<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>the Jesus Manifesto - Latest Comments in Going Public with My Privates (part 2 of 3)</title><link>http://jesusmanifesto.disqus.com/</link><description>following the way of Jesus in the land of our captivity</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 18:06:01 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Going Public with My Privates (part 2 of 3)</title><link>http://www.jesusmanifesto.com/2008/07/31/going-public-with-my-privates-part-2-of-3/#comment-1065604</link><description>jurisnaturalist, &lt;br&gt;not so much that 'taking faith public' is wrong, but that it is exactly the wrong way of thinking about it.  Rather, faith is always public, never needing to be "made public".  This already being public is the community of faith, as I will argue in my last installment.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">geoffh</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 18:06:01 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Going Public with My Privates (part 2 of 3)</title><link>http://www.jesusmanifesto.com/2008/07/31/going-public-with-my-privates-part-2-of-3/#comment-1063333</link><description>I am re-reading this post and re-reading it.  &lt;br&gt;Are you making the case that taking faith public, or better, taking faith political, is wrong?&lt;br&gt;Both the Wallis crowd and the NAEers are equally out of line in this sense.  The argument runs parallel to that of Libertarianism.&lt;br&gt;Yet, we continue to desire community.  But we treat the church as if it were not enough.  Like the man who will not be satisfied with his wife but must run about with mistresses, we desire connections with other people.  We are merely promiscuous.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">jurisnaturalist</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2008 14:15:30 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>