Warren knows God doesn't chow down on Doritos or caviar. What he fails to see, however, is that there is no difference in principle between the old animal sacrifice theology and his own. Surely the same principle applies to emotional gratification. He is still manifestly talking about the care and feeding of God. His God, like an insecure boyfriend, seems to need emotional stroking.
Lo que puede ser amenazado, lo que puede ser sacudido, lo que temes no puede sostenerse, está destinado a estrellarse. No te hundas con el barco. Deja que lo que está destinado a convertirse en el pasado se desvanezca. Cree que el verdadero tú es el que te llama desde el futuro. Si es un tú más triste, será uno más sabio. Y el amanecer seguirá a la oscuridad tarde o temprano. El renacimiento nunca puede venir sin la muerte.
I bet you've seen the fundamentalist bumper sticker that says, God said it! I believe it! That settles it! It must be a typo because what the driver really means is, I said it! God believes it! That settles it!
Fundamentalists offer us a loving God who is some kind of divine stalker.
I wonder how appropriate it is to try to 'argue someone into the kingdom.' Many apologists hotly deny any such charge, but I don't believe them. The tenor of almost all apologetics literature makes it plain that this is their intent.
Warren knows God doesn't chow down on Doritos or caviar. What he fails to see, however, is that there is no difference in principle between the old animal sacrifice theology and his own. Surely the same principle applies to emotional gratification. He is still manifestly talking about the care and feeding of God. His God, like an insecure boyfriend, seems to need emotional stroking.