Friday Fuel: Mom Blogs, Rappers, and the Topic I Won’t Blog About

July 19, 2013

Happy end of the week!  I hope it’s been a good one for you.  I’ve actually been spending too much time at school – painting my classroom.  That’s the double-edged sword of a small, private organization.  We get lots of creative freedom to do as we wish.  But if you want something done, you’d better be prepared to get your hands dirty.

It’s time to share a few things that pumped me up over the last few days.

Find Life After Art on Simple Mom

Today, Life After Art is being featured on Tsh Oxenreider’s Simple Mom.  I’m so honored and blown away by that.  She’s giving away ten copies, so if you never grabbed the book (or you did grab the book, but you hated it and now want to protect some other unwitting person from reading it), head over there.  Her giveaway ends today.

Why I Haven’t, and Will Not Comment on the Zimmerman Verdict

Zack Hunt is one of my most consistently favorite bloggers.  I think we are long-separated kindred spirits, and his comments on the aftermath of the Zimmerman trial were some of the best I’ve read.

Honestly, I stayed away from social media for a few days, like Zack did.  I just couldn’t stand it.  I knew there would be outrage pouring out of every orifice of the internet.  I know people would be throwing around conflicting facts, incomplete knowledge, all lit ablaze with emotions.

And to be quite honest, I have a bucketload of opinions on the whole matter.  But I looked around and simply thought, “What’s the point?”  Who would benefit from one more person contributing his two meager cents to the cacophony of frothing anger.  As bloggers, it’s often tempting for us to use every issue of the day as blog bait.  But beyond getting a few tweets or comments, really, what’s the point when everyone’s already super pissed off?

Best Photos You Will See This Week

If you haven’t checked out these breathtaking photos of homeless people, correct that now.

For the Theology Buffs

Micah Murray is quickly becoming one of the rising stars in my blog reader.  He’s really smart and articulate, even with tough topics, but he never comes off as pretentious.  Check out Five Reasons I Reject Unconditional Election.

Stuck in the Middle with Us

Alise Wright is in a unique position and she’s been exploring that with her dialogues between Christians and Atheists (a word which I’m not even sure is supposed to be capitalized, but it looked funny next to capital “Christians.”)  Being in the middle with a foot in both camps can be tough and sometimes you just end up hating everyone.

Mo Money, Mo Problems

I pretty much can’t stand rappers, and among their worst traits that not only do they create the musical equivalent of ice picks to the ear drum, they are constantly boasting about how much money they have.  Well, it turns out most of them are a bunch of enormous liars.  Granted, they aren’t exactly in the poor house, but I’m glad to see that the rapper who most earns my ire, Pitbull, is at the top of the list.

That was the best stuff from my week.  What about yours?

2 responses to Friday Fuel: Mom Blogs, Rappers, and the Topic I Won’t Blog About

  1. Okay, as someone who isn’t a theology “buff”, maybe someone who is one can explain some stuff to me.

    Now I’ve been following some theological debates online for a while, maybe more out of a sick fascination with reading the comments than anything else, and I’m left wondering “What am I (as a non-theologian with no background in this stuff at all) supposed to make of all this?”

    You see, in my line of work, I’m used to having “rules to live by” that are based on facts.  For example, I gave a talk at a local medical conference a few months ago that could be pretty much boiled down to “5 reasons why I don’t believe in treating asymptomatic bacteriuria”.  And for each of my reasons why I could point to clinical trials that backed me up–studies where some patients were treated, some weren’t, and what the outcomes were.  If asked, I could point to personal examples as well–patients that I knew that had asymptomatic bacteriuria yet turned out just fine when I didn’t give them antibiotics.  Sure, there might be some doctors who’d disagree with me, or maybe use a different rule of thumb when treating their own patients, but I’d still have some hard evidence on my side.

    But what am I to make of theologians who make these concrete assertions about how I am supposed to think about God?  When Piper lists the 5 reasons why everyone should believe in unconditional election, what is he using to back himself up?  Sure, he uses stuff from the Bible, but the problem is that a different guy can use the exact same verses to justify believing the exact opposite! The only way, as I see it, to really prove which theologian is “right” about things like who gets to heaven, what God is like, and whether there is a hell would be for someone to come back from the dead and tell us.  But that’s not going to happen.  So, how can anyone say who’s “right”?

    And the even bigger problem is that the stakes are (supposedly) so much higher than screwing up with a patient. In my example, if another doctor decides that I’m full of it and keeps giving antibiotics to his patients with asymptomatic bacteriuria, maybe the worst that might happen would be giving his patient C. diff or encouraging colonization with resistant bacteria.  But if I believe the “wrong” theologian and wind up believing the “wrong” stuff about God, I (supposedly) run the risk of losing my immortal soul and burning in Hell for eternity–how am I supposed to avoid that if no one can give me any concrete proof to show who’s right?

    I guess that’s why I’ve been finding all this theology stuff amusing, if nothing else.  You have folks in the comments sections getting absolutely pink-faced and livid over arguments that neither side has any hope of “winning”–why bother?  As someone who’s clueless about theology (and really, I don’t see why things have to be made more complicated than the Nicene Creed, anyway) is it even worth reading about it?

  2. I am in no way a theology buff but I see what you are saying. I think all this talk, debating, discussing, questioning and rethinking the things of God and Scripture is overall a good thing because in the long run it progresses the Church. (think Protestant Reformation which challenged a thousand plus years of Church doctrines and practices)

    In the world of Christendom, there are thousands upon thousands of differing and contradicting beliefs systems, doctrines and interpretations of Scriptures that it is hard not to call modern-day Christianity, ‘Babylon’, or ‘confusion.’ And if there are thousands of beliefs and interpretations that contradict each other, than that means there are thousands of incorrect or incomplete interpretations out there today.

    Theological debates can be a double edged sword. On one side, they serve to keep the ‘conversation’ going which leads to the progression and advancement of our understand of God and the Church. And on the other hand, they lead to more ungodliness by increasing the deception of false doctrines that spread fear, hate and disobedience to Christ. (more blind leading the blind)