Advertisement
Scot McKnight is a widely-recognized authority on the New Testament, early Christianity, and the historical Jesus. He is the Karl A. Olsson Professor in Religious Studies at North Park University (Chicago, Illinois). A popular and witty speaker, Dr. McKnight has given interviews on radios across the nation, has appeared on television, and is regularly asked to speak in local churches and educational events. Dr. McKnight obtained his Ph.D. at the University of Nottingham (1986). Click to continue reading Scot McKnight's Bio...
Daily Prayers:
Emerging Movement:
Other sites I frequent:
Recommended Online Readings:
Scholarly Books I've written:
Scholarship Online:
Stuff online:
I know that I'll be throwing cold water on the humour (bad pun), but I cringe at this cartoon. While it is meant not to be offensive, this kind of cartoon does not do well to bridge some gaps of hurt between the Church and those of native (espicially Inuit) descent... espceially in Canada and those states with large populations of Native American descent... I know that we can't be overly worried with being "PC," but in my opinion this comes too close to crosssing that "bad taste" line because it is directly associated with an ethnic people group.
Dad, I sure am glad we're Presbyterians!
Thanks, Henry (#21) - for pointing out your concern about this cartoon. I missed it, but now can see what you mean. One of my professors at seminary lived and worked with the Inuit for years - and I would not want to offend them (or other native people).
My joke was going to be about the rather bizarre sport of ice-fishing (yes I'm biased against cold-weather sports)....but I'll leave that for now.
Since the discussion turned toward being PC, how about those that balk at those of us in churches that believe baptism is always to be by immersion? Frankly, I would find being teased about how I was baptized more offensive than being teased about eating whale meat raw.
Just sayin'. Anywho, I think it's a funny cartoon. Maybe it just just say "Arctic baptism?"
Isn't this proof that we are so off base on interpreting the Biblical narrative into our generation?
We hold to a form of "baptising" because... why? that is what they did then?
What was the significance?
Where did the idea come from?
WHAT POLIITCAL SIGNIFICANCE DIDI IT HAVE?
What, ultimately, was the point?
If we took those answers and applied it to today's story.......
would we build "baptistries" into our stages in churches?
Would we go to a local pool? Or anything even close?
Does the "believe and be baptised" statement look different today?
Just a question.
This cartoon shows the irony of "applying" such a tradition where it should be rethought in a new context.
IMHO
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.