![\"\"](\"https:\/\/4.bp.blogspot.com\/_b7Eh98KJ_qI\/TAmk4R2TaNI\/AAAAAAAAA-4\/3o9c7AYC5Cw\/s320\/7_quick_takes_sm.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\nYesterday, I posted about why I have a big problem with atheist activist P.Z. Myers<\/a>. \u00a0A lot of my commenters have turned out to disagree with me that it is wrong<\/strong> for atheists to desecrate the Eucharist. \u00a0I\u2019m going to respond to some of their arguments in a post that will go up around 9am today, but, in the meantime, feel free to weigh in<\/a>.<\/p>\n One of the worst reported stories this week was the debut of the iPhone Confession app, so I just want to use one of these quick takes to clear up the confusion. \u00a0Here are the facts:<\/p>\n Now you know!<\/p>\n And speaking of responding to misrepresented news stories, I have two new articles up at the Huffington Post <\/em>this week in response to the Live Action stings at Planned Parenthood. \u00a0I\u2019d appreciate it if you took a look:<\/p>\n \u201cWomen Are Casualties in High Profile Abortion Fight<\/a>\u201d \u201cPlanned Parenthood Slammed for Telling the Truth<\/a>\u201d If I\u2019m doing a round of clarifications, I want to put in a plug for an article my friend Ben sent me. \u00a0Every time I talk to Ben about theology, I can follow along for a bit, and it sounds reasonable, until suddenly everything goes upside-down or sideways. \u00a0He sent me this essay (\u201cWay Beyond Atheism: God Does Not (Not) Exist<\/a>\u201c) by Paul Wallace to help with the concept of a God without Being, and I figured I\u2019d pass it on to all of you for comment as well.<\/p>\n Clarifications in translation can be tricky little buggers. \u00a0Check out this fascinating article from Christianity Today<\/em><\/a> about how missionaries to Islamic countries are justifying dropping the phrase \u201cSon of God\u201d from their biblical translations. \u00a0Here\u2019s a quote:<\/p>\n The problem, however, far surpasses a theological argument between Muslims and Christians. In fact, the Qur\u2019an (At-Tawba <\/em>9:30) says God curses anyone who would utter the ridiculous blasphemy that Jesus could be ibnull\u00e2h<\/em>(\u201ca son of God\u201d). Not only do Muslims disagree with Christians about the identity and nature of Jesus, they also incur a curse for even mentioning the phrase \u201cSon of God.\u201dSo what can translators do to overcome this particular stumbling block? One option is to stick with \u201cSon of God\u201d and deal directly with the objection\u2014if Muslims overcome their fears to begin with. Alternatively, translators may find a word for son in the native language that carries metaphorical connotations. (Translations that opt for a phrase other than the literal \u201cSon of God\u201d commonly include it in the footnotes to preserve connection to the biblical authors\u2019 word choice.) Or, they can nuance it with a more descriptive phrase, such as \u201cspiritual Son of God\u201d or \u201cbeloved Son who comes from God.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n \u00a0<\/p>\n If you were trying to clarify your religion and distill it down to a single sentence, how would you do it? \u00a0A blogger asked, and a passel of theologians and pastors answered<\/a>. \u00a0J.L Wall of The League of Ordinary Gentleman read through the list and asked an interesting question<\/a>:<\/p>\n None of them take a path similar to Rabbi Hillel\u2019s famous line \u2014 \u201cWhat is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor: that is the whole Torah; all the rest is commentary; go and learn it.\u201d<\/p>\n \u2026Intriguingly (to me, at least), their replies are all the summary of a narrative: Creation, fall, God\u2019s love, redemption\/Jesus. My question (wanting to avoid arguments over the nature\/ethics of various religions), is this: does this indicate a general distinction between the two religious traditions over the literary nature of their respective Bibles?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n This last one\u2019s a bit of a stretch for a theme of clarifications, but the article is awesome, and I\u2019ve made it this far, so I\u2019m sticking it out. \u00a0In \u201cSatan\u2019s Accountant<\/a>\u201d Claire Hoffman wrote a fascination profile of the Mormon who was assigned by the state of Utah to sort out the financial records of the polygamist sect of cult leader Warren Jeffs. \u00a0So he\u2019s, uh, clarifying their finances. \u00a0Yeah.<\/p>\n Anyway, the article is great; here\u2019s an excerpt:<\/p>\n Now Wisan is in the midst of trying to do something that, to his knowledge, has never been done: set up a functioning economy on the still-smoldering ashes of a theocracy. It is up to him to privatize the trust\u2019s assets and get these radical believers on the grid, fiscally speaking. Wielding the blunt instrument of his accounting trade, he\u2019s trying to use homeownership, property taxes, subdivision ordinances, and a few fire hydrants and other infrastructure amenities to bring these outsiders into the modern economic world.<\/p>\n But those he\u2019s trying to help\u2014Jeffs\u2019 followers, including the police chief, two mayors, and virtually every resident\u2014have tried to foil him at each turn. Meanwhile, Jeffs continues to advise community leaders, despite the fact that he is serving two consecutive five-year-to-life sentences in a Utah state prison for rape as an accomplice.<\/p>\n The polygamists believe Wisan is an agent of the devil, he says, and want nothing to do with him. They came up with a name for him almost as soon as he arrived: state-ordained bishop\u2014S.O.B. for short.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n
\nWhen medical regulations are used as weapons in the fight over abortion, women and doctors get hurt.<\/p>\n
\nLive Action attacked Planned Parenthood for telling people how to exercise their medical rights. \u00a0Why should doctors be expected to lie to patients?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blogger.googleusercontent.com\/tracker\/4256452356987023523-5379957099235510999?l=www.unequally-yoked.com\")
<\/div>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"