About This Site

So the story goes like this…One day I said to myself, “Self, there really aren’t enough blogs in the world. Let us make a blog in our own image, in our likeness.” I leave it up to you to determine if it is “good”. I personally have my doubts.

A Note on Religious Affiliation

When reading some of the posts on this site, it may be helpful to know the context.  I was raised in a conservative, evangelical Christian atmosphere; specifically, it was a Baptist church. I have over the years also attended a Wesleyan church and an Anglican church. These days, I am a member of Patterson Park Church in Beavercreek, Ohio. If it matters to you, I am what was historically known as a “Particular Baptist” or what is more commonly called a “Reformed Baptist”. (That second title annoys my Reformed friends, so I will avoid the term out of something like respect.) More about what I believe can be found on this page.

I contribute some articles to the various websites of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals. If you dislike something you see me writing either there or here, I am under the authority of the elders at Patterson Park Church. However, I do not speak for them and they are not responsible for any mistakes I might make. You can also send complaints via post to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, Washington, DC.

Amy (Watkins) Mantravadi – Biographical Highlights

Born: Columbus, Ohio

Raised: Muskegon, Michigan

Currently Resides: Dayton, Ohio

Degrees: B.A. in Political Science and Biblical Literature (Taylor University – 2008), M.A. in Non-proliferation and International Security (King’s College London – 2010)

Employment Highlights: Congressional intern for Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-MI) and Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI), Columnist and Opinions Editor for The Echo at Taylor University, Assistant to the Director at the Egyptian Press Office in Washington, D.C. (2009-2013), Field Interview at University of Michigan Institute for Social Science Research (2014-2016), Penniless Writer (2016-present)

12 Comments

  1. Amy, Just read your excellent article on Anne Bradstreet. Thank you for showing the conflicts that numbers of Puritan sympathisers felt: that Charles’ sympathies were dangerous, but that at the same time he was an authority instituted by God. Theologically, do you think it’s connected with the idea that sin is always about mankind reaching up to usurp, whereas God’s work always comes from above? (Wow, am I saying monarchy is more biblical than the will of the people?!) As an Englishman I’ve sometimes wondered which side of the Civil War I’d have found myself on. I’ll have to try and read a bit more of Anne Bradstreet!

  2. So glad you liked the article! There were certainly a lot of theological implications to be drawn from the English Civil War. If I had been able to write a longer article, I suppose I could have examined those more in-depth. Bradstreet herself only gives certain hints of her theological viewpoint regarding the divine right of kings. However, a strong view of the sovereignty of God could certainly lead to the kind of opinion you mentioned. I think the Civil War period shows us that Puritanism was hardly monolithic. It encompassed a wide variety of opinions. Much as you wonder which side of the English Civil War you would support, I have wondered whether or not I would have remained loyal to the king during the American Revolution. Of course, practically everything you hear on this side of the pond lionizes the American revolutionaries and their aims, but I think the situation was actually more complicated. Many colonists did not support the revolution and moved back to England when it was over. I can see their point of view – the king never treated any of the colonists as bad as they themselves treated their slaves and the Native Americans, for example. Well, interesting things to consider. Thanks for stopping by!

  3. amy,

    just read your piece on aquinas, found at the aquila report. i am recommending it on my facebook page. i wrote a piece defending thomas against the stupid attacks offered by dewey roberts. as i read your essay i thought, “finally, a good and balanced critique of thomas.” as i say in my piece, i love his metaphysics and epistemology, but his so-called science (from aristotle) and views on women are just ridiculous! so, thanks for making these points. i will definitely share your piece with my students!

    also, we may have a mutual friend. anthony bradley was a classmate of mine at westminster seminary! :)

  4. Amy, I am Lindsay Adams Nixon great aunt. My heart aches for what God is allowing you to go through! Please be assured I will pray for you – for answers, grace, comfort and complete healing! ~ Love, Ruth

  5. Hi Amy. Very interesting about all the traitors in your family history. 2 small points. Badlesmere couldn’t have been annoyed about the Despensers by 1281. That’s 30 years too early. And it’s Gaveston not Galveston…though I’ve often thought that the great Jimmy Webb/Glen Campbell song could easily be adapted to work in a musical about Edward II. Sorry to be pedantic. But kids studying history do read these blogs.

  6. Just read on article of yours on Tim Keller as a quick refresher. Saw your about page as well; just found it funny that you live in Dayton, OH! Same here. I know a lot of the guys from Patterson Park, used to go to the church father’s study Friday mornings at Panera. I’ll try to keep up with your blog since you’re a local.

    1. Linda,

      Thank you for visiting the site. Baptists are a large and diverse group. There may well be times when certain Baptist groups join with the Catholic Church on certain issues. I do not believe this signals a large-scale move toward complete fellowship and/or unification. With all due respect, I will not respond directly to anything published by Pulpit & Pen, as they have failed to repent of numerous occurrences of slander and other ungodly behavior. Many respected Christians have rebuked them, but they continue to rejoice in tearing others down (and here I particularly mean other Christians) rather than building them up. I do not fault you for your own personal decision to read their material, especially as some Christians may not know about P&P’s problematic reputation. Let me know if you have any further questions.

  7. I read two of your articles on Tim Keller and they read like much ado about nothing. Had you listened to a handful of Tim Keller’s sermons all of your questions would have been answered. Keller’s critics seem to be arguing about orthodoxy, which misses the point of the Gospel entirely. As Keller often says, “The Gospel is good news, not good advice.” Keller preaches the Gospel of Jesus, “For our sake he made him (Jesus) to be sin who knew no sin, so that in him (Jesus) we (you and me) might become the righteousness of God.”

  8. Hello and thank you for taking the time to read my articles. I did listen to sermons by Tim Keller in addition to reading his published works. For the article on his teachings regarding the Trinity, I also spoke with a knowledgeable person who was able to answer my questions. It is certainly possible that I erred in my analysis, but I made a sincere attempt to find answers to such questions as I had. I am not sure what you mean about orthodoxy missing the point of the gospel, or how my articles were in violation of this principle. I do not consider myself an opponent of Tim Keller – quite the contrary. In fact, it was because I was troubled by all the criticism he had been receiving around that time (summer 2017) that I wrote the articles. I believe I made every effort to engage in good faith and according to scriptural principles. I did make one error of fact due to my failure to double check something. I corrected this as soon as I was informed (the day after publication) and issued a public clarification. The majority of people who read the article never viewed this inaccurate information. I wish Tim Keller all the best and am thankful for his ministry.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *