Alarming News: I like Morgan Freeberg. A lot.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: We were following a trackback and thinking "hmmm... this is a bloody excellent post!", and then we realized that it was just part III of, well, three...Damn. I wish I'd written those.
Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler: ...I just remembered that I found a new blog a short while ago, House of Eratosthenes, that I really like. I like his common sense approach and his curiosity when it comes to why people believe what they believe rather than just what they believe.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is an intriguing guy...[he] asks great questions and answers others with style, flair, reason and wit. On the blogroll he goes. Make him a part of your regular blogospheric reading. I certainly will.
Brutally Honest: Morgan Freeberg is brilliant.
Common Sense Junction: Misha @ Anti-Idiotarian never ceases to amaze me. He keeps finding other good blogs. I went over to A.I. this morning for my daily Misha fix and he had found this guy named Morgan Freeberg in Fair Oaks, California, that has a blog, House of Eratosthenes. Freeberg says its "The Blog That Nobody Reads" but it may now become the blog that everybody reads.
Jaded Haven: Good God, Morgan, you cover a topic from front to back with a screwy thoroughness I find mind boggling. I'm in awe of your thought proccesses, my friend, you're an exceptional talent. You start by throwing in the kitchen sink, tie in someone's syphilitic uncle, bend around a rip tide of brilliance and bring it all home in a neat, diamond dripping package of an exceptionally readable moment of damn fine wordsmithing. I love reading you.
Mein Blogovault: Make "the Blog that No One Reads" one of your daily reads.
Philmon: When Morgan meanders, stick with him - he's got a point and it'll be worth it in the end. He's not a hit-and-run snarky quip kind of guy. The pieces all fall into place like tumblers in a lock and bang! He's opened a cognative door for you.
Rightlinx: Morgan at House of Eratosthenes is one of the best writers out there. I read him nearly every day because he manages to provide an interesting perspective, even though I don't always agree.
Poetic Justice: Cletus! Ah gots a laiv one fer yew...
As long as I’m quoting myself:
Rick had a link to a nice, logical, beefy, well-thought-out rebuttal to the “New Christianity” being espoused by Brian McLaren and others. I thought so highly of it that I sent it to some relatives whom I thought would be interested.
The response I got back, reminded me of my problems with organized religion. And, not-so-organized religion. And, come to think about it, social affairs outside of religion. In all walks of life, we become enemies of our own intellectual acumen when we spend too much time and energy trying not to argue about things. It causes us to fail to see incompatibilities among the various components we try to snap together. That’s one of the constructive points to arguing about things, you know: Try to determine incompatibilities among things, incompatibilities that would otherwise go undetected.
I won’t quote the other party, but I’ll excerpt from my reply:
The phrase “[McLaren] would have credible answers to many of his critics’ doubts” suggests a lack of experience “debating,” if one can call it that, religious leftists. These folk are not the debating type. Think of Al Gore being confronted by well-informed global warming skeptics…it’s a few steps down from that. A distracting sucker-punch, which neither the opponent or any bystanders can genuinely understand let alone dissect for a response, followed by a hasty change of subject. That’s about the best you can get out of them. See, “leftist,” in religion as well as in politics, has come to indicate a desire and inclination to think things out emotionally. Ideas are evaluated emotionally; new members are recruited to the movement emotionally. In religious leftism, there isn’t an awful lot of thought given to the thinking-concepts of Christianity — The Fall, man’s redemption, Christ Himself. As that McLaren critic pointed out, these things are all missing. Instead, the core elements are, as I’ve noticed:
1. I feel X;
2. (unstated but more important) I wouldn’t feel X if I were not a Good Person;
3. (also unstated but even more important) Others don’t feel X and therefore are not as good as I am.
And it is a constant that, as these other concepts are being discussed, all conversations lead back to #3. It is a relative exercise of self-evaluation. Therefore, it ends up being negative when it was conceived as something that was supposed to be positive…I suppose all cults are stacked into this crude, three-level pyramid — the idols and officials who drive the movement, the followers who are mere mortals but at least are heading in the right direction, and the stupid rubes who haven’t joined, don’t belong, aren’t heading in the right direction, and provide the contrast by which the cultist can feel good about himself.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: This need to feel like a worthy person, appears to drive everything else. There is a sense, on the left, in both religion and politics, that motion is needed for redemption. This makes the entire engine go. Redemption from what? Real Christianity is precise and thought-provoking in answering that question. Also, in real Christianity the emphasis is on coming to terms with one’s Creator, with one’s destiny, so that one can turn one’s attention to other pressing worldly concerns on the other six days of the week. Be functional. Just as God was on His six days. Leftists, on the other hand, seem to be engaged in a Sisyphean struggle to continually earn some redemption which is lost to them a few seconds later, so it has to be earned back again. Audibly.
They’re pretty annoying, and they don’t seem to have a clear understanding, themselves, of what they do & don’t want to discuss. When people ritually dispense the time-honored advice of “let’s not discuss religion or politics,” the older I get the more convinced I am this is a reference to leftists.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.