IM friend Ragamuffin was recently in a debate with some sisters who claim that Roman Catholics are not Christians, don’t worship Jesus, etc., and the subject of the canon came up. His conversation partner, “pilgrimsdaughter,” covered a lot of topics, such as a kind of Landmark view of the church, and then got around to the canon.

Here’s her statement:

As to whether the RCC gave us the doctrine of the Trinity, the Canon, the understanding of Christ’s nature, etc.: IF the men that finalized those ideas and wrote them formally as church doctrines were RC and not just simply churchmen, that still does not negate the fact that all those things were already understood by the Apostles and early believers and WRITTEN IN SCRIPTURE, where I and any other believer can find them. As to the canon, that was understood well before any council finalized it.

Now I actually agree with pilgrimsdaughter that the Trinity and the natures of Christ are data in scripture, but I believe this data, like any other statement in scripture, isn’t in a confessional form in the original texts and was later put in confessional, doctrinal form to be affirmed as “those things which must be believed.”

But the statement on scripture is a puzzler. Did the early Christians have a sense of inspired writings? Absolutely. Did they call these writings scripture? Yes, but was there complete agreement on the canon? No. Was there a process of canonical formation that debated, included and excluded? What part did the church as a whole play in canonization?

What happens when individual conservative evangelicals declare themselves to be their own authority on the issue of the canon of scripture? How does a Protestant who deems church councils to be the instruments of an apostate church defend their own idea of canon? Where was the canon of the New Testament when it “existed” before any church council? Where was it hiding and how do we find it if we ignore Catholicism?

So if you reject the finalization of the canon as the actions of an apostate church, what do you tell a Mormon about his canon? “That’s not in my Bible?”

After spending the day learning that my Alan Creech ad has deprived me and thousands of others of their salvation (thanks a lot Alan), I’m rather overwhelmed with the ironies of evangelicals in general and the neo-Reformed in particular. (Yes, Virginia, there are neo-reformed.)

So here today’s somewhat sophisticated open mic question:

What are some of the ironies you see in evangelical life, belief and practice? (If you have to look up irony, that’s OK. Go ahead. We’ll wait.)

We’ve been so busy with all this political rhetoric (which I am totally tired of and won’t be revisiting anytime soon. Ugh) that we haven’t had our regular “Open Mic” post. So here’s our “open mic” question for this week:

Have you ever just “lost it” (i.e. found something unbearably funny) in church? Gotten so “tickled” that you had to leave? Found something so funny that it was all you could do to contain yourself from exploding with laughter? Well, what was it? We want in on the story.

What happened in church that was so funny you “lost it?”

Matt Stokes responds like a reasonable person. Good blogger, Matt. Good.

It’s all over Facebook. All over email forwards. All over Christian discussion sites and blogs. All over evangelicalism and elsewhere.

It’s Red Envelope Day:

Hey everyone, I just was invited to a group on Facebook that I thought would be good to give you the heads up on. It is an event where on March 31 everyone who opposes abortion and wants to let President Obama know about it will send a Red envelope addressed to:

President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington , D.C. 20500

On the back you should write:

“This envelope represents one child who died because of an abortion.
It is empty because the life that was taken is now unable to be a part of our world.”

This would be a great way for all your pro-life people out there to let Pres. Obama know that you don’t approve of killing innocent babies.

So, Internet Monk audience….especially those of you who have been around a while…Why does “Red Envelope Day” bother me? (And why does it bother, or not bother, you….if you like.)

I hesitate to open movies as a topic for discussion when a chunk of my audience is of the generation that thinks Pineapple Express is great cinema, but here’s the question.

What are some films “For and About Hard Times” that the IM audience should check out?

Economic hardship has been a theme for a lot of good stories, books, films and music. Just looking at our Netflix ques for now, what movies have depictions of or lessons about hard economic times?

I especially would like to hear about older movies with America’s Great Depression as the backdrop. Older movies are real treasures, and a lot of us just don’t know about them.

(Facing the Giants does not qualify. Thank you.)

UPDATE: Jared Wilson takes off on this topic.

I’m not dogging any churches here. I love my brothers and sisters in the suburbs. But this is a question that needs to be discussed. No blame, but thoughtful consideration. If you want to rant, go away.

I drove around Lexington yesterday, looking at suburban church after suburban church after suburban church after suburban church…..

I know Lexington pretty well. It has a major downtown/inner city area. Universities. Lots of businesses. Lots of housing of different kinds. Plenty of ethnics (Hispanics, especially) and minorities down there. Plenty of young people in the city. Lots of poverty and the resulting problems.

There are some churches in the inner city, but they are mostly Catholics, older, endowed, old money mainline congregations and Pentecostals who are happy to reach out to non-white, non-suburban people. [Continue reading]

I’m not trying to promote a pile-on here, but this story effectively points out something I’ve experienced many times.

It’s a story about Christians justifying rudeness with religion. Here’s the short version, but you’ll want to read all of what the original poster had to say. [Continue reading]

The following comment appeared in the Losing God comment thread. Please read it, with special consideration of what is said, not the person saying it (whom I don’t know and neither do you.)

I do not struggle with “Is Christianity true?” vs atheism, Islam, Hinduism etc.

My “spiritual depression” is caused by the continual dueling (in my mind) of the various theologies within Christianity: Reformed, Wesleyan, Lutheran, Catholic, Orthodox, and on and on.

How can I know which, if any, are truly true? All have scads of brilliant and holy adherents. Is it all subjective? Just close my eyes and pin the tail on the donkey? As Lewis said, we cannot live in the hallway (mere Christianity.) We must choose a room.

To continue to study systematic theologies only seems to drive me further into “depression.” Yet it is like an unbreakable addiction.

Since my wife’s move to the RCC was related to her own healing from depression, I’m quite interested in this topic.

I’d like to invite the comments of those who have a thoughtful response to make to this person. I will not post anything other than serious and mature comments. I realize that most commenters will have made a denominational choice, but this is not the post on which to sell your church as the winner.

What I want to know is….

1) Why does this search matter so much? Is there some question of the availability of Jesus?

2) Why is this related to depression?

3) Why, for some people, is this search so compulsive and addictive?

UPDATE: Lauren Green on the two prayers.

Bishop Gene Robinson- who needs no introduction, does he?- prayed at an Inaugural event over the weekend.

Bishop Robinson got the gig not because he is a spiritual leader or is looked up to by Christians, but because he is the first openly gay bishop in the ECUSA. He has become the lightning rod that has split worldwide Anglicanism. He has a way of turning up wherever the issue of gay marriage is on the agenda. He was hanging around the media rooms at the Lambeth Conference, just in case anyone wanted his opinion. And when Rick Warren was asked to pray at the Inauguration, Bishop Robinson’s angry friends- offended that Warren was a supporter of Prop 8 in California defining marriage traditionally in that state- got him the job of praying at this event.

The Bishop didn’t miss a beat in saying he was appalled by the distinctively Christian prayers that had dominated Inaugurations in the past, and he would not pray in the name of Jesus. [Continue reading]

Tonight’s “Open Mic” question is a simple one. If you don’t get it, I’m not going to help you.

Catholics, I thought about this just being about your team, but that wouldn’t be fair.

OK. Here it is. Tonight’s iMonk Cafe Open Mic Question:

“Why are apologists….you know…..why are they the way they are?”

Some help is available here.

It’s traditional here at Internet Monk to have an open thread on the topic of your experiences in Christmas worship. We want to hear your stories. What was outstanding. What was awful. What was full of the meaning of the incarnation. What was lost, given up or thrown away. Was the great opportunity to focus on the incarnation appreciated or wasted?

Christmas usually brings out the best and the worst in our various traditions and approaches to worship. Let’s hear what you saw and heard (or didn’t see and hear) at this year’s Christmas worship services.

D.A. Carson has a wonderfully thoughtful and well-written editorial in this month’s Themelios web magazine. It’s not particularly long and it will be a provocative way to think about this week’s open mic question, so go read it and come back.

The Question is: How would you evaluate the overall effect of technology on your development as a serious, balanced, useful disciple of Jesus?

Carson makes the points many of us could make from our own experience: technology fascinates, entertains, amuses, captivates and addicts. We gain information, access and speed, but we gain access to universes of useless and less than useful information. We occupy our minds at a high rate of speed, and we reflect less and less. We read more online and we read less of what we ought to read. We stay in touch and we say less and less. We acquire more and more gadgets and we don’t know where to stop. We see our children down the same path and call it normal.

Is it normal? And is all of this helping us become what we say we want to become?

Is Carson on target or is it just Luddite ranting?

What do YOU say? (Keep comments to a reasonable length and PLEASE don’t go overboard with your detailed history of gadget acquisition. Thanks.)

In my Bible classes, I often will come up with a topic that relates to what we’ve been studying, and I’ll ask the students to prepare to debate either side of a proposition related to what we’ve learned.

I thought this week’s topic would make for an interesting topic of discussion. Our students, like any group of students, really dislike group punishment. So now that we have completed most of our study of the Old Testament, I’ve got them working on debating the following proposition.

“God’s use of group punishment and group blessing in the Old Testament is inherently unfair.”

Groups in this case are families, cities, nations, tribes, even the whole world.

So, what do you say? What would be your criticism, defense, questions, examples or insight? What would you contribute to our discussion?

UPDATE: This thread is sitting an IM record for posts in a short period of time. And some very interesting responses.

One of the commenters in a previous discussion raised a very interesting, practical situation facing young families that would make for a good open thread topic.

“Going to church” is very difficult for families with young children. The stress of getting everyone up, dressed, fed, in the car and on the road is difficult, even for two parents and especially if they have more than one child. The result can be both comic and tragic.

Depending on the church and on the family’s own values, a family may take advantage of a nursery and children’s ministries, or they may decide that all the family should be together in worship. This may be further stress, may necessitate almost complete inattention to what is going on in worship and may stress out more than a few other worshipers.

All of this is, of course, even more of a problem for single parent families.

Is it any surprise that many families with small children simply say that “traditional” church is impossible for them to navigate?

How can families with young children have a continuing participation in church life? Is it impossible? Should they worship as a family? Should one parent go with older children?

How can churches make this time more manageable for families with young children? Is the answer more nurseries and children’s programs? Or is the answer a different experience of the church altogether?

What’s your experience, both as a family and as a church? And what’s your advice?

None of us know God’s ways and purposes beyond what He has revealed in scripture or in our own experience. But taking those lessons and “sanctified common sense,” we can think in terms of possibilities.

For instance, I have my students answer the question: “What were God’s possible purposes in allowing Saul to be such a failure as king of Israel?” Their answers help them think about what God was doing in the nation and for David.

So here’s an open thread question that I promised on last week’s podcast:

“What Might Be Some of God’s Purposes In Allowing A Major Economic Downturn?”

Talk amongst yourselves.