So many good books to choose from... what should I read next?
Primary tabs
Rumours of another world (Yancey)
20% (2 votes)
A better way (Horton)
20% (2 votes)
Shake hands with the devil (Dallaire)
20% (2 votes)
Making of the atomic bomb (Rhodes)
20% (2 votes)
Perspectives on an evolving creation (Miller)
0% (0 votes)
A history of the United States (Johnson)
0% (0 votes)
Biblical preaching (Robinson)
0% (0 votes)
The structure of scientific revolutions (Kuhn)
10% (1 vote)
Otherland - City of Golden Shadow (Williams)
10% (1 vote)
Total votes: 10
Comments
Sarennah
Tue, 2006-03-07 01:31
Permalink
How long have you had these
How long have you had these books lying around?
David
Tue, 2006-03-07 10:14
Permalink
Anywhere between a week or
Anywhere between a week or so at the least, to 3 or 4 months at the worst.
Scott
Tue, 2006-03-07 10:22
Permalink
Usually I read books in the
Usually I read books in the order I receive them, with a few exceptions.
Ashley
Tue, 2006-03-07 17:14
Permalink
My vote goes to Romeo
My vote goes to Romeo Dallaire. We're studying that book in my english class.
David
Tue, 2006-03-07 20:02
Permalink
I always find it amazing
I always find it amazing just how much can go on in Africa without it attracting much attention in the rest of the world (I recently watched Invisible Children - about child-soldiers in Uganda).
So, how's the carpool working out this semester now that both Ryan and I have finished?
Ashley
Thu, 2006-03-09 02:02
Permalink
The carpool is going well.
The carpool is going well. It's just the four of us, and Greta is all over the place-Surrey, Burnaby, Harbour Centre. . . so mostly is it Julian, Randall, and I. There is a lot more waiting around than before, but so far, so good.
Anonymous (not verified)
Thu, 2006-03-09 01:34
Permalink
reformed vs christianity and people vs. bricks.
hey dave. i read what you wrote on rev. bredenhof's xanga site. amazing stuff and i am glad that you said it. if fact i don't think that i could say it any better myself.
Scott
Thu, 2006-03-09 10:51
Permalink
I've heard that many people
I've heard that many people in Langley don't like the word "Reformed" and prefer to be called simply Christians. I was relieved to see that such a strong stance on the word "Reformed" was included on the web site. The word is not included in the name of the churches for fun or to make it longer for some reason. It distinguishes our churches (as well as the other churches with the word in their name) as being returned to the true doctrine. Indeed, the significance of this is lost on many people because things have changed around us over the centuries. "Reformed" harkens back to the Reformation, when the vast majority of the population was Roman Catholic. Today, one could say there is even new significance to calling ourselves Reformed. Fellowship/community type churches are getting more and more widespread, where anything that doesn't fit in the post-modern worldview gets shoved aside as inconvenient. Arminianism is perhaps a larger issue today than back in 1618.
As for the web site in general, like Dave I've also been involved in a few church web sites and pretty much the only time they get a significant update is when somebody new takes over and does a complete redesign. Having a content management system on the back-end is indeed good for improving the likelihood of updates, but content management systems tend to produce terrible code, and this one is no exception. Somewhere along the line somebody used Dreamweaver 6, which is notorious for churning out web sites that are inaccessible. Probably most of you reading this have no clue what I'm agitated about, so I'll stop ranting now.
Anonymous (not verified)
Thu, 2006-03-09 18:09
Permalink
Besides which, most
Besides which, most "churches" are Christian. And the front page of the Langley website does state the most fundamental belief in the good news of Christ...which is the essence of being Christian.
David
Thu, 2006-03-09 19:10
Permalink
was relieved to see that
was relieved to see that such a strong stance on the word "Reformed" was included on the web site. The word is not included in the name of the churches for fun or to make it longer for some reason. It distinguishes our churches (as well as the other churches with the word in their name) as being returned to the true doctrine.
Could a Lutheran church state a claim on the word reformed? What's your opinion of the Christian Reformed Church? Your thoughts on the Reformed Church of America? (etc.) People from the United Church that I've talked to are also willing to label themselves reformed (and I am not a fan of that organization). To me the word represents little more than an ethnic label when used in denominational names in this present day and age, and little theologically when there are many groups with differing theologies all claiming to be reformational.
At least Lutheran stands for something a little concrete theologically - perhaps Calvinist could be used instead of the word Reformed as referring to a specific theology?
Anyways, that's a few thoughts for the present time (and I don't even know if the original comment here was referring to my latest comments regarding the church website, or some of my earlier replies).
Ryan
Fri, 2006-03-10 16:59
Permalink
I would have expected a
I would have expected a slightly different answer from you, Dave, especially since you've read MacCulloch's The Reformation: Europe's House Divided. The Reformed denomination came from the so-called "second reformation" that started around 10 years after Luther's nailing of the 95 theses. It started in Heidelberg, and spread from there. John Calvin was one of its leaders, as were Zwingly and others. Also, as much as some of us may cringe when we here it, Arminianism is part of the Reformed denomination. It is those who follow the doctrines that came out of this "reformation" that are "reformed."
Scott
Fri, 2006-03-10 17:17
Permalink
Indeed, those other
Indeed, those other denominations Dave mentioned find their roots in the "second reformation" just like we do. Some, like the Christian Reformed Church, have fallen away with regards to certain issues.
Considering a lot of the denominations out there, who knows, maybe there will be some sort of smaller-scale reformation in our lifetime?
David
Fri, 2006-03-10 18:40
Permalink
I never read MacCulloch's
I never read MacCulloch's "The Reformation: Europe's House Divided" - I read MacCulloch's "The Reformation: A History" :-P (ignoring that I don't think that we've come across any differences between the two other than pagination).
I had mentioned that there was some history behind the name, yet in the dictionary sense I'd also grant Lutherans the title (and you could also argue that their claim to the title is more legitimate - after all you're talking about a second reformation). Labelling a movement after one of its leaders also generally makes it clearer what the movement stands for theologically speaking (although I seem to recall MacCulloch arguing that as far as predestination was concerned Luther was more Calvinist than Calvin himself - although I can't check page references as I'm roughly 1 megameter from my copy of the book).
Anyways, another thing that I dislike about the word reformed is how it seems to imply completion. I think that you'd agree with me that some churches with Reformed in their name are in need of another reformation (we might bicker about which ones to include in that category though).
Anonymous (not verified)
Thu, 2006-03-09 23:47
Permalink
Read Dallaire
Hey, this is Greta
Read the Dallaire book - it's very good, not in a happy way, but in a wow-i-really-should-know-this-about-the-world sort of way. And then think about Darfur and Afghanistan and...yeah. Just read it :)
I'm sure the other ones are great, but I push this book on everyone