"Rights Talk" Collides with Right and Wrong

By Al Mohler

An absolute "right" to an abortion for any reason or no reason at all -- a cardinal principle of modern feminism -- runs right into the fact that this means the killing of females by the millions. The United Nations, a body as obsessed with rights as any other, cannot even respond with coherent moral outrage.

No structure of "rights" can long survive without a clear and substantial moral foundation. In other words, matters of right and wrong must come before claims to abstract "rights." Just ask the millions of missing baby girls. (more)

Let's Think About Sex: Sex Education Programs and Critical Moral Reasoning

By Joe Carter
The Evangelical Outpost

If forced to choose I would be firmly on the abstinence only side. But I believe the debate is rooted in a misguided focus on a false dilemma. Both approaches are primarily concerned with indoctrination toward a particular viewpoint and inoculation against the effects of certain behavior. Neither is concerned with providing an "education", in the truest sense of the term. The abstinence advocates, for example, want teens to "just say no" while the comprehensive crowd want students to "just wear a condom." Both are more concerned about "effectiveness" than with teaching teens how to think for themselves about human sexuality. (more)

There Are No New Heresies -- New Thought Isn't New

By Al Mohler

Look closely at a claim that appears on the Web site of the Understanding Principles of Better Living Church and, most interestingly, is also offered by the minister of the Unity congregation. They both claim to teach how to think, not what to think. This statement implies that the groups offer no doctrine, merely a route to transformed thinking.

But the claim is false -- and must always be false. The distinction between how to think and what to think is artificial. It is sloganeering and advertising, not serious thought. Every pattern of thinking is based on certain presuppositions and leads to certain conclusions. A pattern of thinking that begins with relativism as a presupposition will inevitably (if at all consistent) lead to relativistic conclusions. In other words, when it comes to thinking, there is no how that does not include a what.

You cannot begin with the presupposition that you are the center of the Universe and then reason to conclusions that are in any way consistent with the Bible. You cannot get from the presupposition that you are a sinless victim of negative thinking to the conclusion that the cross of Christ is the answer to our deepest need. You cannot reason from the presupposition that you can cope with all your problems by the exercise of positive mental imagery to the conclusion that your greatest need is for a Savior. The how is a what when it comes to thinking about anything of importance. (more)

How to read a lot of books in a short time

By Matthew Cornell

Naturally, because my goal is to learn, the reading involves work. But the question is: How can one read efficiently, capture relevant ideas in a usable way, and keep the process sustainable and enjoyable? The rest of my post summarizes the best solutions I've found, but the most useful technique comes from Jason Womack [3], and synthesizes nicely the most common ideas. In a nutshell, he says he reads the book four times:

1. Table of contents, glossary, index.
   
2. Anything in bold, titles, and subtitles.
   
3. First line of every paragraph.
   
4. Entire book

(more)

What Books Should I Read on the Trinity? A Top Ten List

By Fred Sanders

Every few months I get e-mails from people asking what books I would recommend on the Trinity. These are not requests for the latest scholarly work. They’re not focused inquiries with specific topics in mind. Nor are they requests for the greatest books of all time on the doctrine of the Trinity, the kind of thing I would use in a seminar class on the doctrine. These are just people asking, “I heard you talking about the Trinity, and I want to think harder about that doctrine. What books are in print (or not far out of print), readable, and broadly trustworthy on this subject?” (more)

The Reality Based Community: How Faith in Jesus Avoids Utopian Fallacies

by John Mark Reynolds

I try to explain that this is not faith . . . at least not Christian faith. Faith is believing things despite some contrary evidence. It is building a view of the world based first on things we know beyond a reasonable doubt (though we can still have doubts on a very dark and terrible night of the soul!) and then building on that foundation to ideas we can accept that seem (on the whole) better than their contrary. (more)

Do Democrats think Billy Graham is Immoral?

By John Mark Reynolds

Instead, what the Pope thinks about homosexuality is called “divisive” by Senator Obama. So much for his outreach to Evangelical voters who evidently only support marriage because they want to divide the nation!

...

Are the two leading candidates for the Democrat nomination for President saying that every traditional Jew, Christian, Islamic person in the United States have an immoral position?

Are the majority of Americans immoral? (more)