Theories of change vary widely. Does progress arise from
countless participants, working in countless places and ways? Does it require
an organized movement? How critical are public, influential leaders? At what
point is there a need for precedent to be set from the top down?
Speaking to a professor at Liberty
University, Frederica Mathewes-Green was surprised to find out that the
professor and some of the young people at Liberty were going to a Celtic
liturgical service at a local Baptist church (link;
relevant conversation starts at the 28:50 mark).
March, U.S. publishers released new editions of two of the most widely read
English-language Bibles: the Catholic New American Bible and the evangelical
New International Version. These updates are intended to reflect modern idioms
and the latest scholarly research, while also responding to changes in the
(niche-philic) scripture marketplace.
Last year Professor Bart Ehrman of the University of North Carolina cranked out yet another book, God’s Problem. Dr. Ehrman breathlessly announces that he has discovered that God has a big problem – suffering.
Ehrman dismisses various futile attempts on the part of God to explain
why there is suffering, pain, and disaster in the world – the Book of
Job, Ecclesiastes, and Jesus.
"Open conversation that leads to nothing." That's how Jon Stewart summed up his interview with popular right-wing historian David Barton. He was right: After 30 minutes of glib back-and-forth with Barton (ten of which made it onto TV), Stewart was flummoxed, worn down, unfunny.
It's only in the last few years that I've felt free
to resist a biblical text, free to accept that such resistance is "allowed." It
still isn't something that comes easily for me, given my particular seminary
training--not to mention my fundamentalist upbringing.