He was right from what I’ve heard of him, but I have not read the book in question.
Right about what? He wasn’t right about Hegel.
He was right about where the country is headed. That’s for sure.
Where’s that? (I’m new to Schaeffer and don’t know that much about him.)
If he’s the same Schaeffer we are thinking about, he has pointed out many of the changes that were about to occur, such as what is in the public sphere during these days. Such as what the right, including myself perceive as threats against our religious liberties.
I want to learn more about him. What changes? What is in the public sphere? What threatens your religious liberty?
I’ll just say he’s a Christian Apologetics guy. He’s against Christians not being able pray in school. He concluded that one day the Christians would slowly be subject to the constant Christmas problems, and the government stepping in against Church businesses, and passing laws against preaching against homosexuality, and that sort of thing. By the way, do you know why I have to constantly hit the submit button fo the stupid post to send?
You shouldn’t have to constantly hit the submit button. When you press it, just wait a little while for it. Otherwise i don’t know what’s going on with these stinken computers!
We have rights in this country and have freedom of religion. What church “businesses”? We have free speech. We will always be allowed to preach against homos. And they will always be allowed to preach their lifestyle too.
Not in California we can’t.
In CA you can’t what?
Bump!
???
I finished the book last night. It would be tough to even call it a philosophical book. He does a very poor job of defining his terms, then as the book goes on, those terms begin to alter and change meaning. The book has more generalizations in it than… I don’t know, a book with a shit load of generalizations in it! 
Overall rating:
As a theology book: 6 out of 10
As a philosophy book: 2 out of 10
As a book attempting to be both theology and philosophy: 5 out of 10
He made a good effort, but comes up short.
In CA you can’t what?
In California, there are legal reprecussions for speaking against homosexuality, or rather an attempt is being made to do so.
Of course there are going to be attempts. Bills like that are in the same vein as Flag Burning Bills and other related things that will never get passed (and even if they do, they will get struck down in very short order), but they force people to vote on them and show their true colours.
That way if someone votes against the anti-gay bashing bill, in the next election people can point and say: He voted for hatespeech! Plays very well.
Frankly, the Dems need to do that sort of thing more – the Repubs have just about perfected it and it costs the Dems a lot because they haven’t been doing enough of it and they haven’t been doing it well enough.
What attempts? Perhaps attempts are being made, but we will never loose our right to free speach. It cannot be illegal to speak out against anything. [homosexuality, the president, the church, etc.]
Interesting! Modern politics is wild!
I read the article you embedded and for the life of me can’t see how it advanced the Christian ideal.
I am a firm believer in Hegel’s 3 part process for logical development. Though, I think he stole it from ancient Egyptian philosophy, but that’s another topic. He argues for an idealistic concept separate from the bounds of scientific materialist tenets. Boy, writing that sentence, I felt like I was back in the days of my old Communist party membership and teaching the prolos’ about how this applied to dialectical-materialism.
Anyway, Hegelian logic has place being compared to Christian spiritualism…
nuff said on this topic…
Neither can I. It seems to discredit Schaefer, but didn’t strengthen Christianity.
I think it makes sense.