Monthly Archives: January 2010

WebSmart TV

Posted on by
Reply
Websmart TV

WebSmart TV - the basics of the web in about a minute.

Are you a regular person who is trying to make sense of all the new terms you hear being tossed around in conversations and in written messages such as: tweets, RSS, web 2.0, friend (used as a noun), blog, and many others? Does it make your brain hurt to think of figuring it all out? Well, Headstand Media has a new tool made to serve you! It’s called WebSmart TV and you can visit it online at http://websmart.tv

What is WebSmart TV?

Headstand Media (the Chicago web design company I founded in 2007) noticed a need in the marketplace for a resource that normal people (like you) could access to educate themselves about the web 2.0 world we now live in. Rather than provide a lot of long-winded, high fog-level technical articles (which you can certainly get elsewhere), we decided to create a video blog (vlog) of short one-minute videos that each explain one aspect of the web 2.0 world, in plain everyday language. Simply put, WebSmart TV offers the basics of the web in about a minute.

Who is WebSmart TV?

The Headstand Media team writes, acts and produces these videos ourselves using our own time, talents and “prosumer” level equipment. Taylor Birkey writes our scripts. Benjamin Nelson is our on-camera talent. Matt Ritsman does all the audio and video recording and production. Kyle Williams helps us get the site optimized for search engines and social media. We all contributed to the design of the site, but it was mostly Benjamin’s idea. We believe that if we can do this, then anyone can do it… including our clients!

So, I encourage you to check out the new site. We have launched it with 5 videos covering:

There is also a video explaining “What is WebSmart TV?” We plan to add a new video every week!

We’ve provided many ways for you to stay connected with WebSmart TV through: Twitter, Facebook, RSS feeds and our YouTube channel. If you like what you see, you can easily share the links with your friends and associates, and spread the word about this educational resource.

House Churches are Isolationist and Cult-Like?

Posted on by
2

Question: Are house churches more likely than conventional churches to become isolationist and cult-like?

Apparently at least one blogger thinks so, and had the guts to quote George Barna’s research to support his assertion! Author and researcher George Barna responds to this assertion in a recent blog post of his own.

First, I found the alleged bloggers perspective offensive and mis-informed based upon personal experience.

Second, I find George’s response and perspective enlightening, especially as it relates to the potential of conventional churches to become “cult-like” – but in a different way than what many would admit is all too common.

I also appreciate George’s perspective on the tendency of people to see what they want to see in research data, and to manipulate it to support their view – as did the alleged blogger. I have read several of the books where Barna reports on his research related to house churches, and nowhere does his data suggest anything close to what this blogger alleges. In fact, just the opposite is the case, which perhaps explains why more and more Americans are finding their spiritual needs and Christian growth experience better met through smaller, in-home meetings or “house churches.” In my opinion, it is a trend that will increase if the conventional church continues to resist making the gospel relevant to a postmodern, post-Christian culture.

George Barna

George Barna's Blog Website

Click on the banner above to read George Barna’s blog post on this topic.

Want to learn more about the history of the house church, its biblical basis in the New Testament and how it is a viable structure today? Visit The House Church Book website to learn more.

The House Church Book Cover

The House Church Book - Cover

Republican Revolution

Posted on by
2

I am thinking that if:

  • You are a economic and social conservative
  • You are concerned about the sad shape of politics and the economy in Illinois
  • You have lost confidence in the Illinois Republican Party to actually be “the party of Lincoln” (which would be very different than being just like the Illinois Democratic Party)
  • You are fed up with “machine-style” politics as usual and the “good ol’ boy” network of political insiders
  • You are looking for a radical change in political leadership style from a political outsider
  • You yearn for transparency and authenticity in government
  • You are tired of career politicians who use public office for self advancement

Then you need to seriously consider supporting Dan Proft for Governor by voting for him in the Illinois Primary Election on February 2, 2010.

Dan Proft for Illinois Governor

Check out Dan Proft for Illinois Governor (Republican) in 2010

I’ve been following this guy since June 2009 when he sent me the first campaign email and I was impressed. Check out Dan’s very informative, well designed, well-connected, open and transparent, web 2.0 website!

REGISTER TO VOTE

FIND YOUR POLLING PLACE

DOES VOTING REALLY MATTER?

EXERCISE YOUR FREEDOM – VOTE!

Cisco is back on WLS

Posted on by
Reply
Cisco Cotto

Cisco Cotto on WLS Radio 890 AM

Fellow Oak Parker and Calvary Memorial Church attender Cisco Cotto was recently employed at WIND 560 AM Talk Radio, where I would listen to him on the John and Cisco show in the mornings. Now he is back at WLS 890 with Roe Conn in the afternoons from 2-6 PM. He was at WLS in the mornings previously to his WIND stint.

Here is a link to a great interview with Cisco in our local newspaper, The Wednesday Journal.

Congratulations Cisco!

Work to End Slavery

Posted on by
2

A group of friends have formed a Local Abolitionists group in Oak Park, Illinois, to fight slavery, human trafficking and the sex trade. More information can be found at LocalAbolitionists.org.

Their next event is the showing of a film called At the End of Slavery – the battle for justice in our time. It is scheduled for Monday evening, January 18 (Martin Luther King Day) at the Oak Park Public Library.

Get Event Details

I encourage as many of you as possible to attend and find out more about International Justice Mission.

RSVP

Can Christians be Capitalists?

Posted on by
2

I just listened to Jay W. Richards, author of Money, Greed, and God: Why Capitalism Is the Solution and Not the Problem (HarperOne, 2009) give a talk at the American Enterprise Institute to a predominantly young evangelical Christian audience, addressing this question (Listen Here).

I would have to agree with Jay that the answers is “Yes” when “capitalism” is properly understood and practiced. This view is counter to a growing number of young American evangelicals who are buying into the viewpoints of evangelical activists such as Jim Wallis and Tony Campolo, who criticize the “capitalist” system and argue that in a nation as wealthy as America the government can and should take care of the poor.

It was good to hear Jay make a very good point that in order to be a Christian, there is no imperative that one must be a capitalist. Rather, Christians my hold to many different economic and political viewpoints and remain Christian. However, this does not mean that all the possible viewpoints are equally valid. Jay states that he believes “capitalism” rightly understood actually reflects the Christian worldview and values more closely than any other economic system, and that the Christian worldview actually contributed strongly to the rise of capitalism. I agree.

What do you think?

American Enterprise Institute

Posted on by
Reply

I wanted to make a few more resources available if you are interested in conservatism, and conservative economics and politics, especially from an American Evangelical perspective. These resources come to me from my son Marshall, who is currently employed in Washington DC, and is definitely in the “minority” when it comes to public policy in our nation’s capital. He has attended AEI events there and I have benefitted from the resources he has shared below.

The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) has a long history of promoting the culture of free enterprise. Last year they embarked on The Project on Values and Capitalism, seeking to engage in a conversation with evangelical college students on the topics of economics, values and faith. Here are links to resources that I found very enlightening.

  • Marvin Olasky – Speaking on: “Social Justice, Free Markets and Evangelicals” – (audio file)
  • Jay W. Richards speaking on: “Can Christians Be Capitalists? – (audio file)
  • P. J. Hill, professor of economics at Wheaton College, discussed the Christian doctrines of Imago Dei and the Fall and their implications for a Christian understanding of social institutions. A transcript of his remarks are available here.

Looking for more? Try: American Enterprise Institute YouTube Channel

Additionally, Arthur Brooks, President of AEI spoke on Thursday, January 7, at Calvin College on: “The New American Culture War.” Read his Wall Street Journal article about The Real Culture War Is Over Capitalism: Tea parties, ‘ethical populism,’ and the moral case against redistribution.

Government is not a corrective device

Posted on by
1

Last night riding home on the EL, I read this in Common Sense Economics, on page 83.

Government is not a corrective device.

People have a tendency to think of government, particularly a democratically elected government, as a corrective device. They act as if government is something like a pinch hitter  who can always be counted on to deliver the game-winning hit. This view is false. A democratic government is merely a method of social organization, a process through which individuals collectively make choices and carry out activities. There is no assurance that a policy favored by a majority will promote economic progress. In fact there is good reason to expect that, unless the impulses of the majority are restained, even popularly elected governments will often adopt policies that undermine economic progress.

They go on to illustrate their point with a hypothetical illustration, and then come to this conclusion:

When voters pay in proportion to the benefits received, all voters will lose if the government action is unproductive, and all will gain if it is productive. Therefore, when the benefits and costs of voters are directly related, large majorities will oppose unproductive projects in favor of productive ones.

Hmmm, this seems to be common sense true to me. So, I wonder how this applies to the “healthcare” debate? Any thoughts?