Rotundus.com

One thing that I came across when reading through some stuff on Roman Catholicism a while back was the idea of a conditional baptism. Basically, in practice this seems to just involve tossing a phrase such as "If you are not already baptized" at the beginning of the form. In this way Roman Catholics try to ensure that people aren't baptized more than once, while at they same time ensuring that all are baptized.

I was just thinking about this form, and the thought came to mind as to whether or not this might work to create a greater sense of unity between those adhering to infant baptism and those adhering to adult baptism. Somewhat surprisingly (to me) server logs suggest that people are concerned about this sort of topic as I've had a number of people discover this website in their search for information on rebaptism. Might such a modification satisfy those holding to a believer baptist position without creating unneccessary hostility with those adhering to an infant baptist approach?

Check "Weird-out family by sneaking up on them unannounced, when they expect you to be in another province" off my list of silly tasks to do at least once in life. If you haven't tried this one already I reccomend giving it a shot some time.

Following tea with r_0 sigma while in the Fraser Valley, I put in an order tonight for a whole batch of books on technology, science, and christian worldview. Should make for some interesting reading (assuming that I have even a few moments of spare time with school resuming). Here are a few of the items in my latest book order:

• The Myth of Religious Neutrality: An Essay on the Hidden Role of Religious Belief in Theories
• Responsible Technology: A Christian Perspective
• Faith and Hope in Technology
• Creation Regained: Biblical Basics for a Reformational Worldview

Believe it or not I actually bought a textbook too as part of this order! One of the nice perks of being in a constantly changing field is that often the textbooks just haven't caught up. Combine that with unlimited print quota, and this would be the first textbook that I've actually purchased for a class since starting grad school.

It seems that there' been a bit of a flurry of posting about this topic lately. First, I'm on a mailing list at Boundless.org, and this was by and large the topic of their latest mailing which announced several new postings on their site. Tim Challies mentioned this last night, and then this morning announced a book project entitled The Discipline of Discernment (are they accepting preorders?). One comment in response to this post led me to a two part post with a list of principles to follow. I'd encourage you to take a look through the above sites and think about which of these principles you might be wise to pay closer attention to.

I've likely violated a majority of the above principles at some point or other in the last 5 years of posting, but I think that my primary weakness at this point is lumping together people that I critique. Sometimes I tend to treat those who are not extremists on a particular issue as if they were. I suppose that this is largely the error of guilt by association.