Between Two Worlds

I've appreciated virtually everything I've read by Armstrong Williams, and I especially root for black conservatives, especially since they experience a unique sort of loneliness in today's world. Furthermore, as anyone reading this blog knows, I am generally supportive of the Bush Adminstration. So it's a double shame to see that this has been happening:

White House paid commentator to promote law

By Greg Toppo, USA TODAY

Seeking to build support among black families for its education reform law, the Bush administration paid a prominent black pundit $240,000 to promote the law on his nationally syndicated television show and to urge other black journalists to do the same.

Williams on being paid to boost NCLB: "I wanted to do it because it's something I believe in."

The campaign, part of an effort to promote No Child Left Behind (NCLB), required commentator Armstrong Williams "to regularly comment on NCLB during the course of his broadcasts," and to interview Education Secretary Rod Paige for TV and radio spots that aired during the show in 2004.

Williams said Thursday he understands that critics could find the arrangement unethical, but "I wanted to do it because it's something I believe in."

The top Democrat on the House Education Committee, Rep. George Miller of California, called the contract "a very questionable use of taxpayers' money" that is "probably illegal." He said he will ask his Republican counterpart to join him in requesting an investigation....

Why in the world would the Bush administration do this? Why would Armstrong agree to it? $240K? This is very strange...and stupid.

Derek Thomas reviews Devoted Life: An Invitation to the Puritan Classic. Excerpt:

Despite Leland Ryken’s valiant attempt to salvage the Puritans from dishonor (Worldly Saints: The Puritans As They Really Were [Zondervan,1986]), H. L. Mencken’s infamous quip defining Puritanism as “the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy” still has mileage in many quarters. How refreshing, then, to find IVP publishing a thoroughly positive appraisal of the Puritans and the Puritan era. I cannot recall enjoying a book so thoroughly as this one for quite some time.

Hugh asks:

"Now we wait for the Rathergate report. Would CBS be so transparently cover-up minded that it would release the thing late on a Friday afternoon? Nah. They couldn't be that dumb."

Nah--couldn't be....

Here's a picture of Irrational Blog Hater Extraordinaire, Mr. Mainstream Media Himself, the Strib's Nick Coleman, ringing in the New Year with a joyful tribute to the Year of the Blog.

Here's a picture of Irrational Blog Hater Extraordinaire, Mr. Mainstream Media Himself, the Strib's Nick Coleman, ringing in the New Year with a joyful tribute to the Year of the Blog.

The findings of the CBS "RatherGate" Internal Investigation are set to be released on Friday. (I join others in speculating it will be released around 5 pm so that it will be buried in the weekend out of the normal news cycle. But we'll see.) Most speculate that the report will be deeply disappointing and incomplete. One thing is absolutely certain, though: the blogosphere will be abuzz tomorrow. It should be an interesting day. Check in with Powerline, Hugh Hewitt, Little Green Footballs, TKS, and Instapundit to see the report disected in real time.

Powerline already has some questions--exerpted from a lengthier post:

The fundamental question here is whether CBS was the victim of a hoax, or the perpetrator of a hoax. It has been our view for a long time that Rather and his colleagues were perpetrators, not victims, in part because the documents were such obvious fakes that it strains credulity to suppose that they were actually fooled. When you read the Thornburgy/Boccardi report, keep that question constantly in mind: victim, or perpetrator?

There are lots of problems with CBS's effort to portray itself as the victim of a hoax, but perhaps the most intractable is Dan Rather's personal vouching for the documents. Trust me, he said to America. I know they're authentic. They came from an unimpeachable source. That takes CBS out of the category of victim, and into the category of perpetrator.

As a trial lawyer, there are lots of witnesses I'd love to cross-examine and lots of questions I'd love to ask. On Hugh Hewitt's show tonight, I said that the first one would be of Dan Rather: On what basis did you personally guarantee that the documents were authentic? What source did you describe as "unimpeachable"? Why? If the source was Bill Burkett, it is hard to imagine anyone more impeachable. Maybe Rather was just lying, trying to brazen it out until after the election, so that his last "contribution" would be the election of John Kerry. Or maybe--this is my own idea, just a wild hunch--the source that Rather thought was "unimpeachable" was Max Cleland. But, of course, he couldn't admit this afterward, as the story unravelled, because his paramount concern was not to admit the coordination between CBS and the Kerry campaign.

Enough speculation. Tomorrow, the report--and we'll let you know what we think of it.

Hugh Hewitt--one of the forerunners of the media revolution--has influenced film honcho Jonathan Bock to try open-source movie marketing, using blogs. Here is Hugh's post:

"Grace Hill Media has risen to my open source movie marketing challenge. The maiden-launching film? IN GOOD COMPANY, starring Dennis Quaid, Topher Grace and Scarlett Johansson. So blogosphere, if you have a blog and would like to attend an advance screening, prior to the film’s release of IN GOOD COMPANY (official site & trailer), just email info@gracehillmedia.com and you and a guest can be added to the list. In exchange, all you will need to do is blog about the film after seeing it."

So if you are a blogger and want a chance to see an advance screening (assuming they are in your area), jot them a note.

Update: Universal and Grace Hill Media are upping the ante:

"There’s been overwhelming response from bloggers responding to the offer for free tickets to an advance screening of IN GOOD COMPANY. So Universal Pictures and Grace Hill Media wants to respond to that enthusiasm by upping the ante: any blogger who signs up for the free tickets and then posts this offer and a link to the IN GOOD COMPANY trailer on their site will be automatically entered in a contest to win their very own private screening of IN GOOD COMPANY in their town. The winner can either fill the screening with their friends and family, or see the film alone with that special someone – it’s entirely up to them. One lucky blogger here in the US will win. Sign up at info@gracehillmedia.com and send us your link. And of course, all the non-winners will still be eligible to attend an advance screening in their area."

John Piper pens an excellent article for World Magazine on one of the key messages we should take from the tsunami tragedy.

I'm home today with the flu, so I don't plan to post much today. In the meantime, check out Joe Carter's list of 10 Reasons to Despise Planned Parenthood.

Al Mohler is providing excellent commentary on "God and the Tsunami--Theology in the Headlines," parts 1 and 2.

Mona Charen's new book, Do-Gooders: How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help (And the Rest of Us) "is a chronicle of failure — the failure of liberals to help those they set out to help." "The liberal do-gooder," she writes, "has shaped American life for most of the past 40 years with sometimes silly, sometimes counterproductive, and sometimes disastrous results." How should we respond? "Liberals must be called to account for the real havoc they have created in so many lives. They must be asked to offer something more than good intentions when their actions lead to disaster." Kathryn Jean-Lopez of National Review interviews Charen here.

Tim Challies authors a stinging critique of McLaren's "Generous Orthodoxy."

I've quoted before on this blog the excellent insight from Wayne Grudem to the effect that:


Jim Klauder, writing in the San Francisco Chronicle, makes a similiar argument in his article, "Ignorance shrouds capitalism's profound impact on reducing poverty." I encourage you to read the whole thing. He argues that "It is undeniable that 2004 was a great year for the poor." He cites a recent study by the World Bank to the effect that 2004's growth reflected "an expansion without precedent over the past 30 years," and that "the rapid growth of developing economies . . . has produced a spectacular, if not historic, fall in poverty." And this may be the part that's the most surprising--at least to those of us without adequate knowledge of economic principles--one of the greatest hindrances for the world's poorest poor (those who live on less than $1 per day) is that they are unable to go into debt--a benefit that we American take for granted. They not only have nothing, but they have no way of acquiring anything due to governmental and institutional restrictions.

(HT: Instapundit)

Powerline draws our attention to a new poll of 4,974 Iraqis living in and around Baghdad--printed in the Iraqi Arabic newspaper Alsabaah and translated by Haider Ajina. Instead of only hearing the gloom-and-doom reports of the liberal media, it's about time we actually started listening to the cautiously optimistic view of the Iraqi people themselves.

Will the security problems cause you to?

• Not come out and vote the day of elections = 18.3%
• Come out and vote the day of elections = 78.3%
• No opinion = 3.4%

Do you support military action against the terrorists?

• Yes = 87.7 %
• No = 11.1%
• Don’t Know = 1.2%

Meanwhile, a friend highly recommends the movie Voices of Iraq--now out on video. Here's a description from the website:

Voices of Iraq offers a unique opportunity to hear the diverse perspective of Iraqis on issues at the forefront of a global debate over war, terror and the prospects for democratic reform - directly from the street. Voices of Iraq is a ground-breaking documentary that does what no other film or news organization has done before.

The producers of Voices of Iraq distributed over 150 DIGITAL VIDEO CAMERAS across the entire country to enable everyday people - mothers, children, teachers, sheiks and even insurgents - to document their lives and their hopes amidst the upheaval of a nation being born.

Beginning amidst the Falluja uprising in April, going through the marshlands in the South, the Kurdish communities in the North and ending in September of this year, thousands of ordinary Iraqis became filmmakers to reveal the richness, complexity and emotion of their lives.

Voices of Iraq is an unprecedented film. This new documentary genre offers a unique window into what is happening in Iraq. Voices of Iraq has allowed Iraqis to tell their own story.

Finally, don't forget to take a look at Arthur Chrenkoff's roundup of the past two weeks' good news in Iraq.

Last week's Wall Street Journal ran an editorial theodicy in light of the tsunami. In Sunday's sermon, John Piper responded to the double grief of both tragic events and tragic theology:

Our grief in these days since the Tsunami struck (December 26, 2004) has been doubled—first there is the untold suffering and death. One entire church on the coast of Tamil Nadu, India was wiped out while they were worshipping. Only one survivor from the whole church. Story after story breaks your heart.

Then there is a second grief: the religious people around the world, including some Christians, who say so many God-belittle things. Like one article in the Wall Street Journal, that said, “No Christian is licensed to utter odious banalities about God’s inscrutable counsels or blasphemous suggestions that all this mysteriously serves God’s good ends” (David B. Hart, “Tremors of Doubt,” WSJ, December 31, 2004). Such talk compounds this calamity with greater and greater evil.

Biblical hope and love in this calamity are sustained in many different ways by the Bible. The central one is that Christ came into our suffering and conquered it so that it does not have the last word. But Oh, how much more the Bible has to say so that we are not carried away by calamities from our hope in the sovereign wisdom and power and goodness of God. How could a person say what this man said, if he read and believed his Bible? He writes as a Christian theologian!

Shall we not believe in the God who destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah? Genesis 19:24—“Then the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the Lord out of heaven.” Genesis 13:10—“The Lord destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah.”

Shall we not believe and worship the God of the Exodus? Exodus 13:15—in the final plague on Egypt it says, “The Lord killed all the firstborn in the land of Egypt.”

The people of God in those days knew far better than we do what Moses would write later in Deuteronomy 32:39. Thus says the Lord: “See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.”

Shall we not trust and reverence the God of Joshua? Joshua 10:11—the Amorites gathered against Israel, but it says, “The Lord threw down large stones from heaven on them as far as Azekah, and they died. There were more who died because of the hailstones than the sons of Israel killed with the sword.”

Shall we not fear and worship before the God of David? 2 Samuel 12:15—when David committed adultery and made Bathsheba pregnant, it says, “The Lord afflicted the child . . . and he became sick” and he died. God owns all life. He gives and he takes according to his own wisdom which mingles justice and mercy in perfect proportion. He does not owe any human any life (Job 1:21).

Over and over in the Scriptures we have descriptions of God’s judgment on the nations and on his own people. For example Amos 4:10 where God reminds Israel what he had done: “I sent among you a pestilence after the manner of Egypt; I killed your young men with the sword, and carried away your horses,and I made the stench of your camp go up into your nostrils; yet you did not return to me, declares the Lord.”

Or in the same time Isaiah 37:36 describes what God did to Sennacherib and the Assyrians when they came against his people, “The angel of the Lord went out and struck down a hundred and eighty-five thousand in the camp of the Assyrians. And when people arose early in the morning, behold, these were all dead bodies.”

And this is what the book of Revelation says will happen in the last days of God’s wrath on the world. For example Revelation 16:9 describes one stroke against the earth: “They were scorched by the fierce heat, and they cursedthe name of God who had power over these plagues. They did not repent and give him glory.” Oh, let us not be among that number.

Paradoxically, stories like this from the Old and New Testament keep us from being knocked utterly off balance by the calamities of our own day. They keep the solid foundation of God’s sovereignty under our hope. They sustain hope. The heart-rending calamities of our time are not new—and they are not over. We don’t know all that God is doing in them. But to say that God cannot be in them, and that his “inscrutable counsels” are not at work, and that this suffering does not “mysteriously serves God’s good ends”—to say that shows (to use the words of Jesus) “you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God” (Matthew 22:29).

Some helpful points below from Brendan Miniter's Wall St. Journal article on how the United States is taking advantage of public diplomacy opportunity in its aid to tsunami victims.

. . . as residents from Thailand in Southeast Asia to Somalia on the horn of Africa pick through the debris, it will not be lost on them that not only are food, fresh water and other necessities streaming in from the free societies of the world, but also that a large portion of those necessities are arriving on American military transports.

. . . this tsunami is putting on display exactly what United Nations and European bureaucrats are loath to admit: that the U.S. and its military are forces for good in the world. From the wealth and freedom that allow Americans to generously give to those in need to the military infrastructure that enables much of that aid to be delivered, this natural disaster is an advertisement for the type of societies that best serve the people of the world.

. . . By responding with generosity, it is also clear that the vision Americans share is of all nations prospering. Liberty for all is more than a political ideal; it's also the foundation of President Bush's foreign policy. Admittedly this is partly for the selfish reason that prosperous countries are unlikely to breed terror. Nonetheless, the policy is benefiting Afghans, Iraqis and Muslims around the globe.

. . . The point here isn't to squeeze a political opportunity out of what may be the worst natural disaster in recorded history. Rather it is to recognize that what's at stake in the war on terror is also what was nearly swept away by the sea--civilization itself. It won't be lost on the people of Thailand as they face their own terrorist problem that the same American military that is battling al Qaeda is now helping them battle the brutal natural world as well. The training exercises the U.S. military regularly conducts around the world with other nations' armed forces will now take on an added significance.

In case you missed it last week, the Star Tribune's Nick Coleman wrote a sloppy, sophomoric, vicious attack against Time Magazine's blog of the year, PowerlineBlog.com. The center-right blogosphere laughed and shook their collective head at Coleman's meltdown. For a helpful recap, see Pejman Yousefzdeh's Tech Central Station column.

Harry Reid--the presumptive Senate Minority Leader--has recently voiced his view that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is embarrassingly, stupid, and writes at the level of an eighth-grader. (Even the liberal Congressional Black Caucus has sent Reid a letter warning him about stereotypes.) Reid's conclusion is obviously preposterous and can be easily dismissed. But what is really enjoyable is to watch James Taranto deconstruct Reid's reasoning behind that judgment, and to ask who is the real one who should be "embarrassed" here?

You have questions--the Pew Internet & American Life Project has the answers.

Some highlights:

• Blog readership was up 58% in 2004
• 7& of the 120 million US adults who use the web (=8 million Americans) have a blog
• 27% of web users (=32 million Americans) read blogs

(Hat tip: Instapundit)

A law in California says that "Children under 14 are banned from using tanning salons, unless they have a doctor's note, and those 14 to 18 need parental permission to receive a tan." (HT: The Corner).

In 1997 the California Supreme Court ruled that the requirement of parental consent before a minor's abortion was unconstitutional.

So to recap this sick scenario: if you are a girl between ages 14-18 in California, you need your parent's permission to receive a tan, but if you don't need it in order to kill your unborn child.

If you want to start a blog--and hey, everyone's doing it--Joe Carter has posted a "How to Start a Blog" series--parts 1 and 2. In just a few minutes of set up, you too can become ABC's Person of the Year like me! Just go to blogger.com and you can have a blog up and running in a few minutes.

If you need a guide for reading through the Bible in a year, the M'Cheyne Bible Reading Plan and the Discipleship Journal Bible Reading Plan--both the original version and the newer book-at-a-time version--have been used profitably by many.

I’ve recently been working on a project that involves writing a presentation of the gospel. The task has struck me as a weighty one, given that the goal is to correctly and persuasively convey the good news of God’s grace in the context of redemptive history.

I’m posting below the rough draft. If any readers have suggestions or corrections for improvement, I’d welcome any feedback you might have.

The Truth of the Gospel

You can read this Bible cover to cover and yet not know God. You can be baptized and not be a true believer. You can be a lifelong member of a church and yet not go to heaven. You can even do great religious deeds, and yet hear Jesus say on the final day “I never knew you; depart from me” (Matt. 7:22-23).
The greatest thing any of us needs—the greatest truth in the world—is the gospel. The gospel means “good news.” It is not a twelve-step program of things for you to do; it is the story of what God has done in Christ. In order to understand it fully, we need to look at who God is, who man is, who Jesus is, and what our response must be.

1. God Is Our Holy, Loving Creator

God is holy. He is set apart in a category all his own: “I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like me” (Isa. 46:9). He is pure and righteous: “God is light, and in him there is no darkness at all” (1 John 1:5). God is love. “God is love” (1 Jo. 4:8). When we hear that, we tend to think only of God’s love for us. God’s love for us is precious, but it existed before we did. Before the creation of the world, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit experienced perfect love and fellowship and joy. God is creator. God did not create the world because he was needy or lonely. A God who needs you would be too small for you to need him. He created the world as free act of sovereign love.
There is only one true God, and he is our Owner and Sustainer, our King and our Judge. To him we owe absolute allegiance.

2. We Were Created for God’s Glory

God—our holy, loving Creator—created the world and declared that it was “very good” (Gen. 1:31). Men and women, specifically Adam and Eve, had been created “in his own image” (Gen. 1:27)—to reflect and represent God as they expanded his kingdom on earth. We were created to glorify God (Isa. 43:7)—to shine forth the beauties and excellencies of who he is. We were created to fellowship with God, free from sin and pain. The greatest philosophers and poets and religious leaders have debated for thousands of years the purpose and meaning of life. Here it is—the purpose for your life—“to glorify God and enjoy Him forever” (Westminster Confession of Faith, 1.1). The reason you exist is to enjoy and reflect the glory of your holy, loving Creator.

3. But We Became Sinful Rebels Against God

Adam and Eve were our legal representatives. That means that they were to represent the rest of the human race as they underwent a test of obedience. If they failed, we failed. If they passed, we passed. They lived in a perfect place under the rule of a perfect Creator with whom they had perfect fellowship. All of their needs were met by God, and he gave them but one authoritative prohibition: not to eat from the tree of life. But Satan, a fallen angel in the form of a serpent, tempted Eve to doubt God’s authoritative Word: “Did God actually say . . . ?” (Gen. 3:1). Adam and Eve rebelled against their holy, loving Creator, and we have inherited their guilt. The result is a fallen world full of sinful rebels who refuse to submit all of their thoughts and desires to their holy, loving Creator.
This includes you. Many of us imagine that we are good—but we can only do so if we lower the standard, comparing ourselves to “the next guy.” When compared to our holy, loving Creator, “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23). Read through the Ten Commandments (Ex. 20:3-17). Ask yourself whether you have ever valued any created thing above God, whether you have always reverenced the name and character of God, whether you have perfectly honored your parents, whether you have ever taken or longed for something that was not yours, whether you have always spoken the truth about everything. Or read Jesus’ summary in Matthew 22:37: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.” Have you loved God and neighbor perfectly?
God is infinitely holy, infinitely loving, infinitely glorious, and therefore infinitely just. Our sinful rebellion cannot be swept under the rug of the universe. Many imagine that if God is loving, he will just forgive everyone their sins. But precisely because of his love and justice and holiness, he must punishment our treasonous sins with the only punishment that fits the crime: eternal, conscious punishment. “The wages of sin”—the consequences of your sin!—“is death” (Rom. 6:23).

4. Jesus Christ Is a Gracious Redeemer

Who is Jesus? Jesus is God—he is eternal (John 1:1; 8:58) and all things were created through him (Col. 1:16). Jesus is man—God, in his grace and love toward us, sent his only Son to earth. Jesus remained God but also took on human nature. Jesus is our representative—just as Adam and Eve were the legal representatives for all mankind, so Jesus became the legal representative for all who would trust in him (Rom. 5:19). He came to fulfill what Adam—and Israel after him—failed to do: perfectly keep and fulfill God’s holy law. He was tempted in every respect, yet he lived a righteous life without sin in perfect conformity to his Father (Heb. 4:15). Jesus is our redeemer—this perfect obedience culminated in his bloody death, a sacrifice for our sins (Heb. 9:26).
Some people view Jesus and his death as a traffic figure in a tragedy. It was indeed a horrible event, but we must remember that this is the very reason that Jesus came to earth. He lived to die. He knew it would happen. In fact, God had planned it from the beginning of time (Acts 4:27-28).
But couldn’t there have been some other way? Why did Jesus have to die? The reason can be found be considering what we have already learned. We are sinful rebels. We have committed high treason against our Lord and Maker and Judge. God is holy and just. He would be unrighteous to overlook an infinite offense against his majestic name. There are no escape routes. God cannot just wave a magic wand and pronounce our sins forgiven. This is as unthinkable as a judge in a courtroom deciding to let a convicted mass murderer go free because the judge is such a nice guy. So here is the greatest dilemma of the universe. How can we have fellowship with God and forgiveness of sins before a righteous God?
There is only one way. God sent Jesus to be the representative and the redeemer for those who would trust in him. Jesus lived a righteous life. And Jesus died a righteous death. When Jesus hung upon the cross, God the Father poured out his wrath upon Christ’s head in our place. (That’s what the word propitiation means in Romans 3:25.) God the Father punished Jesus in our place. He died a humiliating death was buried in a tomb. On the third day, however, he rose triumphantly from the grave and appeared to his disciples. After forty days he ascended into heaven to sit at the right hand of his Father.
For treasonous rebels who cast themselves upon Christ as their representative and redeemer, they will receive the righteousness of Christ and the forgiveness of all their sins.

5. We Must Turn to and Trust in Jesus

What then must we do to be saved? Before we can ask what we must do, we must make certain we are clear on what Christ has done. Man-made religion invariably starts with us, but divine revelation starts with Christ. Reread the previous section if you have to. You must first recognize the no amount of good deeds or righteous acts done by us will suffice.
We must turn (or repent) from our sinful idols (or competitors) and trust in Jesus Christ alone for the forgiveness of sins, the gift of righteousness, and the hope of eternal life. It is not simply a matter of believing this intellectually. The demons believe all of this—and shudder (Jas. 2:19). You must trust in Jesus Christ as the only way to God (Acts 4:12). You must cherish Jesus as you would a hidden treasure or an expensive jewel (Matt. 13:44-46). You must submit to Jesus as the Lord of your life and the Savior of your soul, believing this in your heart and confessing it with your mouth (Rom. 10:9). You must cast yourself upon him and bank all of your hope in him, becoming like a child in your dependence and trust (Mark 10:15).
If this is the desire of your heart—if the “gospel” truly seems to you like “good news”—then we encourage you to cry out to God in prayer. Your prayer might be as simple as the tax collector who beat his chest and cried, “God, be merciful to me, a sinner!” (Luke 18:13). It would also be wise to seek out a Bible-believing church (see the section on this below) and talk to a Christian friend or to a pastor.

Two Final Questions

Imagine that you are standing before your holy, loving Creator on the Day of Judgment, and he asks you two questions: (1) Why should I let you into heaven? and (2) Why do you want to be here in heaven? Your answers to those two questions will reveal whether you have grasped the truth of the gospel. So before you read further, stop to ask yourself how you would answer those questions.
The answer to why God should let you into heaven is: he shouldn’t! You have rebelled and committed high treason against the King and Judge of the universe. You only deserve one thing: eternal punishment. So you cannot plead your own case. You have no righteousness that earns you a right to heaven. But then you point to Christ. Christ paid the price. Christ bore the punishment that I deserve. Christ provided the righteousness that I cannot provide. I can therefore enter heaven because I am united to Jesus my Savior, my Lord, my Treasure, my Redeemer, my Refuge, my Delight.
But why do you desire to enter? Many of us want to enter heaven to be free from pain and sickness, sin and suffering. We also want to be reunited to lost loved ones. These desires are good, not wrong. But they are never sufficient. Ask yourself this question: Would I want to go to heaven if it had everything that I desired, but God wasn’t there? God would not be honored by an affirmative answer to that question. If we have embraced the truth of the gospel, then our greatest desire will be to be with God himself, in whose presence there is “fullness of joy” and “pleasures forevermore” (Ps. 16:11).

Douglas Wilson makes an excellent points regarding “modernism,” “postmodernism,” and “foundationalism.”

The first thing is that Andrew [Sandlin] simply assumes that if I attack postmodern epistemology, I must be doing so as a foundationalist. But I don't remember ever saying anything like that, and do remember saying quite a bit to the contrary. I don't think that we can take a series of indubitable legos and stack them up into a worldview. What we need around here is a Trinitarian epistemology, one that is not beholden to the arrogance of Descartes, and that is equally not beholden to the arrogance of the postmodernists. And just in passing, at bottom, it is always the same arrogance. Postmodernism is just modernism's ugly little brother in drag. Modernism says that God cannot have spoken, “because I have spoken to the contrary.” Postmodernism says that God cannot have spoken, because “nobody speaks really, when you think about it.” The key thing they share (and which the Bible calls unbelief) is wrapped up in that phrase “God cannot have spoken.”

Well said.

Update: D'oh, Vikings! They've now lost 5 of the last 7, and lost 20 of their last 22 outdoor games. Oh well--it looks like they'll still be going to the playoffs!