Two or Three (.net)

For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. - Jesus

4.27.2005

New RSS Feed for Two or Three

by danielg [+/-] show/hide

If you are seeing this, you are subscribed to our old feed - this URL will no longer be receiving any posts. Please visit www.twoorthree.net to pick one of our feeds, or you may just subscribe to http://www.twoorthree.net/atom.xml.

Also, you may notice that many of the imported articles have lost some or all of their comments. That's part of the deal, I guess. So time to make new comments!

posted by danielg at 11:08 PM 2 comments

2 Comments:

Post a Comment

4.25.2005

We Have Moved Our Site

by danielg [+/-] show/hide

This location at blogspot is no longer our true location. Our new home can be found by going to www.twoorthree.net.

Note that our feed RSS has not changed, since it was always via feedburner. Thanks!

posted by danielg at 10:28 PM 1 comments

1 Comments:

  • Were some of the comments left off intentionally, or have they just not all been copied over yet?

    (for example, the "was Jesus gay?" post had something like 25 comments here, and only about 3 over there.)

    By Blogger LotharBot, at 4/26/2005 7:19 PM  

Post a Comment

4.21.2005

Blog Changes

by Unknown [+/-] show/hide

We are looking at making some major changes to the blog. That is one of the reasons why not much has been posted here. As soon as everything is finalized, we will let you know and you will be able to see all the changes.

Thank you for your understanding during this transition phase!

posted by Unknown at 10:50 AM 0 comments

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

4.19.2005

The new pope has been chosen, let the whining begin

by Unknown [+/-] show/hide

German Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger is now Pope Benedict XVI.

Many stories characterize Cardinal Ratzinger as being essentially Pope John Paul II's right hand man. So do not look for any changes in church doctrine.

I found this prediction from TKS a bit like predicting liberals will oppose a given judicial nominee by President Bush. Nevertheless, it makes a good point.

So – how soon after the new Pope is chosen, does some thumb-sucking columnist point to one of the guys who wasn't chosen and lament that the Church has missed a golden opportunity to reach out to constituency X? “In selecting Pope Whoever over Cardinal Arinze, the Cardinals blew a chance to reach out to the African continent.” “By skipping over Cardinal Hummes, Church leaders fumbled a chance to solidify their influence over Latin America.” And if it’s not geography, it will be ideology – “by picking this traditionalist, the Church has ignored its waning influence among Europeans seeking a more progressive voice,” etc.


I haven't had the chance to look yet, but I am sure it has already happened. All of the news shows tonight will be blanketed with stories of the "almost Popes" and how much of any impact they could have made, how great they would have been, how super every thing would be if they would just allow the New York Times editorial staff to chose the Pope.

I pray that Pope Benedict XVI will lead the Catholic church with grace and guidance from the Holy Spirit.

Update: It has already begun.

Update 2: At least they aren't confusing the new pope with Cliff from Cheers like some other news outlets are.

posted by Unknown at 10:47 AM 2 comments

2 Comments:

  • Why should American Catholics who don't believe in abusive religion support a man who clearly does? There are criticisms of Ratzinger that are appropriate.

    (Also, the Cliff Clavin joke was a joke.)

    (And the buffalo theory's a great one.)

    By Blogger The Wilkinsons, at 4/20/2005 5:59 AM  

  • I would hope that American Catholics or African Catholics or European Catholics, etc would support someone who belives in the basic tenets and doctrines of their faith. If you expect a very old tradition based religion to change for the whims of society and polls then I guess you could be upset with his selection.

    (It is ironic that many liberals and super conservative evangelicals end up on the same side of this issue, because many conservative evangelicals do not like the restrictions on married priests, contraceptives and many of the Catholic theology that differs from other branches of Christianity.)

    The Cliff thing is a joke, but if you follow the links. Tuesday there were actual news sites (manly tv stations) that identified the new pope as John Ratzenburger. That would have been an interesting, maybe even uniting choice. ;)

    By Blogger Unknown, at 4/21/2005 8:12 AM  

Post a Comment

What Liberals Want (and Why Judicial Confirmations Matter)

by Tom Parsons [+/-] show/hide

John Hinderaker of Power Line has an excellent column today for The Weekly Standard on what the Left is attempting to accomplish through judicial activism and the effect that those efforts would have on the Constitution as we know it. His column only confirms the critical nature of the looming battle over judicial nominess. It's time to put an end to filibusters and move forward on these nominations in the Senate.

posted by Tom Parsons at 10:35 AM 3 comments

3 Comments:

  • Umm, last I checked, it was the conservatives who were shopping around for an "activist ruling" (in the Schiavo case), not the liberals. I also don't see too many conservatives whining about Bush v. Gore 2000, an activist ruling if ever there was one.

    I've long held that an "activist judge" simply means "any judge who rules in a way that conservatives don't like."

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 4/19/2005 1:09 PM  

  • Please explain how upholding the Florida Constitution was an "activist ruling."

    And Conservatives didn't do a very good job of shopping in the Schiavo case if they were trying.

    It's funny that as you talk about conservatives calling judges activists simply for disagree with them, you point to an instance where you disagree with the court therefore they are activist.

    No, actually my definition of an activist judge is basically one that does not interpret the Constitution but rather appeals to "evolving standards of morality" or "international law and opinion" while finding hidden rights buried in the Constitution that no one knew was there.

    But regardless of whether I disagree with you or not tigirsch, I am glad you are here to discuss this. I enjoy engaging people who disagree with me. Thanks for stopping by, come back anytime.

    By Blogger Unknown, at 4/19/2005 2:07 PM  

  • This is the main rift between "strict consitutionalists" and "living document liberals" - as Justice Scalia is fond of remarking:

    "The Constitution is not a living organism, for Pete’s sake; it’s a legal document and like all legal documents, it says some things and it doesn’t say others.”

    By Blogger danielg, at 4/19/2005 2:39 PM  

Post a Comment

This is my lucky week

by Unknown [+/-] show/hide

Apparently, this week is my luckiest week ever. How else could you explain the fact that I should be receiving over $24 million dollars in the next little bit, all because of my email [wardrobedoorblog@yahoo.com]. Somehow I managed to win an international lottery I didn't enter and some guy from Africa died with no relatives leaving me (somehow) as the person to get his money.

Here's my winning lottery announcement:
We are pleased to inform you of the result of the Lottery Winners International programs held on the 14th April,2005 Your e-mail address attached to ticket number 370982217413-1298 with serial number 4708-311 drew lucky numbers 2-34-28-13-62 which consequently won in the 7th category, you have therefore been approved for a lump sum pay of US$5.500,000.00 (five million five hundred thousand united state dollars) CONGRATULATIONS!!!

Here is the story about my long lost African uncle (I guess):
I have a proposal for you, this however is not mandatory nor will I in any manner compel you to honor against your will. I am Mr. Ponfa Oley, an auditor with a bank (one of the African leading banks in South Africa). Here in this bank existed a dormant account for the past 4 years, which belongs to an American national who is now late, Mr. Morris Thompson who died on Alaska Airlines Flight 261.
When I discovered that there had been neither deposits nor withdrawals from this account for this long period, I decided to carry out a system investigation and discovered that none of the family member or relations of the late person is aware of this account. This is the story in a nutshell.
Now I want an account overseas where the bank will transfer these funds. There after, I had planned to destroy all related documents for this account. It is a careful network and for the past eleven months I have worked out everything to ensure a hitch-free operation. The amount is not so much at the moment and plus all the accumulated interest the balance in
this account stands at- (US $18.6 million US dollars).

Seriously, it is amazing that so many people fall for these scams. It is sad that every new invention of man is perverted and distored for our own greedy purposes. New inventions are a lot like new days, we can take them and use them for noble purposes and to benefit others. We can also take them, twist them and use them for own our selfish desires.

Just like it is easy for me to talk about how stupid the Isralites must have been to continue to disobey God or Samson to continue to trust Delilah, it is easy for me to condemn the people who send these emails out trying to rip people off. But I am guilty of making stupid mistakes and trying to push myself up by stepping on others. Too often, I hear God's voice and I ignore it, only to ask God why He let these bad things happen to me. Too often, I am guilty of using others (my wife, my family, my friends, my co-workers) simply to boost my pride and stroke my ego.

Maybe this is my lucky week after all. Maybe I will finally stop making the same stupid mistakes and actually be a doer of the word instead of just a hearer. Maybe I will actually place others before myself. That would be worth a lot more than $24 million dollars. (Not that the money would hurt ;) )

posted by Unknown at 8:04 AM 2 comments

2 Comments:

  • Gee, I figured just because I get one of these e-mails a day (at least) that I was the lucky one! Guess it shows how wrong I am.

    By Blogger Tom Parsons, at 4/19/2005 10:35 AM  

  • Apparently, my spam filter does not want to see me inherit large sums of US dollars. It blocks out a lot of these. Can I sue my spam filter for the money I could have already gotten?

    By Blogger Unknown, at 4/19/2005 10:54 AM  

Post a Comment

4.18.2005

The dangers of a politician filled pulpit

by Unknown [+/-] show/hide

Stones Cry Out has an excellent post on why Christians should be the ones to seperate the local church from politics.

It is not that Christians should not be involved politically, but rather the time for political involvement is not during a worship service.

Jim is speaking about the Family Research Council's Justice Sunday. They will simulcast comments from Sen. Bill Frist and others at Highview Baptist Church in Louisville, KY to other churches who sign-up for the satellite feed.

Along with Jim, I don't see any constitutional issue here, but I do see some problems on the church's end.

Last week I talked about an opportunity I had to experience worshipping God in spirit and in truth during our college's Christian Worldview week. That was during the Monday chapel. I went back Wednesday expecting and anticipating more of the same - I was sadly disappointed.

I sat through a boring, poorly delievered speech (not sermon) on the evils of liberalism, etc. I am as conservative as they come. I agreed with most (if not all) of what the speaker was saying, but I did not want to hear that from the pulpit. All I could see was an evangelical version of the Holy Roman Empire, reading to go out and convert (by any means neccessary) all the infidel liberals. I went to chapel to be challenged and inspired from God's Word, not to hear the latest on the conservative political agenda.

There are many Christian organizations that are set up to engage the political system, but the Church is not of them. We compromise our mission when we attempt to join a conservative agenda to reaching souls for Christ.

I am afraid the evangelical church in America is in danger of becoming just another political demographic for candidates to woo come election time.

Christians neglected their duty to be involved politically until the 1980's, but now we have swung the pendulum too far to the other side. We are no longer neglecting our politically duty in favor of our Christian faith, we are neglecting our Christian faith in favor of our political agenda.

Update: Mark Daniels has more here

posted by Unknown at 10:09 AM 1 comments

1 Comments:

  • Aaron: I obviously agree with you here.

    The politicized Church is in danger of eliminating Christ from its life.

    Furthermore, this politicized Church endangers all Christians striving to share the Good News of Jesus.

    Instead of trying to persuade people of Christ's Lordship with the "gentleness and reverence" that Peter commends in the New Testament, these political Christians thump enemies, perceived and real, with condemnation and an air of moral superiority.

    The possibility of backlash against Christianity, already somewhat apparent, grows as the politicized Church strays further and further away from Christ.

    The cause of Christ-centered living is tarred by the sub-Christian Pharisaism touted in the politicized Church, right and left.

    I hope that the upcoming TV program gets few viewers and that Senator Frist gets the message that this is a really bad idea. More importantly, I hope that the Church understands how horrible it is when we allow the Church and our proclamation of Christ to become subordinated agents of partisan politics, instead of ambassadors for Christ!

    Thanks for your post!

    Blessings in Christ,
    Mark Daniels

    By Blogger Mark Daniels, at 4/18/2005 1:49 PM  

Post a Comment