4.467 billion years is like claiming the history of America can’t be trusted because historians figured out that Columbus discovered America on Tuesday instead of Wednesday.

      The fluidity of science is its virtue. There is no constraining dogma. As new evidence is obtained by the application of ever increasing technology, science can test current theories and confirm, revise, or replace as the evidence demands.

      The early scientific debates on the age of the earth produced wildly varying estimates ranging from thousands to billions, in part because different disciplines seemed to dictate different ages (geology vs. physics). After the discovery of radiation and other advances the estimates from multiple lines of evidence converged to the current estimate of 4.4 by or so. The fact that scientists, based on observational evidence, revise the estimated age of the earth by 1% shows that this interpretation of nature is on sound footing.

      I agree that all scientific theories must be held as provisional, willing to adjust if new evidence demands. But over time theories that continue to require only minor adjustments can be held with a very high degree of certainty. For example, science could, in principle, be incorrect about heliocentrism, but I think most would agree that our current certainty is well founded.

    • Peter

      Just a quick note: your title/link for #8 (The oldest writing ever discovered found in Jerusalem) is incorrect. That link only points to a finding of the oldest writing ever discovered in Jerusalem–it doesn’t claim that that is the oldest writing known. There are many, many documents older than that one, in the Ancient Near East and elsewhere.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.