Sunspots 512, part 2

This blog typically posts a selection of links each Wednesday, entitled "Sunspots." That was true yesterday.

Some important web pages have come to my attention, and here is another edition of Sunspots, annotating them.

FiveThirtyEight, which is not a religious site, but examines various statistical matters, considers the question of religion among prisoners in the USA. The professed religion of prisoners has significant differences from that of the population at large, and the article considers possible reasons for such differences.

Relevant interviews a missionary to Muslims, who points out that Christians have reacted strangely to ISIS/ISIL/whatever. The death of Coptic Christians was widely publicized, but the deaths of larger numbers of Muslims, also by ISIS, has not been. The missionary also said that ". . . prior to the breakout of ISIS . . . missions agencies and churches were actively teaching that Coptic Christians, Chaldeans, etc. are not real Christians and needed to be converted by evangelical missionaries in order to become 'real believers'!"

Two articles, here and here, on contraception, in Christianity Today. They get below the surface, for example pointing out that Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, was not in favor of abortion. The articles indicate that it's a complex matter, and some simple answers aren't logical, or don't take the facts into account. One of them refers to an article in Atlantic, by a pro-lifer, on the question of whether the so-called pill is an abortifacient or not. This article, also, avoids pat answers. (If you are interested, I have posted on abortion, sticking mostly to what the Bible says, and not considering the medical and scientific questions, but such matters as whether abortion really is murder, according to the Bible.)

Christianity Today also reports that most evangelical Christians say that the Bible is not the major source of their opinions on immigration to the USA. (Only about 10% said that it is.) The article does not suggest a correct position on the matter, but just considers what is influencing us. Why am I not surprised by the result?

Thanks for reading. You should find any of these articles to be thought-provoking.