I recently spoke on leadership from II Chronicles 26:1-21. King (CEO) Uzziah was an exceptional leader, due to four best practices he adopted. He also failed spectacularly because he forgot the fourth of these later in his career. All of us in leadership should know and apply these best practices to flourish both personally and professionally.
Leave a CommentHome » Archives for Stan Wallace » Page 16
Author: Stan Wallace
Book Review– Western Christians in Global Mission: What’s the Role of the North American Church?
Published August 24, 2017
Does the world need North Americans to continue sending missionaries worldwide to finish the task of seeing all people hear the gospel? Or have we done our part, and now it is time for those in other nations to finish the task in their homelands? A recent article taking the first position was criticized in a response in another journal here, highlighting the two opposing views. I just finished a book that charts a helpful “middle course” between the two.
Leave a CommentWhat Are We? The Three Answers Underlying Many Spiritual, Moral and Political Disagreements (And Why One Answer Is Better Than The Other Two) Post 8 Of 8
Published August 17, 2017
Can we hope to find common ground in “the public square” over the critically important social issues of our day? Over the past seven weeks I’ve illustrated how the three different answers to “What are we” determines our answer to this question. But our view of what we are also determines our view of whether abortion and euthanasia are ever justified, whether the gospel makes sense, how Christians best grow in their faith, what constitutes “ministry,” and so much more. Let me explain…
Leave a CommentWhat Are We? The Three Answers Underlying Many Spiritual, Moral and Political Disagreements (And Why One Answer Is Better Than The Other Two) Post 7 Of 8
Published August 10, 2017
The third answer to “What are we” is that we are essentially nothing. Therefore each person should define his or her individual “essence” and pursue whatever activities he or she believes will lead to individual flourishing. On this view promoting the common good is nothing more than ensuring everyone has the freedom and ability to pursue one’s own definition of flourishing and “the good life.” But is this right? I think not. Here are three reasons why not…
1 CommentWhat Are We? The Three Answers Underlying Many Spiritual, Moral, and Political Disagreements (And Why One Answer Is Better Than the Other Two) Post 6 of 8
Published August 3, 2017
Understanding what we are determines how we treat one another. In this series I’ve argued we are essentially a soul-body combination (Substance Dualism). But some say we are essentially material—only a physical thing. Over the past few weeks I’ve discussed five reasons given for this view, and showed why these arguments fail. We now come to the final argument for Physicalism.
Leave a CommentWhat Are We? The Three Answers Underlying Many Spiritual, Moral And Political Disagreements (And Why One Answer Is Better Than The Other Two) Post 5 Of 8
Published July 27, 2017
Are there any good reasons to think we are purely physical, and not a unity of soul and body? Last week I considered four reasons that fail. This week I’ll consider a fifth.
Some argue that we should have “blind” faith in science, believing that though now it cannot explain all we are physically, one day it will. I’ll share four reasons this is wrong thinking.
1 CommentWhat Are We? The Three Answers Underlying Many Spiritual, Moral And Political Disagreements (And Why One Answer Is Better Than The Other Two) Post 4 Of 8
Published July 20, 2017
All disagreements about what promotes the good life—human flourishing and the common good—depend on one’s answer to the question “What is it to be human?” The last two weeks I’ve argued we are a unity of soul and body. This week I’ll consider the second answer: “To be human is to be a purely physical thing—a human body.” Here I’ll discuss four reasons people give in favor of this view, and next week I’ll discuss another two reasons. I’ll also explain why I think these reasons fail–why physicalism is not the right answer to the question.
Leave a CommentWhat Are We? The Three Answers Underlying Many Spiritual, Moral And Political Disagreements (And Why One Answer Is Better Than The Other Two) Post 3 Of 8
Published July 13, 2017
What we believe we are, determines how we approach life, how we define human flourishing, and how we think about political, cultural, moral and spiritual issues. Last week I offered three reasons to believe we have a soul, in addition to a body. This then grounds our equality and dignity as human persons. This week I offer three more reasons.
Leave a CommentWhat are We? The Three Answers Underlying Many Spiritual, Moral and Political Disagreements (and Why One Answer is Better Than The Other Two) POST 2 OF 8
Published July 6, 2017
We want to believe in equality, human dignity, value and worth, and the possibility of human flourishing and the common good. But these ideas make sense only if we have a shared human nature that makes us all the same and equally valuable. This shared human nature is not part of our physical dimension (our physical “substance”), but is part of our immaterial dimension (our immaterial “substance”). Therefore Substance Dualism is the only way to ground and defend these ideas.
1 CommentWhat are We? The Three Answers Underlying Many Spiritual, Moral and Political Disagreements (and Why One Answer is Better Than The Other Two) Post 1 of 8
Published June 29, 2017
I write a lot about “human flourishing”—living a whole and healthy life marked by “shalom” (complete well-being). Yet to define what true flourishing is for a human, we must first define what a human is, for different types of things flourish in different environments.
4 Comments