Really Recommended Posts

Really Recommended Posts 8/16/13: Elysium, Osteen, and Russell, oh my!

snowl-owl-post-arpingstonePlenty to check out this go-round of the Really Recommended Posts. LOTR actor Astin opens up about Christianity, the usefulness of natural theology, Bertrand Russell, a “call out” to Joel Osteen and Joyce Meyer, and the recent flick Elysium.

Elysium: Fighting for Paradise– Anthony Weber’s excellent blog Empires and Mangers is well worth following, as he continues to publish top-notch analyses of cultural material. Here, he gives an excellent reflection on the recent movie, Elysium.

Why I Called Out Joel Osteen and Joyce Meyer– I found this to be an excellent summary of Meyer and Osteen’s theology with an insightful critique. Meyer and Osteen have strayed from the Biblical message and they do need to be “called out” as false teachers.

‘Lord of the Rings’ Actor Opens Up About His Christian Faith– Yet another reason to like Samwise Gamgee. Check out the article for some interesting tidbits on living a life of faith in the Hollywood lights.

Why I am Not Bertrand Russell– Win Corduan provides an excellent analysis of a Biblical text to which Russell took exception. It is worth checking out the rest of Corduan’s blog as well, as it is an excellent resource across the board. Corduan is the author of the excellent work, Neighboring Faiths, a text on religions I highly recommend.

On Moser’s Rejection of Natural Theology– Paul Moser’s work has interested me quite a bit. However, he rejects the project of natural theology in a fashion which seems to me to be unwarranted. Here, there is an analysis of Moser’s thoughts in this area.

About J.W. Wartick

J.W. Wartick is a Lutheran, feminist, Christ-follower. A Science Fiction snob, Bonhoeffer fan, Paleontology fanboy and RPG nerd.


2 thoughts on “Really Recommended Posts 8/16/13: Elysium, Osteen, and Russell, oh my!

  1. J.W.,
    re: Paul’s review of Moser’s book. Thanks for sharing this. However,
    Fideism is a tridentine ‘bogeyman’ intended to mislead from the Reformer’s insights about incommensurability and the limits of human faculties to apprehend. It is a label placed on them, not a word ever used by Luther, Calvin, Melanchthon, etc. Post trentian authors make it to be a ‘leap’ which is almost exactly the opposite of the original intention.
    Hear Calvin in his own words: “Faith is the proper and entire work of the Holy Spirit, enlightened by whom we recognise [sic] God and the treasures of his grace, and without whose illumination our mind is so blind that it can see nothing, so stupid that it has no relish for spiritual things” (Calvin, 1593/1977. English edition, IV. 14. 8, 286). THIS is so-called fideism in its original intent. It is not that man does not have gifts, he does. It is not that God has failed to make a way, He has. But, because of God’s distinction and human propensity to deceive ourselves, God has to provide the bridge. We cannot connect without His provision of faith and illumination of the Holy Spirit and Word. That does NOT mean a leap.
    Please help to promote truth instead of a myth.
    Thanks, Dan Porter, PhD.

    Posted by portdb | August 16, 2013, 10:36 AM
    • I appreciate the comment and concern, but I’m not sure what relevance it has… after all, the post I linked to explicitly notes that Moser is in fact critical of fideism and in no way makes a “bogeyman” of fideism from Moser’s view. So I’m a bit confused as to what your concern is, given that the author of this post is not doing what you seem to be concerned with correcting.

      In fact, the last part of your comment seems to me to be really confusing and leads me to wonder if the post I linked to was read before you wrote this critique. You wrote: “We cannot connect without His provision of faith and illumination of the Holy Spirit and Word. That does NOT mean a leap.”

      In the post I linked to, it says “He provides an insightful critique of both “nontheistic naturalism” and fideism (chapters two and three, respectively) that should be helpful to anyone interested in the philosophy of religion (his critique of Kierkegaard’s “leap of faith” is devastating).”

      I honestly think you’re preaching to the choir here. Perhaps you didn’t look at the post I linked? Why this comment about Calvin and Luther when the post doesn’t even comment on them and in fact seems to agree exactly with what you’re saying?

      Posted by J.W. Wartick | August 16, 2013, 5:23 PM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 2,809 other followers


Like me on Facebook: Always Have a Reason
%d bloggers like this: