| | Comments (5)

I took a break from the internet from a few days (and should, in theory still be on said break), and when I surfed the liberal blogs this evening they were awash with invective regarding John Stott. Clearly I missed something because I have no idea what brought that on. What did I miss?


David Brooks got sick of hearing many liberals saying things that assumed Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson represent evangelicals in any way, which is a ridiculous notion for many reasons. So he picked Stott as a better candidate and then said Stott is less of an extremist in his views but much calmer and more polite in his mannerisms. The editorial is here.

I hadn't heard of this until now myself, and Google took more searching than I expected to be able to figure out what was going on. Perhaps it's worth a post.

it was a widely distributed article, it was even in yesterday's palo alto daily news, which reposts many NYT op-eds

Just curious, what were they fuming against?

Heh heh, sorry, I went straight this this entry and didn't see the top one.

Thanks for looking things up for me.

Leave a comment


    The Parablemen are: , , and .



Books I'm Reading

Fiction I've Finished Recently

Non-Fiction I've Finished Recently

Books I've Been Referring To

I've Been Listening To

Games I've Been Playing

Other Stuff


    thinking blogger
    thinking blogger

    Dr. Seuss Pro

    Search or read the Bible

    Example: John 1 or love one another (ESV)

  • Link Policy
Powered by Movable Type 5.04