Introversion

I've blogged before on the challenges of being an introvert, which even today often comes with a stigma (good luck with job interviews when you're hopelessly terrible at making good first impressions).  I was inspired to bring up the topic again by Glennon from Momastery's recent post on the subject.  I can relate to a lot of what she says (I'm not a big fan of telephone calls either).

Fortunately people (at least in the Western world) are generally more accepting these days of introverts (and geeks, and gay folk, and people of mixed race, to name the other major ways in which I fail to conform to the majority).  At my current age I can embrace being different, but it wasn't until I hit my 30s that I really began to feel comfortable in my own skin.  And even now sometimes it can be a struggle.

So, for those extroverts who have never quite known what to make of me (and other introverts), here's a helpful primer that's been making its way around the internet.  (It should be possible to enlarge the picture to readable size in your browser.)



(Source: http://romanjones.deviantart.com/art/How-to-Live-with-Introverts-Guide-Printable-320818879)

Quote of the Week

"I'm still struggling to break free of the notion that faith is an argument to be won. Lord have mercy."
-Rachel Held Evans

God knows it's a tough habit to break...

Inerrantists vs. Inerrantists

Boy, get a little busy and suddenly that post I've left sitting unfinished is several weeks old.  Anyway, I thought this essay was worth pointing out:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/slacktivist/2013/10/22/strange-fire-fight-exposes-charade-of-biblical-inerrancy/

It highlights a very problematic point for biblical inerrantists: if the Bible is indeed free of error and intended by God to be usable as a clearly stated instruction manual for all people in all places and times, why is there such vast and irreconcilable disagreement between different groups of believers who consider themselves inerrantists?

The short answer, of course, is "Satan," by which the speaker always means that everyone but the speaker's group has been led astray by the enemy.  Being an inerrantist also means never admitting to the possibility that one's own interpretation of the Bible might be in error (at least not in any significant way), since ultimately there is no clear dividing line between biblical inerrancy and personal inerrancy.

Note that this applies primarily to fundamentalists like McArthur and not to all inerrantists equally, since more moderate evangelicals have a far more nuanced take on biblical inerrancy, but the problem never completely goes away.  At least, not until we stop treating the Bible like a divinely perfect rulebook and allow it to speak to us on its own terms.