You Can Get With This or You Can Get With That

I'm excited to introduce the "This for Thas" series.  For some time, I've been fascinated by how ideas that have real consequences are used without understanding where they come from.

This series then comes out of a frustration with "distinctions" - real distinctions that make a ton of difference if they are heeded.

What the bugger am I talking about. Ideas that are meant to stand alone for very important reasons, many times will get lumped in with another idea and thereby lose their distinction. The problem with this, is well... I'd rather just get to it. To name a few...

Human Error vs. Human Brokenness

Holy vs. Sacred

The Gospel vs. Implications of the Gospel (with a video featuring Mark Driscoll)

Infirmities vs. Sin

Neo-Reformed vs. Neo-Puritanism (more recent)

Election to Salvation vs. Election to Service

Greatness of God vs. Love of God (Special Guest Bloggers on this one)

Simple vs. Simplicity

Tribes vs. Families


The hope for this series is to address the need to distinguish ideas that are usually lumped together.  By lumping these ideas together, we generally begin to define what one idea is (God's wrath) as more important and sometimes more defining than than its companion neighbor idea (God's love) is.  Hopefully the clarity we can achieve from this will help us approach our faith and other people with our faith more honestly and carefully. We can all agree that being careful is becoming more and more necessary in how we talk about God and others' beliefs in the public and private squares of our world.