Society - Michael J. Thom

Poorly Organized Thoughts on Guns and Society

Michael — Mon, 19 Feb 2018 02:49:53 +0000

So I’ve been fairly quiet on social media latelyâ€¦ well actually, not just lately — always. I am indeed a consumer of social media and not much of a publisher, you could say.

But also it’s in part because rarely does a social media post about any controversial issue accomplish anything other than further deepening the reader’s existing inclinations. And most often, it spurs division among people who might have a reasonable conversation in person, but who happily resort to extremes and straw man arguments with the anonymity or at least separation afforded them by interacting via a web browser or an app.

However, even if for mere catharsis, I’ve felt compelled to commit a few [Editor’s note: gazillion] words to page. Feel free to agree or disagree with me, and to comment below or not comment. If you want to grab a beer and talk through this stuff, I’d love that. But I’m not likely to engage online with anything other than genuine, factual discrepancies.

With all those disclaimers said, I want to discuss some things that have been in my mind lately. As you’ve probably guessed, it’s mostly related to the murder of students and teachers at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL, on Valentine’s Day.

The Rhetoric.

From both sides. Is Everytownâ€s â€œ18th school shooting in the U.S. in 2018â€ statistic misleading? Yes. But does it matter? No. Spending one’s proverbial breath writing an entire post about why itâ€s wrong and trust me things arenâ€t that bad is MISSINGÂ THE POINT. To explain away a statistic like that is to belittle the school shootings that really do fit that label, whether it’s actually 15, or 10, or 5. If that number is greater than zero, it’s too many.

And while reasonable people can disagree on how to reduce (or eliminate!?) this statistic, it doesn’t help anyone achieve anything to continue debating points that don’t matter. The number of school shootings isn’t the point here. Neither is whether an AR-15 is correctly labeled as an “assault rifle” or not. Can it kill many people faster, easier, and more effectively than a handgun, knife, or slappers (a little nod to Goldeneye on N64 there as an attempt at levity…)? Why yes, it can. No matter what label you give it. (More below on that…)

The increasing amount of white noise is making genuine conversations impossible to have. Everything becomes a personal attack, or a straw man argument, or otherwise fails to connect people in a two-sided conversation where both parties are willing to hear the other’s standpoint and consider it. This is very not good.

The Constitution.

Iâ€m not going to have a constitutional scholarship discussion here; thatâ€s largely because I am not a constitutional scholar. But also, I donâ€t think it matters.

First, letâ€s assume the Founders did imagine a future with smaller, more easily used guns that everyone could and probably would own. Second, letâ€s maybe even spot them the idea that being able to resist ones tyrannical government was something worth protecting (after all, they had some very recent experience with this!).

But the game has changed. The civilian guns have changed. What the government (via its modern military) is capable of (if we assume they actually would want to turn that might on its citizens) is vastly different than 250ish years ago, as well as vastly more powerful than that of the citizenry. Itâ€s a whole different ball game.

So. The situation has changed. Even if we stick to a â€œBiblical inerrancyâ€ perspective (whoops wait wrong conversation, I meant Constitutional Originalist), thereâ€s nothing to prevent us from changing it. Itâ€s been done 17 times before, since the Bill of Rights was introduced with the first 10. Since that time, an amendment has been ratified on average about once every 13 years. The last was in 1992. Whether or not a change to the Constitution would be required, it’s time we do something regarding reasonable gun legislation, and hanging onto the 2nd Amendment just because it’s in the Constitution is useless.

In fact, Thomas Jefferson himself acknowledged the potential for humans to progress in their thinking, becoming more enlightened with new truths and opinions:

But I know also, that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.

– Letter to Samuel Kercheval, June 12, 1816

The Guns.

Okay, I love guns especially the ar-15 pistols from Palmetto Armory. Or maybe in truth, I used to. That’s changing in me. But the physical things are quite cool. They’re interesting technology. They are super fun to shoot. The challenge of getting better at target practice and other techniques is exhilarating. And, if I’m being honest, they make you feel powerful. They make you feel important, and capable. I’m not so sure those last ones are good things, but I can say from firsthand experience they have this effect.

And in theory I still like the idea of protecting oneself and one’s family from bad actors, particularly in one’s own home. However, when I think of “reasonable gun control” I think of things such as how easy it is to acquire a gun in most states, certainly here in Indiana. It is literally easier to buy a gun than get a driver’s license or register a car, or to apply for a loan with most institutions, or adopt a rabbit. And while you might argue that owning a gun is the only item on that list that’s protected by the Constitution (see above for whether or not I think that actually matters to the discussion), there are plenty of rights, such as freedom of speech, that, while protected, are also limited in many reasonable ways. Gun ownership simply has to be one of these things. “But it’s already limited! Background checks! Etc.!” you say. And I say, 17 people died in a high school this week. I GUESS IT’S NOT LIMITED ENOUGH.

Also, the AR-15. Ah, what a nice piece of kit. Many have rails on all four sides of the barrel. Space to mount red-dot sights, laser scopes, lights, bayonets, and all kinds of other toys. Magazine capacities of 15, 30, and more. Collapsible stocks. Slings. And so forth. I don’t own one, but there was a time that I wanted to, but just couldn’t afford it. They are tons of fun!

But they also aren’t a “personal protection” weapon. You can’t carry one and conceal it. Without special ammo they’re horrible at over-penetration (i.e. shooting through WAY more than you would want to, endangering the people around you even if you think you’re just shooting the bad guy). Further, while not as big as using a shotgun to defend your home, they’re much bigger to wield in (likely) close quarters.

A quick note about whether it counts as an “automatic” weapon. An automatic weapon just means a gun that reloads itself. The term automatic encompasses both “full-auto” (as in pull the trigger once, hold it down, and get lots of rounds fired), as well as “semi-automatic” (which is one shot per trigger squeeze). Both sides of this argument misuse the term: the Left uses it to make the AR-15 sound more exciting than it is, and the Right to make it sound like automatic weapons are already illegal for citizens to purchase. Nope, only full-auto.

Anyway, what the AR-15 does do super well, and better than any handgun, is make a newbie much more likely to hit his targets. And that’s why they are so much more lethal when used in a mass shooting scenario than handguns, or knives, or baseball batsâ€¦ Yes, you can kill with anything. But you can kill easier and faster with a gun, especially a long gun that’s literally designed to help the military kill with more precision.

I’m not okay with that. Especially when those targeted have so often been among the most vulnerable in our society. Are you okay with that?

The Other Factors.

Many on the Right say it’s not guns, it’s bad people. Or it’s mental illness. Or it’s a lack of follow-through by local and federal law enforcement to act on tips. These are all valid, and some are true in many of the most notable shootings. I don’t want to invalidate efforts to improve mental health awareness and remove societal stigmas that may be keeping people from getting help. Or organizations who are trying to reach out to at-risk youth. Or cities who are making actual strides in improving poverty and equality for those outside of the privilege I (and probably most of you, my readers) enjoy.

But. All these shootings have one, obvious thing in common — a gun. Nearly always legally-acquired. So don’t tell me “criminals will still get a gun” — most of these people got their guns through typical, legal means. Making this process more difficult — or perhaps, completely impossible for the types of guns we’ve been talking about — would absolutely make a dent in the frequency and extent to which mass murders occur in the U.S.

This problem is uniquely American. I’m not enough of a social scientist to even begin writing about the social norms that have developed in the US that might be also contributing to these behaviors. But it is undeniable that more guns equals more gun deaths, both homicide and suicide. As one who considers myself pro-life, this bothers me. I want people to live not just before and through childbirth, but for as long as possible.

Why is the US so screwed up, and what can we do about it? I don’t have final, clear, easy-to-implement answers. Clearly, nobody does. But I know we must do something, and I am more than willing to put aside any remaining personal affinity for guns if it means even the slightest chance that one fewer kid will die while at school.

Postscript.

Sorry I rambled so much. This really was mostly a dump of my brain. I didn’t even say everything I wanted to, because I tried to keep at least a little structure to this. So forgive my writing style. And frankly, I’m impressed if anyone actually reads this at all, especially this far down the page. So uh, digital-high-five! And know that I still love you, dear reader, even if I pissed you off at any point — or all the points — above. Just my thoughts! Reasonable people can disagree with much of what I wrote, and I like to think you and I are reasonable people.

The post Poorly Organized Thoughts on Guns and Society first appeared on Michael J. Thom.

Indiana SB 101 – The “Religious Freedom” Bill

Michael — Tue, 24 Mar 2015 01:32:32 +0000

Oh, Indiana. Le sigh.

So here’s the thing.

I’ll start by addressing the aspects of this (overall terrible) bill that do make sense to me (don’t worry, there are very few).

I do not want the government to tell me how to conduct my private business. That is indeed a basic tenant of a free market, free speech, and a free people. For the government to essentially force its private citizens and private businesses to conduct themselves a certain way is not okay with me.

However, it is SO NOT OKAY to say “oh, please, by all means — discriminate away!” In effect, that is what this bill is saying and ensuring that all Hoosiers can (and should!) do.

We simply need no legislation on this topic.

Individuals who want to do business at a given company are already free to do so, or not. And businesses are already free to do business with a given individual, or not. That is our collective perogative in a free society.

Neither side needs to be coerced into action it otherwise would not have taken.

(Point of clarification: The unstated phrase in all these sentences is “by the government.” I would, in fact, like to coerce my fellow Christians to stop judging and discriminating. I just don’t want myÂ government to do it, because it crosses so many lines, even if well-intentioned.)

The flip side of this law is bad too, so don’t hear me wishing it was written 180Â° the other way around. I don’t — just as I have the right to walk out of any establishment I no longer want to patronize, I should also have the right to end a business relationship with anyone, anytime, for any (or no) reason (barring contractual obligations, of course).

Therefore this bill basically continues to solidify institutional discrimination. Oh and gives “religion” a bad name. A well-deserved one of late, if you ask me.

Ugh.

Addendum. This is particularly frustrating for the maybe-just-right-of-center among us (or the libertarian-leaning, if you will). This, just like the gay marriage issue, is so unfairly polarizing that it’s hard to take a position on. You’re damned if you do (support it) and damned if you don’t. I don’t support the bill, but it’s not because of “gay rights” — it’s because I don’t want the government having the power to tell me what I can and cannot do.

The post Indiana SB 101 – The “Religious Freedom” Bill first appeared on Michael J. Thom.

Musings on the Electoral College

Michael — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 03:27:00 +0000

Since last night I have been planning on writing a post regarding the Electoral College.Â First, I should clarify that I am not writing this as a frustrated McCain voter or something; Iâ€m well aware that Obama won both the popular vote and the projected Electoral College vote.Â So this is not at all based on my feelings on the outcome of the election.Â Instead, it is based on some conversations Iâ€ve had with friends in recent weeks about what might happen should the popular vote once again be very close, particularly if the electoral count should also be very close (or tied).

However, Iâ€ll admit that Iâ€m not writing what I had generally been planning on writing. My thoughts lately have been that the Electoral College system is antiquated and needs to be done away with.Â But, in order to be fair and accurate in my writing, I did some research before beginning to write.Â I now have a renewed confidence in our Founding Fathers and the work they put into crafting our Constitution and the wonderful federation that we call the United States of America.

The Electoral College (which was not originally given that now-common name) was chosen to solve several problems, a few of which I will enumerate.

Around 4 million people were spread sparsely throughout the eastern seaboard, and the communication methods of the day made it very difficult for a candidate to be truly known by all voters.
Candidates did not run campaigns as we know them.
The USA is a federation, under the concept of federalism; thus, the Framers were wary of anything that would risk a national mindset superseding that of the individual states.
Also due to the small number of original states and their sparse populations and lack of communication, it was feared that each stateâ€s voters would only vote for a local candidate; they feared, potentially, 13 different candidates each receiving a small portion of the popular vote, which would cause a useless outcome with no majority.
Additionally, many voters did not feel that they were qualified or knowledgeable enough to effectively vote, so it was felt that it would be better to elect a small number of knowledgeable, trustworthy people to then gather and select a president.

These reasons all make much sense, but all of them except number 3 are now irrelevant, as we now have a very different population and population spread, and the candidate and campaign situations are entirely different.Â So why shouldnâ€t we get rid of the Electoral College system and just go to a popular vote-based election?Â Here are some common arguments for doing just that.

If weâ€re electing the federal president, not a state representative, then why donâ€t we just use the popular vote tally?
We no longer have a lack of communication nationwide.
The two-party system, for better or for worse, has made it such that, in reality, only two candidates have a real shot of winning on election day, so thereâ€s essentially no chance that each stateâ€s voters will just vote for their stateâ€s person and no majority will be reached.
Because we are a more connected society than 200 years ago, where we frequently cross state lines for commerce and pleasure, state delineations seem to have less importance.

These were some of my own arguments.Â I basically said, â€œThe Electoral College made sense 200 years ago when communication and campaigns were very different, but thereâ€s no reason we canâ€t directly elect our president.â€

Nonetheless, after my research today, I was reminded of the place of federalism in all this.Â We are taught far too little about federalism in school, so many are not familiar with what federalism is and why our Constitution is based on entirely on its precepts.

Everything in our government is set up as a balance between state and federal power.Â The Congress is half based on states (Senate) and population (House).Â Likewise, our presidential elections are also a combination: a popular vote in each state (rather than by county or city or such) determines the candidate for whom the proportionate number of electors is selected (based upon a combination of the number of seats in the House and the Senate and three in the case of the District of Columbia).

In the end, the Electoral College makes sense even today.Â Itâ€s not perfect; itâ€s government.Â However, itâ€s the best compromise that will continue to allow our government to be most effectively selected.Â By its citizens and its states, both of which are equally important.

For a much more thorough explanation of the Electoral College, read the excellent article I read through the Federal Election Commission website: http://www.fec.gov/pdf/eleccoll.pdf

The post Musings on the Electoral College first appeared on Michael J. Thom.

Evansville’s Best-Kept Secret

Michael — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 19:39:00 +0000

Last night, during a break from the National Student Conference (hosted by the NACCM), the rest of the Christian Campus House staff and I joined a couple other guys from the conference and drove through Evansville a bit to go to a restaurant.Â It was a Greek restaurant called Acropolis, and it was absolutely amazing.Â Apparently, the two other guys who went with us ate there last year as well, and, upon entering the restaurant last year, the owner greeted them at the door and said, “let me cook for you tonight!”Â Well, long story short, this year they asked if we could do the same thing, and this is what happened.Â We ordered drinks, and the waitress (the same one they had last year!) called Doros, the owner, and he told her what all to have the chefs prepare for us.Â For $20 a person plus drinks, we had probably 4 appetizers, salad, and 3 entrees plus desert, served “family-style” for the 5 of us to share.Â It was absolutely astounding, and the service was fantastic.Â Mind you, I had never eaten Greek food before, but the stuffed mushrooms were the only thing I didn’t try (I’m definitely not a fan of mushrooms).Â I tried everything else, and liked everything else, with the exception of the cucumber sauce – but I’m pretty sure that was me, not the restaurant.

Then, after a bit, Doros arrived (he had been running some errands) and joined us for probably 10 minutes.Â It turns out he has a young son who was very sick during the conference last year, and the guys we were with heard about this and told him and the waitress that they’d pray for his son.Â Well, his son (who was around a year old at the time) was in a coma for four days, but suddenly came out of it and is 100% healthy now.Â He said they were “blessed.”Â What an amazing picture of the power of prayer.Â Surely our two new friends weren’t the only people praying for Doros’s son, but how cool that was for them to be able to ask about him and hear such a great report.

Doros also reported that, a few months ago, Evansville was the host of a baseball tournament of some sort.Â Several guys from ESPN came in, and Doros offered to cook for them (he didn’t know they were from ESPN until after he had started cooking for them); they essentially got the same awesome deal that we did.Â They told him, on their way out, “on the radio tomorrow, we’re not going to be talking about baseball, we’re going to be talking about this restaurant!”Â Truly an amazing place, it is well worth the time and money to enjoy an awesome Greek meal.Â And be sure to ask to dine “off the menu,” as Doros was so kind to do for us again this year.

Acropolis Authentic Greek Cuisine & Spirits
501 N. Green River Rd.
Evansville, IN 47715
http://www.acropolisevv.com

The post Evansville’s Best-Kept Secret first appeared on Michael J. Thom.

Election 08 – What Everyone Needs to Know

Michael — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:40:00 +0000

PREFACE: I did not write this. I am re-posting this excellent commentary posted on facebook, written by Alex Pombar.

As the presidential election approaches, I would like to take time to share with you what I think about the current political issues surrounding the war in Iraq.

We MUST stay in Iraq until the job is done. A few things WILL happen if our future president decides to leave:

The Sunni’s and Shiite’s will kill each other until one side is dead. Since Iran feels they are entitled to Iraq’s land (and also being the world’s largest Shiite empire) you can bet that the Sunni’s will not hold out long.
Leaving Iraq will prove to terrorists all over the world that America can be beaten. Then they will never stop attacking us because we would no longer stand as a legitimate threat to their terrorist cause… period.
They will attack anyone and everyone until they establish the new Ottoman Empire, re-instituting the Caliphate (a position Bin Laden has already claimed rights to).

The candidate who becomes the next president of this nation should ALREADY be embodying sound judgment and displaying good leadership capabilities. Leaders should be elected to hold leadership positions because of what they do NOW, not what they say they will do in the future. Senator McCain has been to Iraq at least six times to get a personal feel for the situation. Senator Obama has visited once.

The United States needs a leader who is willing to go to war, but will use sound judgment on whether we should or should not go to war. When the vote on the original proposition for the war in Iraq was cast, Senator Obama was not yet in the Senate while Senator McCain voted against the war. If anyone knows the extreme consequences of war, it is John McCain.

I appreciate the love my friends and family have shown for me, but please do not vote for someone because you want to keep me from risking my life for my country. I have thought about going to war since 2001. If you did not know, I contracted with the Army in 2004 and signed up for the Infantry Branch in 2007. I did not sign up with the Army to not go to war. I have thought and prayed about the consequences and I know what I am getting into. I would rather fight the enemy in Iraq than allow them to blow up innocent civilians here on American soil.

I promise you, it is not a question of whether or not they will attack us… it is when. If you want to get a good look at how bad they want to kill us, I highly recommend that you see the documentary film, “Obsession”. Even the trailer for it does a good amount of justice. You can see the trailer and buy the movie off of www.obsessionthemovie.com. To say that they hate us is truly an understatement. Loathe gets closer, but still doesn’t scratch the surface. With every atom in their body, they want to kill us. If it is not fellow servicemen and me fighting them there, they will kill us here. If we leave Iraq, it will give terrorists confidence that they can beat the strongest country in the world. It will also tell over 4000 servicemen’s families that their son or daughter died for ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. If we leave, there WILL be another 9/11 or worse. The ONLY reasons we have not been attacked again is because 1) the war has been brought to their doorstep and 2) because of our large and strong defense budget. Senator McCain has a strong defense plan and Senator Obama wants to cut defense spending. Billions of dollars being spent on a war may seem like too much from a stateside perspective, but there are soldiers who still don’t have the best armor available to them.

Despite the fact that terrorists have not attacked us since 9-11, we are still at risk in a very real way. For example, here is a hypothetical, but very possible, situation to show you how simple a plan can be to really hit us hard. A terrorist could learn to fly a small plane and use it as a very precise and effective weapon. They could probably just steal one and hope for the best. After packing the plane full of explosives, they could fly that plane into a school. This attack could potentially kill hundreds of people or worse, hundreds of our innocent youth. Unfortunately, the attack could easily be more horrifying. As every child and teacher runs out of the school for safety, they would soon be met by responding emergency medical treatment vehicles and personnel. That is when a second suicide bomber would drive up to where everyone is located with a car filled with explosives killing most, if not all, of the people standing outside. Scary, is it not? Can it happen? Absolutely. This is what happened in Israel and the country has gone bankrupt trying to prevent this situation from happening again. Every school in Israel has AT LEAST one counterterrorist unit assigned to it. Every time the kids go on a field trip they MUST have at least one armed guard with them. This is the reality in Israel. This is how they live. If we leave Iraq, something like this is more likely to occur. If it does, we will be back in Iraq for a second time with more deaths on our side. Except now, terrorists will know that all they have to do is wait it out until the American public forgets the atrocities committed against it, beats itself up politically, and brings the troops home again. This cycle will repeat over and over.

DO NOT blame their hatred for us because of decisions we have made. Nothing makes me more furious than hearing someone say "Well, they hate us because of our relationship with Israel and because of the war in Iraq". Give me a break. That is one of the most cowardly point of views I have ever heard. They don’t hate us because of our actions. These extremists hate us because we are not Muslim. Because we are a power that stand in their way of re-establishing their future empire. Because we stand for freedom and truth.

If you haven’t noticed, there has been less news about Iraq than usual. I can assure you that it is because we are winning and doing great things in Iraq. I spoke with a friend who has been there twice and the first time he was there, it was EXPECTED that an IED or small arms fire would hit every patrol. The second time he went, his patrols were never attacked. General Petraeus’ strategy and surge of troops has worked wonders there. The surge of troops has demoralized terrorists from thinking they will outlast us. The General’s plan of patrolling on foot, instead of from inside humvees, has worked. We are supplying water, electricity, food, schools, and building new shops. We talk to their people, help their businesses, buy things from their stores, give toys to young kids, and we are training them to defend themselves. The turn around in that country has been tremendous. In desperation, Al-Qaeda has turned to killing Iraqis when they don’t do what they say. The Iraqi people are tired of it and are helping Americans instead. If we leave, that will all be lost. We already left these people in the first Gulf War. Let’s not make the same mistake again.

The post Election 08 – What Everyone Needs to Know first appeared on Michael J. Thom.

SCOTUS Decision in Favor of Gun Owners

Michael — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 02:52:00 +0000

I am so happy to be posting these links. The much-awaited D.C. et al. v. Heller case that went before the Supreme Court has been decided. In a narrow 5-4 vote the Court has overturned the D.C. gun ban law, calling it unconstitutional and specifically stating that "the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self defense in the home." While not a sweepingly broad decision, the case makes it much harder now to deny citizens the right to at least own a gun and keep in ready to be used in the home. Only time will tell just how much more will come as a direct result of this decision, but it’s at least a positive step in the right direction.

Read the SCOTUS Blog’s report, or go straight to the decision (pdf).

The post SCOTUS Decision in Favor of Gun Owners first appeared on Michael J. Thom.

Spiritual Receptivity

Michael — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 02:38:00 +0000

I am a little over halfway through A.W. Tozer‘s classic The Pursuit of God (also available to read online). This is my first read of the book, and, despite the language being just a bit old-fashioned (it was written around the middle of the 1900s), he is an amazing man of God with a lot of interesting things to say. I just read one portion tonight that struck me as something that I need to keep in mind, now more than ever, in my position working at a church (but, really, to a certain degree, these are thoughts that everyone should think though).

Failure to … [be spiritually receptive] … is the cause of a very serious breakdown in modern evangelicalism. … The tragic results of this spirit are all around us: Shallow lives, hollow religious philosophies, the preponderance of the element of fun in gospel meetings, the glorification of men, trust in religious externalities, quasi-religious fellowships, salesmanship methods, the mistaking of dynamic personality for the power of the Spirit. These and such as these are the symptoms of an evil disease, a deep and serious malady of the soul.

Strong words, eh? I’m just fascinated by how relevant those words are, even today. "The preponderance of the element of fun in gospel meetings" – how did he know we’d be more interested in exciting music and cool slideshows than strong teaching of the Word? "The mistaking of dynamic personality for the power of the Spirit" – I know some preachers who are not the most elegant with words, but have an amazingly Godly spirit and a servant’s heart. Tozer warns that these misguided desires are "symptoms of an evil disease" – harsh, perhaps, but true. Let us pray that our church cannot be described with any of these symptoms of a "deep and serious malady of the soul."

The post Spiritual Receptivity first appeared on Michael J. Thom.

Survey: More Americans dropping dogma for spirituality

Michael — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 17:13:00 +0000

Read the link: Survey: More Americans dropping dogma for spirituality – USATODAY.com

I can hardly believe some of this. Well, actually, that’s not true. I believe every word of it; especially being near a college campus for four years, I don’t doubt any of this. I just hate to see it in words, as stats, proof of the lack of teaching that is going on and the compromise that people are willing to make.

The post Survey: More Americans dropping dogma for spirituality first appeared on Michael J. Thom.

The Never-Ending Adventures and Journeys of the Jesus Followers

Michael — Sun, 22 Jun 2008 02:20:00 +0000

I just started reading another book, this one by the guy who spoke at the NACCM Campus Ministers’ Retreat a couple weeks ago, Don Everts. It’s called Jesus with Dirty Feet, and it’s a look at Jesus that attempts to do away with all of the cliches, ideas, stigmas, mindsets, and perspectives that we seem to collectively have from our 21st-century viewpoint (well, 20th-century, actually… it was written in 1999).

To greatly paraphrase his very first chapter, the term Christian and Christianity has been greatly distorted and misunderstood in modern-day society. So, for now on, whenever you hear the term Christianity, think the following:

The Never-Ending Adventures and Journeys of the Jesus Followers.

The post The Never-Ending Adventures and Journeys of the Jesus Followers first appeared on Michael J. Thom.

A New Apologetic Method

Michael — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 02:30:00 +0000

Okay, so it may not actually be totally new. But it’s new to me, and it’s new to many modern Christians. You see, many "classic" Christian apologetics just aren’t as applicable to today society and situation. With the "New Atheists" as prominent as they are, we must adapt and take on new tactics when dealing with these issues. Dinesh D’ Souza spoke this evening at Crossroads Bible College in Indianapolis. I will blog more on his talk in upcoming days, but here are just a couple of thoughts that he shared with us.

In his mind, Atheism has only recently become as militant as it now is. In the past, Atheists have sought little more than for removal of Nativities from public places or the dismantling of 10 Commandment replicas from court houses. However, these days, Atheists are attempting to discredit Christianity. They try to "make Christians feel like idiots" for believing as we do, as D’ Souza put it tonight. We Christians were taught to defend our beliefs and explain our beliefs by pointing to the Bible. Quoting Scripture is also recommended. However, what do you do when somebody inherently disbelieves the Bible and its veracity? Saying "because it said so" is meaningless when they don’t give the Bible any credit to begin with. Thus, we must become "bilingual," in a sense. We need to be able to speak secularly with Atheists/secularists. This is just one tenant of his methodology for dealing with Atheism as it has presented itself in modern society.

More to come soon; right now, I am simply much too tired and it is past my bedtime. I just want to leave you with one more nugget of knowledge that I gained tonight. I will perhaps put it in context in a future post, but, for now, know that Heaven is adult Disneyland.

The post A New Apologetic Method first appeared on Michael J. Thom.