A Different Perspective on Carlin
The Internet Monk eulogizes George Carlin.
I-Monk responds to Ingrid’s evaluation of Carlin’s value as nothing more than her enemy in the culture war.
The George Carlin post has resulted in a record number of unposted comments. Easily have refused more comments on that one one post than any other post in IM history. And some of these comments are absolutely unbelievable. I have no doubt anymore that there are a breed of Christians- few, but loud- who have a serious case of jihad envy. They really are into labeling enemies and hating them with relish. What that has to do with Jesus completely misses me, but then that’s what they keep telling me.
As the first commenter on the update noted, the prophet Jonah has a life experience that might bring us wisdom.
June 24th, 2008 at 10:42 am
And this gem from Mike’s pen,
“What strikes me as continually ironic is that Carlin and other comedians have become the truth-tellers of our time, while Christians, especially in their official capacities as preachers, etc., have become the embodiment of truth avoidance and truth obscuration.”
Truth tellers without an answer. George Carlin was funny sometimes, but he took many an opportunity to blaspheme the name of Jesus. I cannot eulogize that.
June 24th, 2008 at 10:42 am
I love the admonishment he gives to the torch-bearing townspeople at the beginning.
RIP George Carlin.
June 24th, 2008 at 11:34 am
“George Carlin talked about his grandparents having s-x in the most obscene manner? How real is that?” from the Slice hate piece.
So sex is a dirty word now or is that to allow those behind restrictive filters in? It’s funny because either way the Bible wouldn’t be welcome as there’s tons of sex in there…
June 24th, 2008 at 11:38 am
To offer blog space to eulogize a blasphemer and hide behind the “made in God’s image” strawman reveals the depth to which Spencer’s bitterness toward his view of fundamentalists travels.
Many times Mrs. Schlueter is on the right side of an issue (perhaps wrong verbiage) and this happens to be one. This isn’t about Mr. Carlin, this is about how little the Christian community cares about the lost. We would rather laugh with blasphemers than pray for them, and when they die we soothe our conscience by revelling in their fallen lives.
Calling Christianity…
June 24th, 2008 at 11:38 am
Hehehe, i-Monk used the word “jihadist” in his response.
Glad to see a spade called a spade.
A fundamentalist is a fundamentalist is a fundamentalist.
Ingrid would lose her mind over Sarah Silverman, another truth-teller.
June 24th, 2008 at 11:44 am
Evan - Silverman is a blasphemer also and usually your view of spiritual matters is anti-Biblical as well. It is no laughing matter to see Christ blasphemed by lost people whose eternal destiny is etremely precarious.
People like Mrs. Schlueter will wind up in heaven because she trusted the finished work of Jesus the Christ, do you have that same confidence? Mr. Carlin rejected all religions. It is tragic.
June 24th, 2008 at 11:49 am
I love the classic irony of the two adjoining posts, one reveals the Chinese church - the other the America church.
Voilà.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Silverman is a comic genius, as was Carlin, in that they view comedy without reservations or artificial lines to cross, and go after all subgroups of humanity with equal vigor, including and especially their own.
This is why comedians are so often the greatest truth-tellers. They cut through all of the prejudices and teach us to laugh.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
Rick,
I agree, but then again, I suppose when you have the freedom to express contempt for everyone who isn’t exactly like you in the most vulgar and obscene way possible its much easier to fight an anti-Biblical “culture war” than it is to be a steward of gospel which requires love for those who do things you despise. You’ll note how much of the space there is devoted to heaping contempt on Carlin and a caricature of emergent pastors, and how there’s none spent on mourning his probably eternal destination for his own sake, and plenty of schadenfreude to go around. When an image bearer of God is likely separated from God and the most tenderhearted thing you can write is that he is a “cautionary tale”, well, there’s no gospel there no matter how much you refer to the cross.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Tim - I agree, we must not spend time hashing over Carlin’s fallen life. But then again, we should not eulogize it either as if it is something to emulate.
His life was a tragedy.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
Rick,
While Carlin’s life wasn’t one spent following Christ, that doesn’t mean there aren’t parts of his life that are worth eulogizing. Just as a life spent following Christ has parts of it that shouldn’t be eulogized. Truth is truth, and goodness is goodness.
I also find it extraordinarily telling that the hero of Ingrid’s story is a non-Christian offended by a filthy sinner.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:18 pm
^
Got it. The vast billions of humanity who die as non-Christians aren’t worth eulogizing.
What of all the people who died pre-Judaism/Christianity?
June 24th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
That’s a dishonest journalistic tactic, wherein you use someone who would normally be considered “opposition” to prove your own point, even if it requires twisting their words/motives.
It’s a hallmark of Christian journalism, actually.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
George Carlin’s life is an object lesson on what not to do. His humor camouflaged the tragedy which was his life. And for Spencer to suggest he told the truth better than preachers is breathtaking, but not unexpected.
There is a balance between soothing people’s conscience and being harsh toward sinners. But having a disregard toward redemptive truth is the harshest position of all.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
I loved how Carlin cut through the mud and called us on the carpet.
I loved how he particularly skewered religious people and “religion”–and that includes especially all the people who tediously protest that “it’s not a religion, it’s a relationship”.
I HATED, HATED, HATED when he would cross over to direct attacks on God, Jesus, etc.
I would find myself laughing till I cried and then get that icky churning feeling in my stomach. I’d find myself saying outloud to the TV: Now George…you’ve gone too far.
At the same time, it’s a classic example of what we reap when we sow unreflective blasts of machinegun “christianity” at people. George was wrong to blaspheme Jesus. Christians were wrong for giving him his excuse/reason for it.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:27 pm
All George had to work with was what Christians gave him and showed him.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
BTT,
I have no doubt that what she says is true, because Carlin isn’t being excoriated based on his opposition to the church, or the gospel, he’s being excoriated for not being on the right side of the “culture war”.
And the “culture war” isn’t concerned with the commands of Christ, its concerned with re-making society based on a rigid and voluminous set of external principles, a bare percentage of which may occasionally be confused with anything that Jesus taught, lived or cared about.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:30 pm
That’s right.
Christians hide behind the verse that says people will hate them in Jesus’s name.
The truth is that people hate Christians for what they DO, not for what they believe.
There was a national poll several years ago, right after 9/11, that asked Americans about who they’d least like to have as neighbors. Predictably, radical Muslims were the #1.
Fundamentalist Christians were #2.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
Yep.
The only people who are fighting the so-called “culture war” are Chicken Little Christians.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Now there’s an appropriate eulogy.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
I would also suggest that if a comedian doesn’t offend you sometimes, then he’s not doing his job.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
Colossians 1:
15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. 16For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him. 17And he is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent. 19For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, 20and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.
The first Adam was made in God’s image and likeness.
The first Adam is dead in his sin.
God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.
Jesus the last (new) Adam is the express image of God.
Therefore only those who are “re-created” in Christ are the image and likeness of God.
The rest of humanity are men who don’t know that they died.
George Carlin was dead in his sin and never came to Christ.
You share the same bitterness and hatred of the fundies that Carlin held. This is why you defend him.
I suggest that you listen to Rick Freuh, look in the mirror, and don’t forget what you
look like when you walk away.
What hypocrisy. You have no leg to stand on here.
June 24th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Rick,
Why is Chris P attacking you for now reason… does he disagree with you that it is hard to overlook that you seem to be the only one that might remotely agree with him?
Personally I did not listen to much GC after I became a Christian, but always appreciated him for who and what he was and that he stood up for what he believed in right or wrong.
Yet, again, I just see that Chris P seems to just take any potshot at anyone he can and not even “get” what that person was stating… even if he may agree with them…
Hate blinds people… and funny how GC knew that, but Chris P who supposedly had the Spirit of the Living God living in him, does not.
iggy
June 24th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
The first Adam is a myth. Mesoamericans were already trading with Egyptians by the time he supposedly came around.
Haha, because I used to BE one, until I saw the error of my ways.
It’s funny — I’m still using the same Bible I used when I was a teenager, back when I was clinging to fundamentalism, and looking at the notes I made in the margins then vs. now is revelatory. Back then, my notes seemed to center around an obsessive need to confirm all the dogma that had been shoved down my throat for years. Lots of exclamation points and underlining, like I was arguing with a boogeyman that didn’t exist.
Now the notes are more thoughtful. More question marks and suggestions than anything else.
Sometimes one has to come up for air to get a real perspective on things. Carlin, being raised Catholic, was able to do so.
June 24th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Iggy, Chris P was attacking me.
June 24th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Which is why people hate fundamentalists, as a general rule.
Their entire lives scream hypocrisy.
June 24th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Chris P,
I encourage you to learn what this means: “I desire mercy, not sacrifice”.
I don’t hate fundies, I am, however, profoundly saddened and a little repulsed by people who have have been shown grace and mercy can’t show it to anyone else.
I’m also extraordinarily repulsed by people who take great pride in knowing and pointing out who’s going to hell and can’t show the slightest bit of sorrow over that. Instead they’re more concerned about the “culture war” they’ve decided to wage.
June 24th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
Kevin,
Funny thing is that Ingrid knows about GC’s story about his grandparents… I wonder if she is so pure and separated from culture… which is all evil. Funny that relevant is wrong yet, Ingrid seems more relevant in her knowledge of GC than myself… an evil apostate emerging guy…
Really, it seems that Ingrid exposes herself for the type of person that secretly watches things she claims to hate with a gusto!
iggy
June 24th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
DOH!
Then all is well… LOL! Being the hateful fundy he is, he is being consistent.
Still… being one attacked, abused and refused to listen or love those Christ has told them to… as BTT and myself have, I find it funny that those who abuse cannot understand why we might be bitter. I personally do not hate them, but I hate their sin and arrogance. I hate their pride and inability to grasp they are sinners saved by Grace just as I am or Evan is… I hate that they would rather judge and condemn instead of walk with me and others in our struggles for purity and understanding what God wants for us in our lives.
I do not mean to speak for you Evan, yet I know the sting of hate… I know the feeling of not being loved by “brothers in Christ” because i am a bit different… or not pulling the “company line”.
iggy
June 24th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Exactly.
You either get it…or you don’t.
Jesus’s smackdown re: removing the redwood from your own dumb eye is much more meaningful when you understand being on the receiving end personally.
June 24th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
Moses seems to disagree when in Genesis he wrote: “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.” It’s clear from the context that Moses is talking about all of humanity, i.e. any man since all men are created thus.
What foolishness this conditional created in God’s image creates!
Genesis is clear that first Adam than all are created in God’s image.
Neil
June 24th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Neil,
In regards to your comment #31…
For years I chased the “become more like God>” idea until I realized I am to become more like Christ Jesus… who was fully human (yes and fully God) but it is in His humanity that I am becoming the “likeness” of God… I am not become like a god, but as God intended the image of God in my humanity.
That seems to be lost these days in many peoples minds. they seem to think we are becoming little gods like Jesus… and miss the point of the incarnation of Jesus becoming the last Adam so that we can be new Creations in that image.
iggy
June 24th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
Iggy,
I agree, we are to become “Christ-like.” I miss the point in how this is relevant to the false statement that a person is not imago dei until redemption?
Neil
June 24th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
I think it ties together in that Fundamentalists like Chris P think that only they and those who agree with them are actually in imago dei, and they assume that, due to that belief, they are somehow like Christ
But they’re not like Christ at all, The end.
June 24th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
I’ve read the blogs and came away with a thought, “This whole Carlin thing is pretty much a non-issue as far as I am concerned,” and a question “Who brought up the issue of imago dei?”
Neil
June 24th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
Well clearly they think that they are more like Christ… that’s the whole point. Would we not say the same thing, that what makes us different is to some degree what makes us more like Christ.
That’s also what makes me cringe when I see something like “But they’re not like Christ at all, The end.” I bet there are a lot of ways in which Chris P. et. al are like Christ. They just have some really really poor ways of extending this to others.
Neil
June 24th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
I’m talking about Fundamentalists collectively.
June 24th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
BtT, I understand.
Part of the denying unbelievers imago dei status could be the philosophy that goes hand-in-hand with seeing them as enemies… Whenever you get into a war, it’s always easier to kill them if you give them a name that renders them less like you - Rebel, Jap, Gook, Kraut, Hun… etc.
Neil
June 24th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
ugh…
Yep.
It’s also part of the World of Warcraft view of Christianity that states that everything is “spiritual warfare” or whatever.
Haji…nigger….faggot…
It’s a weakness to define oneself by what one is not…to require an “other” to fight against/disagree with.
June 24th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
Hey really quick BTT I am just wondering if you consider yourself an orthdox christian, i.e. protestant(reformed in some manner not neccisarily calvinistic)??
Just wondering becasue some of your commetns just don’t jive with the bible.
So how would you describe your belief?
June 24th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
so I-monk is upset at Ingrid for believing in
John 14:6
June 24th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
George Carlin, meet Jesus Christ
(article by Michael Mickey of some website called RAPTURE ALERT
http://rapturealert.com/2008/062308carlin.asp
June 24th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
J,
Imonks article came first. Ingrid is pissed at Imonk for believing John 3:16 and 2 Peter 3:9.
June 24th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
tim, thanks for clearing that up.
what do you think of Michael Mickey’s article
June 24th, 2008 at 5:18 pm
Iggy, I see lots of hate on this site towards preceived fundamentalists. It’s almost palatable sometimes.
June 24th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
I agree with the concept that ALL men including the unregenerate are created in the image of God, but I agree with Rick that of late it’s being used as a defense against slander et. al. is a bit of a stretch.
June 24th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
And how do you know what Christ is like BTT? You don’t believe much of anything written about Him is reliable, so what are you basing your comment on? Oh wait, I know . . . a god of your own imagination.
June 24th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
I think it is a work of schadenfreude.
June 24th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
tim, what do you mean
June 24th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
He means that is revelling in the misfortune of others. I believe we can use the death of someone like Carlin to delicately warn others without stomping on his grave. The article was opportunistic and I’m sure many are writing similar post that might have some truth but don’t address our sins as well.
A few months ago a church decided to pray for Brittney Spears and they were vilified. We are so hypocritical in the church. And the imonks post is also on the other side blind to Carlin’s redemptive situation. Silence would have been much better.
June 24th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
J,
schadenfreude is a malicious joy at the hurt of others.
A great example is Iggy’s false ODM site where he has a Ken Silva church growth chart. Another good example would be Tim’s hatred of ‘legalists’ (defined as anyone who calls him on his pet sins)
Oh yes, and so is anyone who would take joy in an unrepentant sinner going to his doom.
June 24th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
Ahh, the pride and the arrogance.
June 24th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
Pastorboy,
Its a shame we can’t all remain sinless while telling people to “shove it”. I guess the rest of us will just have to rely on Christ instead of our own innate goodness.
June 24th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
rick, I know what you mean and are talking about regarding the Spears thing.
I supported the church for praying for her.
the Hollywood Prayer Network
http://www.hollywoodprayernetwork.org
and:
http://www.myspace.com/hollywoodprayernetwork
is constantly vilified by so-called christians
I support the HPN and was upset at “Christians”
attacking fellow Christians
who were and still are praying for folks like Spears and Lohan and Hilton and Lily Allen among other famous folks
BTW, they were praying for them to know Jesus
what bothers me, is that christians will attack people who they dont like but yet wont pray for them
I BTW wish more people would stand up for the HPN
or at least speak out against hypocritical christians who attack the HPN for praying for folks
I felt instead of Ingrid S attacking Miley Cyrus, she should have suggested people pray for her.
——————————————-
Hollywood is in their prayers
Maverick Christian ministry calls for people to pray for celebrities instead of boycotting their movies.
http://www.ocregister.com/news/prayer-hollywood-people-1783501-network-says
June 24th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
No.
Agnostic Christ-follower. The word “Christian” requires disclaimers I don’t like to have to spend time giving. “I’m a Christian…oh, no, not like those a-holes…no, not like that, either…nononononono….”
Sicko.
How’s it feel to be on the receiving end for once? Right.
Nah, just what I read about him in the Bible. So arrogant, you.
June 24th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
What’s so funny to me is that one would not be able to see the silliness inherent in calling one’s God “imaginary” when one’s own God is indeed unprovable and comes from a book/tradition which, let’s remember, came onto the scene relatively recently, if one takes human history into account.
It’s all faith!
And there’s nothing wrong with that!
June 24th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
Ok, little picky point here. Palatable means it is acceptable or satisfactory. I think the term he was accusing us of having is palpable. Which means able to be touched, felt or heard.
Sorry, lesson over fee free to continue.
June 24th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
Haha, good catch.
June 24th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
It’s neat how you can read my words, translate them through your filter, squeeze really hard, and then hummus comes out when you spew it back.
For the record, I never said that.
People with good reading comprehension can verify this.
June 24th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
Oh yes, and so is anyone who would take joy in an unrepentant sinner going to his doom. - PB
Who would take joy in anyone going to Hell?
Neil
June 24th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
I’ve known some folks in my time (not referring to anyone who’s ever read this site, that I know of…) who would be rather delighted in the prospect, if it somehow proved that their narrow theological doctrines were correct…
June 24th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
I think that feeling a sense of justification when someone dies lost can be labeled as joy. That is why it is so spiritually duplicitous to battle sinners and make their morality some public catfight, because when and if they die your flesh will send you messages of contentment as if you have won some horrifying game.
I have KNOWN believers who revel in the death of a gay activist especially due to AIDs. We cannot ever expect to live and preach the most gracious offer of redemption ever imagined while we verball attack and expose the sins WHICH WE HAVE COMMITTED OURSELVES.
The stench of hypocrisy flows before God’s throne and when people like Dobson publicly attack Obama as distorting the Bible (no kidding) we as believers are DISTORTING THE GOSPEL. The gospel is good news and comes with no moral prerequisites. And snide remarks when someone like Carlin dies like “he believes now!” I label as joy. Self righteous and huburous joy that indicates a lck of understanding and gratitude for the grace which we all have received freely.
Carlin’s life was not something to be praised, but his destiny should be a cause for mourning not a “he got what he deserved” attitude. I am just grateful that I will not get what I deserve - ALL BECAUSE OF HIS MATCHLESS GRACE!!
June 24th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
Great statement.
June 24th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
Haha, James Dobson really had a little whinypants tantrum about Obama, didn’t he?
So funny.
June 24th, 2008 at 8:19 pm
http://judahslion.blogspot.com/2008/06/distorting-gospel-ttention-please.html
June 24th, 2008 at 10:10 pm
Really quick this may be schocking but I will say it.
I take joy is God’s judgement, because he is righteaus and holy and all he does is perfect! So I glorify God for his just and righteous judgement.
No sinner will be able to so this is not fair, this is unjust. They will accept there punishment in the light of His majesty.
One other reason I take joy in God’s judgment and justice is that it is most fully shown in the cross. Because God is just, perfect, holy I can rely on Him for my salvation through Christ. There is no double jeopardy in the court of God.
So I glory in all of God’s judgments because they are just and good.
June 24th, 2008 at 10:21 pm
Whatever.
June 24th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
How easy it is to joy in the destruction of the wicked after we have been saved by grace. Like being pulled from a fire and having joy that those that are left are being burned.
Jesus wept over Jerusalem, He didn’t say “I feel joy you will be destroyed!”.
June 24th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
Exactly.
Long iterations about how we don’t really understand what a huge, terrible sinner Carlin was is exactly this type of argument.
June 25th, 2008 at 1:00 am
John H,
Then I pray you never truly experience real hatred. The stuff here, if hate is nothing compared to the hate I have received for preaching truth, but being “emerging”.
Yet, I have hung out with Hell’s Angels that showed more compassion than some fundies…
I have known druggies and drunks who know more about grace than many who claim to be “righteous” who come here.
Again, I have experience hate where someone wanted to come to my door with a shotgun and blow me away. I have faced demon possessed people who are consumed by hate. I have faced a lot of hate, but much of it pales in the light of most hate I receive from Fundy’s who claim to have the Spirit of the Living Christ in them… and hate their brothers and sisters in Christ.
iggy
June 25th, 2008 at 6:48 am
–Agnostic Christ-follower.–
No such thing. Such a creature would be a contradiction in itself.
Considering what you said about the Creation account last week, your position is not surprising.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:25 am
BTT,
LOL. You can’t even remember what you wrote a couple of days ago regarding your views of Scripture.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:26 am
Iggy,
Sorry to hear about all of that.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:29 am
Palpabale / palatable are we now resorting to correcting typos? Where’s the
SoupGrammar Nazi when you need him?June 25th, 2008 at 7:31 am
Then why does God judge. Is He under compulsion?? Yes I also feel sorrow that Carlin died it is very disshearting. The man reason is because he hated God so much and now must face Him. This is said we had such a witness here in America.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:31 am
sorry lots of typos in that, haven’t had my coffee yet.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:33 am
It’s not shocking, unfortunately, but typical. Certainly there are passages that talk about rejoicing in God’s judgement, but in those I think it makes sense to think of judgement in terms of God’s deliverance. You can see this when David cries out for God to deliver him from his enemies and oppressors.
We have to remember for that a lot of its history, Israel was enslaved, and to a lot of Jews that fact that the chosen were in slavery was an injustice. They were crying out for God to rectify the situation.
I don’t think we should take joy at all in sinners’ getting their due. Even God doesn’t delight in this. A parent doesn’t delight in disciplining his children, but he knows it’s for their good. By the way, I know that someone will say that an unrepentant sinner isn’t a child of God, but it’s still someone God created in His image. I still think God’s heart is grieved.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:47 am
[...] the writers (and readers) of CRN.Info and Analysisweighed in on the subject too. Their post consists mostly of reader’s responses so don’t [...]
June 25th, 2008 at 7:47 am
Yes I agree with that Phil. God’ heart is grieived. But can not God show His glory in the just judgement of sinners. That is what I glory in that He is righteous. When people rejoiced that Hitler was dead was it wrong. Justice is not wrong and to rekoie in justice is not wrong. Can we not both be sorrowful and joyful and the same time??
I would say God takes joy in disciplining us becuase he know what the results will be.
“Certainly there are passages that talk about rejoicing in God’s judgement, but in those I think it makes sense to think of judgement in terms of God’s deliverance.”
That was my primary point. Another reason I take joy in God’s judgment and justice is that it is most fully shown in the cross. Because God is just, perfect, holy I can rely on Him for my salvation through Christ.
June 25th, 2008 at 7:56 am
Friends,
I realize that this post is nearly run its course, and that’s OK. But I wanted to stop by and let you know that I did a little post about it at LUTBS this morning and at the end of the writing a posted a youtube video that has the funniest Carlin routine in the history of the world. This routine by Carlin is prophetic in a way, full of truth, and marvelously funny. I appreciate his depth of insight into a serious problem we Americans, we Christians, seem to have.
I’m thinking of doing some limmericks concerning the inability of some people to laugh at things that are truly funny, but I won’t post them here. Anyhow, what a great conversation.
I wonder what is worse: George Carlin’s not acting like a Christian and pointing out the truth about humans? Or the Author of Slice not acting like a Christian and expecting not- Christians to act like Christians. I guess we are not supposed to have any interaction with anyone in the world who is not just like us.
We should live behind our rose colored windows (a Petra song) and forget the world exists. (Although, the author of Slice quoted a Josh Grobin (sp?) song in one of her posts.) Ironic, isn’t it?
jerry
June 25th, 2008 at 8:01 am
Kylein,
We can delight that God’s judgment is always right. But I don’t think that means in any way that God is happy that people end up on the wrong end of his judgment sometimes. I don’t delight in God’s discipline either and I don’t think he does. His discipline means that we are not yet perfect; that I am not yet perfect. It means there are parts of me that are disagreeable and needing fixed. To delight in pain is rather strange. I’d rather be perfect than to endure discipline. Your point is understood, but strange. How can God take delight in the pain of his beloved children? That is a strange, John Piperish point of view.
jerry
June 25th, 2008 at 8:04 am
Which is one of the reasons Substitutionary Penal Atonement is lacking as a complete explanation of God’s work on the cross, and why applying it as such ends up making Christians look like royal jerks…
June 25th, 2008 at 8:10 am
I think I will start using “Piperish” as an adjective in my daily speech - “quit being so Piperish…”
I hear you, though. I’ve had the privilege if hearing John Piper speak a few times, and he usually ends up saying something that I disagree with so much, that it makes taking the rest of his message seriously very hard.
June 25th, 2008 at 8:28 am
The discpline point, becasue I agree with most of what has been said about judgement, the bible commands to take joy. And while it is not pleaseant and the present time, discpline, it produce the the peaceable fruit of righteousness. So we can take joy in discpline becasuse then we know that we are a child of God! It does not please us or make us happy at the time of displince that is why we are command to take joy in it becuase our natural reaction is the oppoiste of joy.
Lot’t of people disagree with Piper. Of course I love him. Go to youtube and look up Piper and make war. That is a great little clip. Piper has such passion for God and it is not if we disagree with Piper but if the bible does. I know the following answer. So we will just leave it alone!
Take joy in your sufferings and displinces brother for God only discplines those whom he loves and a son!
June 25th, 2008 at 8:44 am
Kyle,
Well, sure we our told to take joy when we our disciplined personally, but I think we were talking about taking joy in the judgement of another’s sins. Those are two separate things.
I just think some of the stuff I’ve seen written about Carlin from Christians takes the tenor of “well now he’ll get what’s due him”. I think that’s what we are referring to. We shouldn’t take joy at the expense of others.
June 25th, 2008 at 8:59 am
“Well, sure we our told to take joy when we our disciplined personally, but I think we were talking about taking joy in the judgement of another’s sins. Those are two separate things”
I agree, but are we talking about taking joy in the discipline of a believer or the sad eternity a man has away from God when he dies as a non-believer?
June 25th, 2008 at 9:23 am
One quick question,
Why is it wrong to say he is getting what he earned or what is due him?????
I think it cause both great sadness that a man is now facing God naked with his own sins laid before him, but also joyous as God’s judgements and perfect. Can we not delight in the justice of God?? Or can we only delight in the love of God?
June 25th, 2008 at 9:31 am
Well, for one thing, I don’t see how we can say something like, “he’s getting what he earned or what is due him” without making some sort of judgement call on his final condition ourselves. The fact is, we don’t really know for sure what his heart was, or what his standing was with God. Sure, we can have what seem to be informed opinions, but beyond that we’re just guessing, aren’t we? I’m content to let the call of someone’s eternal fate rest in God’s hands.
I actually think the desire to have the same knowledge that God has gets back to original sin in the garden. When the serpent tempted Eve, he was basically saying that God knew something she didn’t and that that’s not right. I think there’s still something in us that wants the ability to judge others. It’s something we need to resist, no matter how cut-and-dry things appear.
June 25th, 2008 at 9:40 am
Oh, what did I possibly say?
Did I say I believed in the One Week Dinosaur Party?
I doubt it.
Somehow I suspect the commenters missed something or think they’re scoring a point and they’re doing the adult daycare “haw haw high fives” thing…
June 25th, 2008 at 9:41 am
Not a very attractive one.
June 25th, 2008 at 9:42 am
So we should not judge a person by there fruit or take them at there word. We belive that a christian is a christian by there confession and life.
Although Paul does say not to judge thoughs outside the church but only those in the church.
So bottom line I just say I love God and glory in all of His characteristics love, mercy, justice, wrath, jealousy. I love them all becasue He is perfect and holy.
So I agree that we should not judge him, the Lord will do that. Sin in a wicked man is like poison in a snake it is where it belongs. I am more worried about the church and her holiness.
Intrestign thoughts. I would still say we can feel both or several emitions regarding a sinner reciveing justice from God. Much like God does.
June 25th, 2008 at 9:45 am
BTT
You must admit that the freedom and witness although not perfect is really strong in this country. At least it was. Everyone pretty much knew what christianity was. Christ dieing for sins. Altough it is very different today. I have always found it strange we I asking some young kids in bible studies if they have ever been in a church and a good 60% say no. This kind of shocks me. This really is a post-christian nation.
June 25th, 2008 at 9:45 am
Unless you’re one of those rare creatures capable of holding more than one thought in your head at a time…
June 25th, 2008 at 9:46 am
I’ll tell you why in two words:
Religious Right.
Sorry, but it’s true.
June 25th, 2008 at 9:47 am
I would say you are either following or not. How can one be unsure if they are following Christ???? Explain what you mean a little bit more about Agnostic Christ-follower?? Very intresting stuff i would love to hear?
June 25th, 2008 at 10:04 am
Okay, I’ve done it before, but here goes:
I believe in the precepts and message of Christ. I believe in the things he taught. I believe he lived the life we are supposed to emulate — that of service, of love, etc.
I don’t claim to know absolute truth. I have no proof of anything, so how can I? I tend to believe in God, but I can’t be sure of God’s attributes…the Bible seems to have several conflicting ideas about God, so I’m not going to try to narrow it down to one.
“Agnostic Christ follower” is the short version, though.
The full title is “Christ-following Agnostic Deist, with a little Gnosticism and Judaism thrown in…spiritual.”
I find labeling spiritual belief silly.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:08 am
Kyle, in short, this “belief” allows someone to conveniently embrace what they like about God, and discard the rest. It’s a brilliant religion that makes little demands on its adherents.
One of the amazing characteristics of a Pharisee (kind of on the other end of the spectrum of self-righteousness) was their ability to outwardly receive God while inwardly rejecting Him.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:09 am
You figured it out, thanks Super-Bible-man.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:10 am
BTT
What do you think the central message of the bible is??
June 25th, 2008 at 10:16 am
Man, does every thread have to turn into an interrogation of Evan?
I mean, I don’t agree with everything he says by a longshot, but he is who he is for now. I don’t think we’re going to do much in the way converting him here.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:17 am
Well, I don’t necessarily look at the Bible as one completed work…
I believe Jesus’s central message is to love others, and that if one’s action falls within those parameters, one is following Jesus.
Paul confirms that in Romans something or other, that the totality of the law is “love thy neighbor.”
June 25th, 2008 at 10:18 am
Not an interrogation. Just a converasation, sorry if question offend. I will stop asking. I am not trying to convert just trying to figure out where people are coming from so there comments will make more sense.
My apologies BTT.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:18 am
Haha.
Yes.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:23 am
Kyle - I don’t think it was so much directed at you, as it was the forums, in general, a number of which have diverted down this course recently…
June 25th, 2008 at 10:26 am
Agreed, Paul, and agreed as well on it being the equal and opposite (and just as faulty) response to Phariseeism. It’s somewhere in the spectrum between secular humanism and restrained hedonism.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:26 am
I remeber hearing similar things when Jihn Lennon was murdered… once fellow Chrsitian even said “I wonder if he can imagine there’s no heaven now…”
Pitiful, just pitful…
Neil
June 25th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Heh.
If so, Heaven’s going to be a pretty boring place, what with all the artists consigned to hell.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:36 am
If certain voices within the church of the past 4-500 years had their way, Evan, you might be right. Fortunately, though, it is God who decides and who gives grace.
Artists have pretty much taken it on the chin from the church since the birth of modernism, with the invention of the printing press and the systematization of religion by much of the church.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:49 am
Phil, Take it up with Evan. He comments a lot and given his “unique” take on Chrisitianity many of his comments require a more orthodox response lest silence = agreement I guess.
Sorry to be talking over you Evan.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:50 am
Chris L,
I hate Thomas Kincade. Does that earn me any brownie points?
June 25th, 2008 at 10:51 am
No - sometimes art is just trite or bad, no matter the heart of the artist…
June 25th, 2008 at 10:53 am
I understand this, as well - by leaving comments open, you always have to weigh that - whether it’s Evan or Pastorboy (etc. - hitting both ends of the scale)…
June 25th, 2008 at 10:54 am
Trust me… We all know that most here don’t agree with him. He’s probably gotten the message, too.
I understand the impulse to ask the questions. It just seems that they always end up in the same place.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:56 am
I was remarking on the fact that the most talented artists/writers/composers don’t tend to be Christian.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:56 am
Actually, it does with me. He’s godawful.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:58 am
Hehe, because you have to “set me straight.”
What might surprise you, John is that I was raised with my head held under the water of the Orthodox view for 19 years. I used to be a 5 point Calvinist!
I moved beyond it.
June 25th, 2008 at 10:59 am
They used to be when christianty acutal effected peoples lives totally. Most of the best artist in and genere wher christian, specifically reformed christians. Not so much anymore, not sure why that happened, but christian agian need to embrace the beaut and majesty of all the arts.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:13 am
Well, a lot of the artists of the renaissance were on the church’s payroll…they weren’t necessarily Christians themselves.
But to be honest, these days, the best Christian artists are the ones who compete in the real world…I’m thinking of musicians now, like Sufjan Stevens. Had no idea he was a Christian until recently, because it was and still is irrelevant. He’s just out there being an artist.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:19 am
Uh, when Reformed Xtianity began taking over it stamped out art by claiming it was anti-thetical to the word, by which they eventually meant The Word.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:24 am
Tim,
How do you reconcile that with history. While there where radicals who hated an art for a most part some of the best art, paintings, writings and music can from the reformation. This is one thing that has always confused me how claissical music became so beloved by the secular world when much of it is unashamedly christian. It is the beausty and majesty of the art breakdown those walls.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:30 am
Kyle,
It wasn’t an instant death knell for art. The Reformation was far more concerned with the direct theological implications of their time. In the generations that followed the emphasis the Reformation put on the word was eventually turned into a discouragement of art in general. I think if you check out the timeline of artistic works you’ll find a slow trickling out over the years when it comes to protestant works, that especially accelerated when denominations either came to or formed in the US.
And if we’re really honest we’ll concede that many of the big names and their works which are considered masterpieces of all of western civilization were Catholic. Even now you’re far more likely to attach works of art from murals to stained glass to statues with a Catholic or EO church than you are a Protestant church.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:35 am
Yep.
Plus, the great composers wrote for the church because that was kinda their paycheck. Same with visual artists.
There is so much revisionist history out there, though. Some Christians try desperately to claim everyone from artists to the founding fathers in order to argue their viewpoints, when so much of what they say simply isn’t true.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:39 am
OH, and I also love Byzantine art. Not so wild about their theology, which is a shame because it’d almost be worth it to preach among such beauty.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:39 am
John H,
Yet, what drives me is the Love of Christ. If one truly experiences it, they are changed. hating others is not a valid option…
iggy
June 25th, 2008 at 11:42 am
Bach, Handle, Remberant, Buynan ect…I now it has dimished and I see this as a result of christianty being waterdowned. No longer does it effect every ascpect of our lives. It has now become something in our own personal time that we do, it is no longer what we are. And there where christian’s who hated and taught that the arts where evil. But there is some revivial among the christian arts. I thinking of Max McClean and his little assocation that he has started. The reason it flurshed some much right after the reformation is becuase doctrine matters and effectives lives dramatically. I love how Bach signed everything first JJ and then at the end SDG.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:47 am
It has much more to do with a specific type of theology that developed, not with anything being waterdowned.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:47 am
Except that Bach and Handel were foundational, but “classical” music (to use a broad incorrect term) flourished far beyond what they ever did in the years after them, with Beethoven, Schumann, Liszt, Chopin, etc.
It has nothing to do with religion whatsoever.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:51 am
Yes, but Bach and Handle where termousdly effective by religion. Not all classical music was, a lot of music was religious because that is what sold and what everyone wanted but that still does not mean that none them where true christian writing the most beautiful art in human history for the glory of God. Anywho you guys have a good day. See you in the next intresting topic.
June 25th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
I feel slightly embarrassed i’ve never even heard of him..
:-[
Nowwwww Bill Hicks, a genius..
“a funny man were Christians, and we don’t like what you said”
“then forgive me”
June 25th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
I would probably like you better now as an agnostic Christian.
June 25th, 2008 at 12:09 pm
Oh, Andy, George Carlin was WONDERFUL.
Here’s a link to a bunch of his videos:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=%22george+carlin%22+%28DiavoloDiAno%29&search_sort=video_date_uploaded
June 25th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Oh snap!
June 25th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Seriously.
The 5-point Calvinist thing was a late high school/early college phase. Before that it was more mainline protestant with some dabbling in Southern Baptist land.
June 25th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Friends,
The best comment I have seen written here, aside from my own othewise brilliant commentary, is this one, and I am sorry I don’t know who wrote it:
That is quite the point of all this talk concerning Carlin’s death isn’t it? That is, that God the Father does not delight in the loss of a single human life. If the new heavens and the new earth will be a place where there is no tears, I imagine that is because they are currently being wept now for every single human life that is lost to sin, death, hell. I imagine heaven even now being a place where there is weeping.
(Not to mention all the weeping that is done because of the way Christians treat one another.)
Evan what do you think?
jerry
June 25th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
I think that if it’s causing heaven to weep so much, then God has truly lost control of his Creation.
June 25th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Haha to add to the embarrassment i just seen him,and know him as the guy who played Ben Affleck’s dad in Jersey Girl
June 25th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
Evan, that does not surprise me at all. Yet I am sad that is your take. Thanks.
Jerry
June 25th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
But I would suggest that I disagree with the premise, Jerry.
I don’t believe heaven is weeping over the loss of human souls.
I merely said that IF that’s the case, then God has lost control.
I don’t believe God has lost control, necessarily.
I’m willing to consider that he may have relinquished control long ago. That’s more plausible.
June 25th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
ahhh the good ‘ol days when everything was … anyway, I’d say Christianity is every bit as effective today as it ever was, same as it ever was, same as it ever was
June 25th, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Evan,
Try not to read the words ‘weeping’ or ‘tears’ in a too literal sort of way and my statements will make a lot more sense. Nevertheless: weeping and tears. PS–I said nothing about ’souls’; I’m talking about flesh not some disembodied, mystical ghost.
And, on a brighter note: I don’t know that a ‘god’ who didn’t create the world ever had control.
That’s a different subject, of course. 
Thanks for the feedback.
jerry
June 25th, 2008 at 4:25 pm
AND these are the issues where I happily say “I dunno.”
June 25th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
June 25th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
Too many smile faces are a sign of compromise.
June 25th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
Friends,
I don’t want to beat a dead horse, but has anyone seen the ‘PS’ that the author of Slice posted today concerning Carlin?
She is complaining about something that happened in 1972. OK, that’s fine. I suppose my question is: What did the parent expect he was going to see and hear in 1972 at a George Carlin concert? Why was a parent taking a ten year old child to a George Carlin concert in the first place? Seriously, or did I miss something?
Since 1972 is long gone, and so is Mr Carlin, and we cannot go back in time and ask, I wonder–perhaps a bit too loudly–if Mr Carlin was sort of being ironic about ‘not changing anything just because a child was there’? I mean, it’s not like he could sit down and hurry up and re-write the material. Maybe his point was, ‘Why are you bringing a 10 year old to my show?’ I blame the parent, not Carlin. The parent should have known better.
Well, I’m just sort of thinking out loud. I wish I had more time on my hands to blog. I would start a blog devoted entirely to exposing Slice for what it is. I would go through word by word of that horrible blog and expose its ungrace and go out of my way expose the anti-grace basis of the posts there.
I know something we should be ‘righteously angry’ about: Ignorant people who will write anything simply to write it, who oppose something simply to oppose something, who will denounce anything for the sake of denouncing it. Slice makes me want to be a universalist.
I seriously cannot imagine being as hateful as the author of Slice of Laodicea. I am going to start praying for the author of Slice every day: Prayers for grace, compassion, and mercy; a better understanding of theology; a deeper understanding of Christ. Then I’m going to pray that the blog shut down forever: It’s not helping the cause of Christ.
Sorry for all this. I realize I am beating a dead horse and I am late in the game on this thread.
G’day, all.
jerry
June 25th, 2008 at 5:18 pm
I reject the victim mentality as well. If anything, her anger would be toward the church where she had a bad experience and not the world.
This morality tiabribe misrepresents the gospel which was offered to Mr. Carlin. Jesus never hated him, He loved Him in spite of his sin. I completely reject it when believers squawk about sinners ruining their civil ambiance, Jesus the most holy man who ever lived came and actually rubbed shoulders with sinners.
Do you believe Jesus ever heard cursing? Did He ever see drunkenness? Blasphemy? Of course, and yet He dies for them anyway. He didn’t get a petition together, He didn’t ask Rome to stop these sinners, He didn’t get mad at common sinners, and He never presented Himself as some victim. He died - yes, that glorious mystery - He died for all those rotten sinners including George Carlin and others like him.
Let us be honest about it, many believers hate sinners. They wish they would live somewhere else but not in their neighborhoods and encroach upon the utopia they envision.
This attitude toward sinners distorts the gospel and in fact completely miss what the cross is all about. And why would God love sinners such as you and me? Against the holiness of God we all are just as repulsive as any sinner we could name. Let us ask God to soften our hearts, full of loving redemption, and release the moral hubris that so contradicts the grace we have been given. I hope the Rosie O’Donnels and the Bill Marers and John Stewarts of this world see the gospel in us and not some squealing about their sin and our discomfort. (see “The Cross” for reference)
June 25th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Rick,
That’s exactly it. That second article misses the point completely. It doesn’t matter how terrible a sinner Carlin was. It doesn’t matter that he was so much worse than we knew. Writing an article to put a fine tip on exactly the quality and quantity of his sin misses completely what so many found repugnant about the first article. It wasn’t that the article wasn’t nice enough, or was crass, or was done in the wrong way, it was that it was totally void of the grace that Christ offers. The grace of Christ doesn’t care that you were profoundly offended by the life of Carlin, it only cares about Carlin for no less of a reason that it cares about you or me. Reducing a person to a cautionary tale, or an enemy in the culture war (where is that in the scripture?) misses the point completely.
June 25th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
Theory, and it’s not just mine:
Some Christians, especially of the Fundamentalist variety, spend so much time fighting their so-called “culture war” of their own contrival because they see in [insert "other" group here] themselves, and have so much fear of their own inner beings that they feel they must fight in the public square in order to eradicate that which they can’t stand within themselves.
For example, there seems to be a correlation between the fact that much of the church is obsessed these days with porn addictions, etc., and the so-called “pro-family” groups thus spend inordinate amounts of time fighting against Marriott for offering pay-per-view porn and Janet Jackson’s boob…
It’s like some are begging to be protected from themselves.
June 25th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
Another example:
Of the people who go through so-called “ex-gay” programs, the great majority come out more damaged than before, but the tiny percentage who actually ultimately try to pursue a straight life (even though they’ve been forced to admit that no one actually changes their sexual orientation) tend to find themselves as radicalized Fundamentalists on the payrolls of the same so-called “ex-gay” businesses, fighting the hardest against rights for gay people. Almost to a ‘T,’ they’re begging the government to protect them from themselves.
As this relates to Ingrid, doesn’t she have one of those testimonies that starts on one extreme side of the pendulum and goes to the other?
It’s very typical, from a psychological perspective.
June 25th, 2008 at 6:58 pm
Rick,
Without bothering to quote what you said, thank you. You said what I was trying to say, and you said it much better than I could have. The second post by the author of slice was self-serving and, frankly, embarassing. It served only as an attempt to justify her own hatred of anything that she has not washed in the baptistery. I was trying to say that in not so many words, but I didn’t want to come off as ‘mean’ or ‘ungracious’ or ‘uncompassionate’ towards someone’s suffering.
I couldn’t write what you wrote because after I read that post I was angry. I am glad you had words for the moment. I might still be angry, except that I have chosen to let it go.
Tim, bothering to quote you: “Reducing a person to a cautionary tale, or an enemy in the culture war (where is that in the scripture?) misses the point completely.”
Yes, it does. I often think of the man possessed by a legion of demons. The only solution people had for him was to bind him hand and foot, to confine him to the abode of the dead (i.e., ‘the tombs’). No one else had anything for him. Then Jesus came along…unafraid, unembarassed by his yelling and screaming and cursing, unashamed to go into a place where he would no doubt become ritually unclean. Jesus went to him. (Good grief, even Steve Camp, in the comments at imonk had kind words about Carlin.)
When the story is done, the Kingdom advanced, the man was in his right mind, sitting at Jesus’ feet. I love that story because it demonstrates, in part, just how difficult it is for people’s bonds to be broken and the lengths that Jesus will go to in order to rescue someone. My point is not that Carlin was a saint, but that ‘we’ have no idea what he was thinking in the last years of his life, the last minutes of his life, the last seconds of his life. Outward appearances suggest one thing, but God judges the heart. That is something we cannot do.
And I refuse to hold him up as an example of everything that a Christian needs to beware of. And I refuse to hold him up as an example of everything ’sinners’ need to be warned of. And I refuse to hold him up as the cause of everything that is wrong with America. And I refuse to hold him up as everything parents need to protect their children from. And I refuse to hold him up as someone who is in the business of propagating a ‘let’s send all children to hell by teaching them bad things’ agenda.
Certain priests of a certain mainstream worldwide religion are doing that well enough.
In other words, I will not use this story of George Carlin’s death to advance the Kingdom of God unless it has to do with the doctrine of God’s grace. That is not why George Carlin lived, and it is certainly not why he died.
Thanks Rick and Tim for two very well thought out replies.
jerry
June 25th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
As anyone heard of Matt Chandler of Village Church ??
His sermon Preaching the Gospel from the Center of the Evangelical World,at Driscoll’s confrences was amazing..
It really address some of the issues in this and other threads, about the way Christian’s have related to people…
Give it a chance i think your like it !!
http://theresurgence.com/text_and_context_media
June 25th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
I went back and re-read Ingrid’s article on Slice. One simple thing stands out. Never mind all her usual over the top rant and rhetoric.
The fact tht when she writes of “sex”, she feels the need to spell it “s-x”, as if the mere act of stringing those three harmless letters together was in some way dirty. That alone speaks volumes about what a genuine nutjob that woman is. Good Lord, what baggage does she carry around in that strange head of hers. And no, I don’t feel like being godly or compassionate or anything else towards her.
And I’m not even defending Carlin. I used to be a huge fan, but he hasn’t been even remotely funny in years. The clean or dirty aspect of his act doesn’t matter to me. Funny is funny, whether it’s clean or not. The same goes for unfunny.
And how do we know that Carlin, upon arrival in heaven didn’t get a high five from God, and a smile of knowing recognition regarding the wacky human condition that Carlin was so capable of hitting with lazer-like accuracy.
Where does it say God can’t have a sense of humor. As some other comic observed…He must…why else did he create us with all those funny parts that droop and dangle as the years go on.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:22 pm
Maybe not, but that’s what we’re called to. Probably especially when we don’t feel like it.
June 25th, 2008 at 11:35 pm
Upper left corner of this page, fifth bullet down.
June 26th, 2008 at 5:30 am
I cannot get over the duplicitous nature of such comments about people like Carlin coming from devout Calvinists. In Mike Ratliff’s current article he suggests that sinners have heard the gospel and “refused” to repent. I agree, except I am not a Calvinist.
A dead person cannot refuse which indicates a choice and a will. And Calvinists claim sinners cannot repent unless God makes them, so is Mike saying God offers repentance and these sinners refuse it?
The same with Carlin, in their myopic view of election Carlin was only behaving in a way that reflected who he was, and according to Calvin, God didn’t choose to offer him another way. So in essence you are criticizing a sinner who has no choice. As I have said before, condemning a blind man for tripping over a chair he cannot see and even God won’t warn him about.
June 26th, 2008 at 5:41 am
He uses bad words.
I don’t.
I am better than him…
Sad!
June 26th, 2008 at 6:09 am
Did anyone get a screenshot of “s-x”? It is fixed now.
June 26th, 2008 at 6:26 am
Deb - I think she was referring to ungodly “sox” that have curse words embroidered into them.
Now we even have Calvinist “clubs”. This one is named “Reformata” which removes the reformed group from the other dcotrinally challenged believers. I love the names that give off such a pleasant and humble aroma. Let’s see if I can start a club of goofy free willers.
Free Willys
Arminian Armada
Combating Calvinism
Choice Champions
There is one conspicuous absence from my titles and the Reformata moniker - the name of Jesus. Oh well, will fit Him in later!
June 26th, 2008 at 6:44 am
–Unless you’re one of those rare creatures capable of holding more than one thought in your head at a time…–
Not bragging about yourself, are you?
As I said, such a creature would a contradiction in itself. One cannot both not believe in God (or to use the cop-out version, not know if there is a God) and still be a follower of God. Sorry, but you’re either an agnostic or a believer. Stop waffling and pick one.
June 26th, 2008 at 6:48 am
–Of the people who go through so-called “ex-gay” programs, the great majority come out more damaged than before,–
Any support for this, because I really don’t take your word for it.
–but the tiny percentage who actually ultimately try to pursue a straight life (even though they’ve been forced to admit that no one actually changes their sexual orientation) tend to find themselves as radicalized Fundamentalists on the payrolls of the same so-called “ex-gay” businesses, fighting the hardest against rights for gay people.–
And the people who fight hardest against alcohol are ex-alcoholics, and those who speak out loudest against drugs are ex-drug users. Your scenario is hardly news.
–As this relates to Ingrid, doesn’t she have one of those testimonies that starts on one extreme side of the pendulum and goes to the other?
It’s very typical, from a psychological perspective.–
Doesn’t mean she’s wrong, just that you’re hunting for some fictitious (as in, you have no idea of the real) reason or excuse to dismiss her.
June 26th, 2008 at 7:06 am
I’m know this isn’t directly related, but your comment reminded me of this. I was looking at that Pew survey on religion the other day, and one thing that struck as really odd was what people who identified themselves as atheists said. 20% of them said they believed in God. I mean, talk about a contradiction…
And there was a category for agnostic as well, so it’s not like they were forced to choose atheist. It makes me wonder about the accuracy of such things.
June 26th, 2008 at 7:09 am
I can see what you’re getting at, but I really don’t see how it affects you whether or not he “picks one”. I don’t understand the anger.
June 26th, 2008 at 7:13 am
agnostic trumps believer.
June 26th, 2008 at 9:08 am
Rick…
be careful with those club names.
Your Free Willy’s could have hidden connotations that you were just trying to insert here to get a laugh and be worldly. We know your “pastor’s” heart.
June 26th, 2008 at 9:27 am
I would disagree with this, as well, knowing a number of folks who have successfully come through one of these programs…
June 26th, 2008 at 9:43 am
You obviously don’t really know the definition of “agnostic.”
I am not surprised at this.
June 26th, 2008 at 9:44 am
And Chris, how do you define “success”?
Because really, you don’t want to argue this one with me, because it will really make you look silly.
June 26th, 2008 at 9:45 am
“because it will really make you look silly.”
A low threshold.
June 26th, 2008 at 9:45 am
Why don’t you do a Google search for yourself? Search “Ex-gay” and find the tons of support groups and ministries devoted to helping people heal from those ministries.
Or don’t, on second thought. I really don’t trust your kind around people who are different from you.
June 26th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
At one time, Ingrid posted that she would alter “sex” to “s-x” to make sure it got through all of the naughty filters. This doesn’t mean she has a problem with the word herself. Just sayin’.
June 26th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
Glad we cleared that up.
June 26th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Yes. Because we wouldn’t want the blog fans with their Mayberry filtering software missing out on their “heresy-remnant” psycho-emotional porn.
June 26th, 2008 at 3:15 pm
–I can see what you’re getting at, but I really don’t see how it affects you whether or not he “picks one”.–
It doesn’t, but it effects him.
–I don’t understand the anger.–
There is no anger.
–Why don’t you do a Google search for yourself?–
I’m not the one making such claims. It’s usually the work of the person making the claims to provide the support for their claims.
–You obviously don’t really know the definition of “agnostic.”–
agnostic–or or relating to the belief that the existence of any uttimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable
As I said, your “agnostic christ-follower” is a contradiction in and of itself.
June 26th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
True. Why halt you between two opinions? Choose you this day who you will serve.
June 26th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
Tim - even though I disagreed with some of Spencer’s post, and he posted my comment, relishing someone dying without Christ is unfathomable, especially when we are held completely by grace.
Just as when Hagee attributed Katrina to God’s hatred of gays, or Falwell saying 9-11 was the fault of the pro-abortion and pro-gay Americans, the church continues to demonstrate it has a piece of the “out in left field” pie.
Here is something I will say, doctrinal issues aside:
I believe that with all my heart. I guess that makes me a …uh…a…Conundrum Christian.
June 26th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
.
What I also find amazing is the outrage that a non-Chirstian would behave as such…
Neil
June 26th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
And as I said, unless you’re incapable of holding more than one thought in your head.
Yes, I do believe that the nature of God is unknowable on a 100% level, but I agree with the precepts of Christ and follow them.
Do understand that I’m not explaining this because I care.
Yes, you’re a big boy, you can do it for yourself, and I’m busy.
June 27th, 2008 at 4:46 am
Will Farel
Burning
forthe TruthJune 27th, 2008 at 5:43 am
One thing about Phelps, you have to admire his deep knowledge of the original languages and his humanitarian fervor. I especially enjoy his series “Journey Through Song of Solomon” where he richly unfolds God’s love for His church.
I derive great encouragement from his ministry. Deal with it.