by Joe Wooddell
I used to run a lot more than I do now, but I still love to run. Different runners have different habits. Some enjoy listening to music while others prefer silence; some relish trail running, while others appreciate pavement; and some love variety from day to day while others favor predictability. The weather, one’s diet, and the time of day affect different runners in different ways. Nearly all runners, however, understand and value the difference between training paces and race pace. We train at diverse paces: we do speed work, tempo runs, and long runs, among other things. But on race day we have a slightly different plan, typically hoping to achieve some ideal pace (e.g. a six or seven or eight minute mile) toward which all of our training has been directed. It’s called race pace, and it varies depending on the length and terrain of the course, not to mention our time of life.
Over at the Southern Baptist Texan, Barry Creamer responds to a recent Boston Globe article, discussing the tug of war between biomedical research and bioethics. Here’s a snippet: Continue reading
by Barry Creamer
If this issue is so obvious, why were the justices split 5-4, and why are so many people “so obviously wrong” to everyone who disagrees with them? The answer is simple. The disagreement is rooted in competing worldviews. Christianity is not bound by a worldview, but people, including Christians, are. And worldviews are neither chosen by their adherents nor necessarily consistent, even within an individual. As I contend below, an individualistic worldview has led our culture to its current position on gender, sexuality, and marriage. A communitarian worldview would have maintained traditional marriage as normative. And while believers are attracted to that part of a communitarian worldview, we are also sufficiently individualistic that we should be able to understand how the culture has arrived at its current position—even though we adamantly and justly disagree with that position. I do not agree at all with the court’s decision in Obergefell. And as surely as I will continue to affirm the authority and content of scripture I will also affirm traditional Judeo-Christian teachings about human sexuality, gender identity, and marriage. Continue reading
by Kirk Spencer
It’s been an interesting week. The confederate flag was removed across the country and the N-Word was spoken by the president of the country.
It reminds us that symbols and words are like living things. They change. Usage and perceptions alters their meaning over time. And so, if a flag comes to represent racism in America, it is time to lower it and put it in a museum with a card (which no one will read) telling what it meant “back-in-the-day.” And, if words become offensive, don’t say them. For instance, I agree with our president; it is “not polite to say (the N-word) in public…” Now he didn’t say “the N-word.” He said the actual word itself in the same sentence in which he said that saying this word—the one which he is actually saying—is not polite to say. Our president was correct in pointing out the impoliteness of the N-word (though not in actually using it in telling us this). Continue reading
by Joe Wooddell
After Game 3 of the NBA finals (Cleveland over Golden State 96-91), it finally dawned on me why I so dislike some of what LeBron James does. What’s not to like? 40 points in the game, 41% field goal percentage, 33% from three-point range, 83% at free throws, 12 rebounds, 8 assists, and 4 steals. Possibly he is the greatest basketball player ever. So what’s the problem with this 6’8” 250 lb. legend? What I would have said immediately after the game is that he’s a whiner. But I think that’s just a symptom of a deeper issue, which I’ll share in a moment. Continue reading
by Barry Creamer
Anti-bullying is such a common and popular theme for the moment that I don’t think it’s a stretch to call it a fad. Don’t get me wrong. Not all fads are bad—at least not for whatever may give them their original traction. But there is a weakness in fads not too far removed from the weakness of the Old Testament law: us. In the case of fads, our short attention span, tendency to move as a herd, and shallow grasp of sometimes complex subjects make every golden-haired movement du jour (somewhere in there is a messianic pasta based soup) worthy of a little deeper and even sometimes more dubious inspection. I am not suggesting bullying is not a problem, nor that it should not be addressed. But I am suggesting there may be some things to learn from its transient popularity—things both good and bad about the fad. Continue reading
by Kirk Spencer
This Easter morning, as was his custom, our president read “Where the Wild Things Are.” He reads this famous 60s picture book to a group of children on the White House lawn. I’m not sure what “Wild Things” have to do with Easter, however, if we were there, we could hear him read these words: “And now let the wild rumpus start!” Then our president led the “wild things” in a wild rumpus… which was not very wild. And the children were not rumpusing. So they were called out for “not rumpusing that hard.” (I didn’t see anyone rumpusing at all). It was all staged. The children just didn’t feel like rumpusing… or they were not sure what “rumpusing” meant. (I’m not even sure what it is… though I think it has to do with making a big show of doing whatever you want, not matter what anyone else thinks.) Continue reading