Aren’t GPS devices fascinating? I’ve got a mondo cheapie version, nothing fancy, but it is still amazing how accurate it is. Just the idea of somehow being in “contact” with satellites circling the earth is enough to thrill my inner geek.
Why mention this? Well, this little post is sorta like firing up the GPS and getting a “fix” on where we are. I hope the wonderful folks who read my blog (I purposefully omit those who read it while seething and otherwise seeking to find a way to argue every point, and you know who you are!) know that I truly make this Internet recource a high priority. I invest a lot of time on it. And so pretty much as much for me as for everyone else, I thought I’d stop and get a “fix” on where we are going currently on the blog in relationship to the series of articles I’ve been writing, upcoming projects in the ministry, etc.
Dave Hunt—ongoing in that the next Berean Call newsletter will be trying to come up with a defense on the Hebrew original of Acts 1-15 stuff.
Islam series in response to Shaifullah and Azmy.
Matthew 23 response to Armstrong and The Catholic Verses (finishing up that series).
Other current topics: postmodernism/Emergent Church | Mouw and Modern Mormonism | Da Vinci Code Madness | David Cloud’s Anti-Calvinism Campaign
Upcoming topics: Obviously, what I’m preparing to write on and speak on and debate on takes up my thinking and hence the direction of my blog. My upcoming debates this year include the anti-Lordship, non-repentance theology of Bob Wilkin (April), the inclusivism of modern Rome (June), and possibly even topics related to the claims of the Jesus Seminar, Da Vinci Code, etc., later in the year. Writing wise I want to be working in both the Christian worldview area as well as, Lord willing, an in-depth exegesis of John 6. Also, the justification topic is alive and well, and I will be reviewing/interacting with the article by Michael F. Bird, “Incorporated Righteousness” in JETS, June 2004, which not only confirms what I said about Mark Seifrid (the consistency of how scholarship reads him is amazing in light of the eruption that came from my review of his works) but it likewise takes note of The God Who Justifies and at one point disagrees with what the author thinks is my contention. More about this on the DL tomorrow, Lord willing.
Wow. That should keep me busy. 🙂