I’ve been toying with the idea of retooling some parts of my blog to bring them more in line with the overall theme. For my “Top 3 on Tuesday” posts, that basically means changing the title to incorporate something about civics. I’m picturing something that conveys 1) the Kingdom civics theme, 2) the fact that it is a collection of pertinent articles, and 3) that it is a weekly feature. Any ideas?
While you chew on that, I’ll share my top 3 this week:
The Sane Ones, from Experimental Theology
The sanity of Eichmann is disturbing. We equate sanity with a sense of justice, with humaneness, with prudence, with the capacity to love and understand other people. We rely on the sane people of the world to preserve it from barbarism, madness, destruction. And now it begins to dawn on us that it is precisely the sane ones who are the most dangerous.
The bulk of this article (including the above excerpt) is quoted from Thomas Merton. Some of it resonates with my thoughts on the human capacity for evil, and it also echoes some of my concerns about our tendency to always elevate the logical and dispassionate as morally superior.
Forgo, from Millions of Miles
I am among the 1-3% wealthiest persons of the world. Not because of my income, but simply because I have a bed and access to clean water. To realize I am just like the man to whom Christ spoke in Luke 6:24 is a horrible feeling.
When did retirement become one of life’s biggest goals? When did comfort become the deciding factor in all major decisions? What happened to living like foreigners in the land in which we live (1 Peter 2:11)?
The excerpt from this article is also a quote from a third source, and this time, that source is the creator of an app called Forgo. I loved the idea behind the app, and even if I don’t end up personally using it (mainly b/c I want to choose my own charities), I was inspired to incorporate the premise into my own life.
A Ban on “Biblical,” from Internet Monk
I made a New Year’s resolution this year: I will try my best to avoid using the adjective “Biblical” to describe what I think “the Bible teaches.” The use of this word as a prescriptive adjective to promote positions and convictions is rampant among Christians. The problem is, it usually obscures more than it enlightens, hurts rather than helps, and stops discussion dead in its tracks rather than promoting good conversation.
Chaplain Mike goes on to list the necessary caveats, but on the whole, I totally agree with his point. It’s funny because the verses we read in our Wednesday night class last week talked about the banning of oaths. One of the comments I read on that passage was that people used oaths to claim that God was on their side and basically to stop the conversation. It was a power play. It seems sometimes that we do the same thing with the word, “biblical.” After all, if you claim that your view is “biblical,” and someone disagrees, does that mean that he or she is un-biblical? That seems to be what’s implied!
Did you read anything interesting this week?