A date hasn’t been set, but I am planning to migrate my website from WordPress to Hugo soon, and to change domain names.
Not to worry, this domain will still be active for some months after the change occurs, and will redirect to the new site.
There are several reasons I am making this change, but these changes are not for everybody:
I like working with Markdown
Non-static features, such as comments, are more of a hassle for me to maintain than the benefits I’ve gained from them
Updates and hosting are much lower cost for me if the site is static
More opportunities to safely experiment with things like custom template designs
For most people, I would recommend WordPress in a heartbeat and currently maintain multiple WordPress sites for paid clients, but as a programmer I personally love coding my own work and prefer to keep costs down for personal projects.
After months of intense investigation, it turns out that the “Q” of QAnon infamy is none other than Q from the Q Continuum! “I thought the local elections for one of those pieces of land was far too dull,” admitted the interdimensional being last Tuesday. “I was going to use the Capitol Riot of ’21 as an argument against humanity when I meet Picard for the first time. However, those humans have that invasive habit of recording everything and when I tried this argument one of Jean Luc’s engineers spotted my face stirring up a crowd outside the Capitol Dome. Humans are so emotional and immediately decided that the argument was moot upon seeing me there.”
When asked why he would stir up such a dangerous event in world history, Q admitted things went out of control but pled innocence. “It wasn’t I who killed any of those poor people. Those humans did that to themselves, with their flags, their falsified data, and their fighting instincts.”
Towards the end of the interview Q mused, “I just wanted to add some pizazz to an otherwise boring event. Don’t the humans do similar things when they’re bored?”
When discussion regarding the qualifications of a pastor is brought up, it almost always is brought up in the light of sexual sin (as in the case of the late Ravi Zacharias). However, there are other key qualifications in the scriptures and I’m concerned that we’re not sufficiently holding pastors accountable for them.
For example, I know one of my former pastors had been observed inebriated, which is a disqualifying behavior according to Titus 1:7, especially if the behavior is recurring. Instead of being held accountable for it, everybody who knew about it let it slide with little more than a grumble. Decades later, when a social network built specifically for the purpose of adulterous relationships was hacked and the emails were leaked, his was one of them.
Another key qualification I want to focus on today for a pastoral role is not “greedy for gain” (Titus 1:7) which is refracted in 1 Timothy 3:3 as “not a lover of money”.
Now, to be clear, being an owner (which is rather to be viewed as a stewardship, in God’s economy) of significant money is not sinful if gained in an honest manner. Some people in ministry don’t have profit matching or similar employee benefits. Nor do they have the income out of pocket to contribute a sufficient amount towards retirement, and are left to pursue investments in order to achieve a reasonable retirement. This pursuit, if done in an honest fashion, is being responsible and not greedy. However, the Bible is repeatedly clear that if you love your money, which would include honest money, this is a root for all kinds of evil (1 Timothy 6:10).
I would propose, then, that in whatever manner your church or ministry would expect to handle an accusation of adultery against your pastor, whether that be a suspension pending investigation or some similar measure, so too should you handle an accusation of financial fraud.
Man, 2021 escalated quickly! With the increased concerns and distrust of public platforms owned by big companies, “something’s gotta give”. That “something” will probably be hallmark Web 3.0 features which have been in the works for a while, as well as some Web 2.0 applications that lost popularity because people didn’t want to (or in some cases could not afford to) pay money, at least until now. But what is “Web 3.0”? Since it is difficult to define the entirety of Web 3.0 before it becomes mainstream, here are some elements I’m expecting to come from it.
The first thing to expect is an explosion of self-hosted solutions for the Open Web, such as WordPress, Mastodon, and many others. While that explosion may cool off as quickly as that explosion became hot, it is the first knee-jerk reaction to expect from the distrustful, the censored, as well as for those who wish for a quieter, more thoughtful experience. The hosting has become cheaper as of late – one can self-host a fairly secure WordPress site for as little as $5 a month if they are technically minded, or have someone take care of the technical side for them for as little as $12-15 a month if they are not so technically minded.
The next “big thing” I expect to happen is for Ethereum (or at least its underlying concept of decentralized applications) to start becoming more mainstream, as the underlying technology is resistant to even government-level censorship, though currently at the cost of comparatively slow page-loading times.
At its core, decentralization will be the name of the game for Web 3.0, and will give companies like Facebook a run for their money. This is why Twitter is already researching how it could potentially morph into a decentralized system in the years ahead.
This will enable both good and bad.
Let’s start with the bad – to be certain, bad people ranging from human traffickers to fake news vendors and everybody in between will harness this to their advantage. This won’t render catching the criminals impossible, it’ll just mean they can’t be easily censored and catching them via the Internet will require a change in strategy.
However, this also opens up the potential for many good things! Soon we may be able to transmit money digitally without the need (or the trust) of a third party vendor, and with increased security measures. As of right now, you can donate the Ether cryptocurrency directly to my decentralized domain name, codextypes.eth, without the need for entrusting PayPal or Venmo’s data warehouses to protect your sensitive financial data. For a transaction fee, I can convert this into fiat currencies where it is legal. In the US, for example, it is currently allowed provided I report any capital gains.
This will also enable religious freedom in new and exciting ways, such as Christian communities being able to archive and share digital copies of the Scriptures in their local languages, both text and audio, without censorship from persecuting governments.
This also has the potential to enable people who previously couldn’t afford a WordPress subscription or hosting plan to have a place where they can share their thoughts and beliefs with full control over their data.
Every major iteration of the Internet won’t help or solve the human condition, but it will attempt to improve upon the technical pain points that came with the previous iteration of the Internet, and that’s something to be excited about!
When conscientious Conservative Christians object to actions of the Republican Party which concern truthfulness and, more recently, Rule of Law, it seems a growing mainstream response is to question the conscientious objector to see if they believe against their personal Shibboleth, or to outright accuse them of transgressing said Shibboleth.
For example, in raising an objection to a false quote on Facebook regarding the 2nd Amendment, instead of being told “you’re right, I did misquote that, didn’t I?” I was asked if I still agreed with the 2nd Amendment (which I do, of course).
Another example I’ve seen was someone who raised an objection to David Barton’s false, revisionist approach to history. The response to my friend’s objection was “are you promoting secular history?” No, he wasn’t. He was objecting to falsehood.
This behavior extends to the President, a professing Christian, using put-downs like “too dumb or too corrupt” and name-calling like “RINO” as a means of discrediting Republicans challenging his behavior.
It appears as though Christian Republicans are increasingly clinging to the worldly comfort of political power by proactively searching for a Bulverism to commit against others, in some cases their own brother or sister, when they’ve been commanded to live differently.
If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all.
2020 has been a tumultuous year, and most of the commentary has been far from level-headed. Compound this with censorship by social networks on the one hand mixed with blatant misinformation on the other, and you encounter a ridiculous amount of Internet noise.
In my attempt to cut through the noise, I have found that just as the best advice given to me were by trusted people who weren’t afraid to tell me if my ideas or actions were wrong, so also some of the best Conservative commentary will come not from the Conservatives who excuse moral failings but rather from the Conservatives who are not afraid to say when the Republican Party and their supporters are working against the best interests of the majority involved.
Disclaimer: The following recommendations are for individual pieces and not a blanket recommendation or agreement of everything the authors have written. Neither are these recommendations ones for which I agree 100%, but I found these pieces to be excellent food for thought.
I’m reminded of the old religious maxim, “Error has no rights.” That impulse lies at the heart of much of the Christian nationalist/integralist critique of classical liberalism. That impulse lies at the heart of the speech code and the metastasizing intolerance of woke capitalism.
In a culture stripped of existential humility, the only valuable speech is the speech of those who speak existential truth. Dissent harms the body politic by introducing error. Thus “free speech”—as an independent liberty interest—cannot possibly be in the common good. The common good is advanced only by truth, and thus only truth has rights.
In other words, Third Wave Anti-Racism has become a fundamentalist religion. And woe be unto the heretics.
I am anti-racist. As in, I condemn any form of discrimination that is on the basis of someone’s skin color or ethnic background. I am still learning how deep and how wicked the legacy and consequences of racism are, and you should too. American Conservative Christianity has much to blame in this regard. However, all of that does not inherently require you to submit to whatever labels or quasi-religious movements the crowds demand that you do. Such demanding behavior is reminiscent of the AIDS ribbon sketch:
Some Republicans and former Republicans will be shocked to find that former allies may consider them as bad as or worse than Democrats who embrace abortion on demand and value sexual autonomy more than religious liberty or civic virtue. They will be stunned that this evaluation will be based on their embrace or rejection of soon-to-be-former President Trump. Some will be horrified at being told that they are on the wrong side not only of Biblical revelation or the Constitution, but of common grace, natural law, and the best of philosophy. I am not shocked. I am grieved.
Last, but not least, I also recommend reading The Dangerous Idolatry of Christian Trumpism, also by David French, as it cuts at the heart of the problem plaguing significant numbers of Conservative Christians right now: idolatry. French writes:
We’re way, way past concerns for the church’s “public witness.” We’re way past concerns over whether the “reputation” of the church will survive this wave of insanity. There is no other way to say this. A significant movement of American Christians—encouraged by the president himself—is now directly threatening the rule of law, the Constitution, and the peace and unity of the American republic.
I am of the personal belief that when persecution against Christianity comes to America, it will not necessarily be on the basis of believing in Jesus. Rather, I am very concerned that American Christians will have brought this judgment on themselves from their unrepentance in similar fashion to how the Israelites disobeyed and the pagan nations were allowed to conquer and exile them. The difference between us and Israel is that God never made a nationally-restorative covenant with America (beyond the promise that all will confess that Jesus is Lord) but He did promise the salvation and national restoration of Israel.
The situation among Conservative Christians is now dire and I am concerned too few will take this seriously too late.
I am blessed to have my hope not placed in a movement or in a subculture, but in Jesus alone and in His authoritative words in the Scriptures alone.
Fellow Christians, let Him be your rock. Not your President, not your Supreme Court, not your electors. Jesus alone.
Some trust in chariots and some in horses, but we trust in the name of the LORD our God.