The story goes back a couple of weeks. See Cubachi, "Richard Wolffe mocks Palin and C.S. Lewis as just “a children’s author”"
Wolffe seems to think it is clever to mock Palin reading a “children’s author,” while disrespecting one of the greatest authors in literature. Yes, C.S. Lewis is most famous among the pop culture crowd with the movies and sudden ressurgance of The Chronicles of Narnia, which happens to be an allegorical tale of Jesus Christ, who became a human being, and gave His life to save undeserving human beings from the penalty of sin. (Richard Wolffe seems to be in the same boat as Liam Neeson when it comes to not understanding C.S. Lewis’ Christian tales.)Yet, it's more than progressive ignorance we must address. And it's not just children's books. It's the larger issue that leftists are attacking Palin on the basis of her faith. See, "Palin Criticized for Praying to God, Obama Given a Pass for Playing God."
Lewis is also a well-accomplished Christian author who writes novels of human nature in some adult fictional work and essays on Christian faith.
I'll have more on these issues throughout the day.
I'm going to have to unearth my old history books (old enough to have actual facts in them) and see what the relationship was between the "Knownothings" and the "progressives".
ReplyDeleteMeager on-line info seems to say the connection was non-existent.
ReplyDeleteProgressives seeing this will report that it is just like the Republican party--anti-immigrant (and probably, some how, anti-Catholic).
I am not at all comfortable with pronouncing what the Republican Party believes in--this author, if he must accept labels (I remember when _that_ was an honorable position!), is a (note case) constitutionally conservative republican who is vocally IN FAVOR OF immigration, very much opposed to illegal immigration. To clarify--I strongly hold that the immigration process needs to be streamlined and simplified so that people can legally immigrate. But the rul must be rigidly enforced
I read your recent post about Elizabeth Edwards and her faith. It appears that you believe in God and that you serve Him. I found it odd to peruse your blog and find Victoria's Secret and Lucy Pinder videos.
ReplyDeleteY = X: God doesn't tell me I can't post videos of hotties. And I obviously don't fit into your warped stereotype of a Christian. Go back to Pharyngula or Richard Dawkins', or wherever you came from. Clearly, what I have to say will be of no interest to you.
ReplyDeleteJesus equated lust with adultery and also admonished His followers not to lead others into sin. I was wondering how you rationalize the apparent contradiction of your service to Him and the fact that you post videos of 'hotties'.
ReplyDeleteClearly the Bible doesn't mention anything about videos. I don't take this omission to be permission to post any video whatsoever. I'm wondering where the line is drawn.
I found it odd to peruse your blog and find Victoria's Secret and Lucy Pinder videos.
ReplyDeleteI don't know (yet--I'll look it up in a minute) who or what Lucy Pinder is, but I do know something about Victoria's secret.
Since we are made in His image I can not for the life of me understand why we should cover up iterations of that image, nor why the most ugly people are held up as icons. Still your rage, I believe "beauty" is a multidimensional thing of which physical beauty is but one.
But people like Pelosi and Thomas are ugly from the core out.
I looked up "Lucy Pinder" and now understand why she was interesting.
ReplyDeleteToo much "better loving through chemistry" for my tastes, the Victoria's Secret view is more to my liking.
But certainly not something to draw condemnation or damnation.
Now if the reference had been to Code Pink or Ariana Huffington....
Oh, and for "Y=X".....
ReplyDeleteI'm an A = A kind of guy.
Y = X: You keep saying "service to Him." But I've never said I was in service to Him. Again, you're stereotyping. I've been married for 16 years, faithfully. No doubt that my existence blows aways all the false ideas you have about people of faith.
ReplyDeleteThanks for commenting, Larry!
ReplyDeleteWho brought "lust" and "leading into sin" into the discussion?
ReplyDeleteOh, right.
Donald, my concern if for your soul. If you are not in service of Him then you aren't a Christian. It appears you claim to be one and I apologize to you if this is not something you claim. There are lots of false converts in the church and I hope you aren't one of them.
ReplyDeleteOn purely logical grounds though, your reasoning appears to be a bad one. You said that, "God doesn't tell me I can't post videos of hotties." He does tell us that lust is a sin and not to lead other to sin. Many men who look at the videos you posted will lust in their heart and so commit adultery.
Where is the line drawn? Is it OK to post videos of illicit sex acts? We are called to be pure of heart and I suggest that the videos you posted links to cross that line. Being faithful to your wife means keeping yourself from lust. It's not merely that you haven't had sex with another woman.
I don't want to badger you or anyone else on your blog so I won't comment again on this matter. I hope you don't mind if I keep you in my prayers. I will read your responses and thoughtfully consider them.
Larry: We are all sinners and in need of the redemption provided through Jesus Christ. We are all ugly. Pelosi no more so than me or you or anyone else. We are all equally undeserving of God's grace and yet he offers us grace nonetheless.
ReplyDeleteY don't you start you ow2n blog where you preaching would be on topic?
ReplyDeleteWonder if any of those progressives ever read anything else by Lewis? Somehow I think they missed 'Mere Christianity' and 'The Screwtape Letters'...
ReplyDeleteThey've probably memorized 'Harrison Beregeron' though and continue to cheer every time he gets shot...
I have been thinking about the fault-finding exchange here--it is that mindless kind of meddling and fault-finding and attempts to control (not to mention some truly awful evil done by "ministers") that led me to reach the conclusion that John 3:16 contained everything I needed to know about salvation, and that since I had the requirement there covered, I did not need organized religion for anything.
ReplyDeleteI've in recent years "joined" a church for personal reasons that have noting to do with any need related to my salvation--that is unchanged lo these 50 or so years.
I am sorry to report that if I feel the need for Bible instruction or preaching of one sort or another and I do sometimes need a boost for my spirit, I turn on a Glenn Beck program--at church I mostly get global warming, and social justice and why things forbidden by the Bible and common sense are not only really OK, they are required, somehow.