Below is a link to the ADF coverage of a recent story in NH where a girl is being ordered by the court to attend public school because her faith is too rigid and she need to be exposed to other faiths.
click here
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Friday, August 7, 2009
Cold Summer
Well the summer here has been on the chilly side so I was thinking forward to when it's really cold.
Ice Fishing
Ice Fishing
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
Flag this item
In Arlington, Texas of all places. In the country where the hospital is saving lives a supervisor had to take down her flag. Shameful if you ask me.
click here
click here
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Owens or Brett???
Let me ask a simple question. Who would you rather see your favorite NFL team sign Brett Farve or Terrell Owens?
Here's my vote...LOL
Lights, Camera, T.O.!
Here's my vote...LOL
Lights, Camera, T.O.!
Thursday, May 14, 2009
Ann Coulter and The Gospel
Most people who know me know that I like Ann Coulter. Well I don't know Ann personally but I would be honored to meet her someday...which isn't going to happen. What I mean is that I like her writing. She is sharp. Very sharp. The article posted below is not for the faint of heart but in the middle of her post she nails something that I find critically important...
click here
If you don't click before next Wednesday the article will change then you'll have to search for the title, "LIBERAL TALIBAN ISSUES FATWA AGAINST MISS CALIFORNIA" But I can't vouch for the websites you'll find.
In any case here's the quote that I find most precious, "Christians aren't people who believe they are without sin; they're people who know they're sinners and are awestruck by God's grace in sending his only Son to take the punishment they deserve."
AWESTRUCK...Amen! Thanks Ann for the reminder.
click here
If you don't click before next Wednesday the article will change then you'll have to search for the title, "LIBERAL TALIBAN ISSUES FATWA AGAINST MISS CALIFORNIA" But I can't vouch for the websites you'll find.
In any case here's the quote that I find most precious, "Christians aren't people who believe they are without sin; they're people who know they're sinners and are awestruck by God's grace in sending his only Son to take the punishment they deserve."
AWESTRUCK...Amen! Thanks Ann for the reminder.
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
US Military destroys Bibles
It's getting a little press in the Christian Blogosphere but I haven't seen anything on the major news outlets. It appears Reuters carried the story about the Bibles being destroyed first...here
CNN had the original story of the video that aired on Al Jazeera that started the ball rolling...here
Christ tells us that even at the end of all things, "Heaven and earth shall pass away but My words will not pass away." -Mark 13.31
CNN had the original story of the video that aired on Al Jazeera that started the ball rolling...here
Christ tells us that even at the end of all things, "Heaven and earth shall pass away but My words will not pass away." -Mark 13.31
107 Theses
Steve Camp, musician extraordinaire, wrote these a number of years ago. I've had a hard copy for some time and recently found them at Audience One.
It's a bit of a read but well worth it.
click here
It's a bit of a read but well worth it.
click here
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Artist does not unveil picture
I posted under "Not sure what to think" about the unveiling of this painting that was supposed to happen yesterday...
follow up
Read the whole article and notice the results of the poll at the bottom.
follow up
Read the whole article and notice the results of the poll at the bottom.
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Monday, April 27, 2009
Not sure what to think
I realize that there have been many "messiahs" in history. Even in the times of Jesus a Pharisee named Gamaliel warned the council about men named Theudas and Judas who thought they were something and whose followers disbanded when their leaders perished. His advise was directed at the followers of Jesus after He too had perished. [Acts 6:33-39] So "messiahs" have been around for a long time. Scripture doesn't give us any information about the attitudes of people while Theudas and Judas while they were alive other than that people followed them. And so in this case I'm not sure what to think about the President being elevated in art and idea to the level of "messiah." One the one hand it troubles me since Jesus Christ was crucified and rose from the dead. He, who is, actually, The Messiah. It is sacrilegious to do so with any other human being. On the other hand, however, I'm not surprised given the sycophantic way in which people have thrown themselves behind him. Of course I do not believe he is any kind of real savior but the hyperbole isn't lost on me either. People need a savior. It's evident within us. But as Romans tells us, not turning to God and even rejecting Him..."professing to be wise they become fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man..." Romans 1.22-23
WND article
Be sure to check out the picture in the story...that's the point!!!
WND article
Be sure to check out the picture in the story...that's the point!!!
Friday, April 24, 2009
One to watch
I have a tendency to think this is exactly the direction we're heading in so I'm not just sitting by and waiting. I've written once to my elected officials and will do so again.
hate crimes legislation
hate crimes legislation
Thursday, April 23, 2009
In his own words
One can often listen to critics of someone and be completely convinced that that particular someone is the best or worst thing to come down the pipe in a long time. I'm posting this so that you can hear it in his own words and I'm grateful to "alittleleaven" for adding the Scriptural subtitles.
Watch and before you make a decision turn to your Bible and see for yourself.
Watch and before you make a decision turn to your Bible and see for yourself.
Ok which is it people?
I've read this article twice and I'm pretty sure I understand what it is saying but it leave me really confused. I thought that aerosol pollutants were a bad thing. My grandmother had horrible hair days once they changed her aqua-net hairspray to a pump spray. She suffered so much at the hands of the CFC police.
air pollution good for the earth
just in case you don't feel like reading the whole thing here's the kicker...
"Aerosols offset approximately 50 percent of the greenhouse gas warming," Knut Alfsen, research director at the Centre for International Environmental Research in Oslo, Norway, said by phone.
Without this particle pollution, he said, average global surface temperatures would have increased by 1.0 to 1.1 Celsius (1.8 to 2.0 Fahrenheit) since the start of industrialisation, rather than 0.7 C (1.25 F).
The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has predicted that average global temperatures will rise before 2100 by 1.1 to 6.4 C (2.0 F to 11.5 F), depending on efforts to curb the gases that drive global warming.
Any increase above 2.0 C, the panel said, would unleash a maelstrom of human misery, including drought, famine, disease and forced migration.
To stay below that threshold, carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere must be kept below 450 parts per million (ppm). The current level is about 385 ppm.
"As we continue to clean up the air -- which we must do for the sake of human health -- the challenge of avoiding dangerous climate change through reductions in CO2 emissions will be even harder," said Peter Cox, a researcher at Britain's University of Exeter and a co-author of the Nature study."
air pollution good for the earth
just in case you don't feel like reading the whole thing here's the kicker...
"Aerosols offset approximately 50 percent of the greenhouse gas warming," Knut Alfsen, research director at the Centre for International Environmental Research in Oslo, Norway, said by phone.
Without this particle pollution, he said, average global surface temperatures would have increased by 1.0 to 1.1 Celsius (1.8 to 2.0 Fahrenheit) since the start of industrialisation, rather than 0.7 C (1.25 F).
The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has predicted that average global temperatures will rise before 2100 by 1.1 to 6.4 C (2.0 F to 11.5 F), depending on efforts to curb the gases that drive global warming.
Any increase above 2.0 C, the panel said, would unleash a maelstrom of human misery, including drought, famine, disease and forced migration.
To stay below that threshold, carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere must be kept below 450 parts per million (ppm). The current level is about 385 ppm.
"As we continue to clean up the air -- which we must do for the sake of human health -- the challenge of avoiding dangerous climate change through reductions in CO2 emissions will be even harder," said Peter Cox, a researcher at Britain's University of Exeter and a co-author of the Nature study."
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Miss USA: runner-up Carrie Prejean
Posting these for clarity with respect to the end of my last post about Carrie's followership of Christ.
Fox News Interview
Steve Camp's awesome blog
I would post a link to her bio at Miss USA California but they have exceeded their bandwidth limitations which means we have melted their servers :)
Fox News Interview
Steve Camp's awesome blog
I would post a link to her bio at Miss USA California but they have exceeded their bandwidth limitations which means we have melted their servers :)
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Republicans beware???
The GOP a "religious party"
What an interesting article that actually turns out not to be about political parties as much as it is about morality. Still a good read.
Dr. Dobson's quote about the pendulum swing is what I find so interesting. Sometimes in history we do see this swing that he mentions. And I would agree to a certain degree with the proverbial saying that states, "All that is needed for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
As followers of Christ we are to be involved in the culture as an agent of transformation but it isn't the culture that needs transforming it is the human heart. I think we lose sight of that sometimes. We cannot legislate that transformation and if we spend too much time and energy in trying to do so we will not see the desired results, flawed as they are. If we, however, aim our time and energy at the transformation of the human heart, through the Gospel, then maybe those who legislate will reflect more into the culture the values that we ascribe to in following Christ.
Let me try and ask it from another perspective. Let me assume for a minute that the elected official of a state is NOT a follower of Christ. Why would I expect from that official behavior and legislation that is in accord with values that reflect Christ? Believe me, I fully appreciate the truth that God can and does move the human heart of a non-follower to accomplish His will. But for me to assume that a non-follower will do so in a redeemed way is well off the mark. That does not absolve me, or any other follower of Christ from our responsibility but for me to engage in the "culture war" for the sake of the culture is wrong. It is those on the other side of that "culture war" that should be the actual target...right?
I don't know about the condition of the followership of the woman from California who was involved with the Miss USA pageant but according to the morning buzz she lost her crown because she stood up for what has been termed traditional marriage. She has been booed and ridiculed. And maybe she did lose her crown for being so politically incorrect. I applaud her for taking a stand. I believe that her stand reflects the truth of God. Without knowing the condition of her followership I cannot draw any conclusions about the impact on the culture war or the way the pendulum is swing.
What an interesting article that actually turns out not to be about political parties as much as it is about morality. Still a good read.
Dr. Dobson's quote about the pendulum swing is what I find so interesting. Sometimes in history we do see this swing that he mentions. And I would agree to a certain degree with the proverbial saying that states, "All that is needed for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
As followers of Christ we are to be involved in the culture as an agent of transformation but it isn't the culture that needs transforming it is the human heart. I think we lose sight of that sometimes. We cannot legislate that transformation and if we spend too much time and energy in trying to do so we will not see the desired results, flawed as they are. If we, however, aim our time and energy at the transformation of the human heart, through the Gospel, then maybe those who legislate will reflect more into the culture the values that we ascribe to in following Christ.
Let me try and ask it from another perspective. Let me assume for a minute that the elected official of a state is NOT a follower of Christ. Why would I expect from that official behavior and legislation that is in accord with values that reflect Christ? Believe me, I fully appreciate the truth that God can and does move the human heart of a non-follower to accomplish His will. But for me to assume that a non-follower will do so in a redeemed way is well off the mark. That does not absolve me, or any other follower of Christ from our responsibility but for me to engage in the "culture war" for the sake of the culture is wrong. It is those on the other side of that "culture war" that should be the actual target...right?
I don't know about the condition of the followership of the woman from California who was involved with the Miss USA pageant but according to the morning buzz she lost her crown because she stood up for what has been termed traditional marriage. She has been booed and ridiculed. And maybe she did lose her crown for being so politically incorrect. I applaud her for taking a stand. I believe that her stand reflects the truth of God. Without knowing the condition of her followership I cannot draw any conclusions about the impact on the culture war or the way the pendulum is swing.
Monday, April 20, 2009
Bloggers Beware
When I started this blog I mentioned that I had another blog that is still out there but I don't write there anymore. Every once in awhile I go and see if anyone has been reading it through sitemeter. I found out that the Sargent of Arms at the Senate had read the article I posted on Pat Leahy when Senator Leahy was in the news earlier this year. I chuckled. Then I broke out in a cold sweat. Then I chuckled again. Now I'm not sure what to do...
is this big brotherish?
bad for believers
I mean, I know what I will do if this Bill is signed into law and used to convict me of a crime as a preacher of the whole council of God. But, man alive, there are quite a few bloggers out there that say some inflammatory things about a lot of issues. I thought the jails were overcrowded already. Maybe they'll make room? Maybe the separation of church and state is just a one way street?
is this big brotherish?
bad for believers
I mean, I know what I will do if this Bill is signed into law and used to convict me of a crime as a preacher of the whole council of God. But, man alive, there are quite a few bloggers out there that say some inflammatory things about a lot of issues. I thought the jails were overcrowded already. Maybe they'll make room? Maybe the separation of church and state is just a one way street?
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Blair, Catholics and Truth
Former Prime Minister Tony Blair rejects the Catholic teaching on Homosexuality.here
I find this news article interesting on so many fronts. Catholic Doctrine, Conversion, Tradition, Truth, Church/Culture just to list a few. But I think what strikes me the most is an underlying premise that FPM Blair and so many people have with respect to faith. People seem to think that faith is by one's personal design. "Oh, I like this teaching and can live with it but oh this one is too strict it just can't be right", is a pitiful and pitiable stance.
When FPM Blair speaks of the OT and the passages in Leviticus I am willing to give him the BOTD and assume that he has actually read the OT and discussed the ideas relevant to the issue with his clergy. Knowing what the Pope has said and what the official stance of the Catholic Church is on the matter what can we do with FPM Blair's comments?
Dismiss them as some kind of grab for the face time in print. After all he may be running for the first Presidency of the EU and if his claims are accurate that the greater percentage of catholics in the pews disagree with the official Catholic position, which I don't actually believe is the case, then it would be politically expedient for him to align himself with those pew sitters. Let's face it the Catholic church doesn't have the pull it used to have back in the days of Henry the 8Th. Then again what church does.
Which leads me to why I started this post. As a follower of Christ, a reader of blogs, a minister of the Gospel the current trend of replacing truth with anything that is expedient is beginning to become laughable. I started this blog to earnestly contend for the faith. That faith which has been revealed in Scripture. Tony Blair is not the supreme arbiter of truth or faith. His use of cultural change to be the beacon of truth is pathetic at best. Truth is truth. Does that mean that the truth which we now hold to be truth will not change? Yes and no. If what we hold to be truth is truth then it will not change. If what we hold needs modification to be "more true" then yes it will change...it was simply incomplete. But if the truth we now hold is untrue then it must change. Is FPM Blair saying that the Biblical Truth of the nature of homosexuality, as revealed in Leviticus and in Romans, as sin is in need of change because times have changed? I think he is and I think he is wrong. Culture cannot be the grid we pass truth through. Culture is too easily manipulated and truth is unyielding.
I find this news article interesting on so many fronts. Catholic Doctrine, Conversion, Tradition, Truth, Church/Culture just to list a few. But I think what strikes me the most is an underlying premise that FPM Blair and so many people have with respect to faith. People seem to think that faith is by one's personal design. "Oh, I like this teaching and can live with it but oh this one is too strict it just can't be right", is a pitiful and pitiable stance.
When FPM Blair speaks of the OT and the passages in Leviticus I am willing to give him the BOTD and assume that he has actually read the OT and discussed the ideas relevant to the issue with his clergy. Knowing what the Pope has said and what the official stance of the Catholic Church is on the matter what can we do with FPM Blair's comments?
Dismiss them as some kind of grab for the face time in print. After all he may be running for the first Presidency of the EU and if his claims are accurate that the greater percentage of catholics in the pews disagree with the official Catholic position, which I don't actually believe is the case, then it would be politically expedient for him to align himself with those pew sitters. Let's face it the Catholic church doesn't have the pull it used to have back in the days of Henry the 8Th. Then again what church does.
Which leads me to why I started this post. As a follower of Christ, a reader of blogs, a minister of the Gospel the current trend of replacing truth with anything that is expedient is beginning to become laughable. I started this blog to earnestly contend for the faith. That faith which has been revealed in Scripture. Tony Blair is not the supreme arbiter of truth or faith. His use of cultural change to be the beacon of truth is pathetic at best. Truth is truth. Does that mean that the truth which we now hold to be truth will not change? Yes and no. If what we hold to be truth is truth then it will not change. If what we hold needs modification to be "more true" then yes it will change...it was simply incomplete. But if the truth we now hold is untrue then it must change. Is FPM Blair saying that the Biblical Truth of the nature of homosexuality, as revealed in Leviticus and in Romans, as sin is in need of change because times have changed? I think he is and I think he is wrong. Culture cannot be the grid we pass truth through. Culture is too easily manipulated and truth is unyielding.
Tuesday, April 7, 2009
Whatever happened to sin?
About 25 years ago Steve Taylor sang a song with the title of this post. In one of the verses he points to politics and the way in which, for the sake of political power and or expediency the notions of truth telling and righteousness are pushed aside. Read the link below and ask yourself the question, "Whatever happened to sin?"
click here
And a few follow up questions:
Why did the United Methodist Church deny his ordination?
What will the ELCA decide in August concerning the question of homosexual clergy?
and for a zinger...Whatever happened to the seperation of church and state? You do realize that that particular door should swing both ways? Right?
click here
And a few follow up questions:
Why did the United Methodist Church deny his ordination?
What will the ELCA decide in August concerning the question of homosexual clergy?
and for a zinger...Whatever happened to the seperation of church and state? You do realize that that particular door should swing both ways? Right?
Monday, April 6, 2009
CAMPONTHIS: ALL BELIEVERS IN JESUS ARE IN FULL TIME MINISTRY
Definetly worth a read and serious think time.
CAMPONTHIS: ALL BELIEVERS IN JESUS ARE IN FULL TIME MINISTRY
CAMPONTHIS: ALL BELIEVERS IN JESUS ARE IN FULL TIME MINISTRY
Martyrdom continues
Although reports indicate that there are a significant number of new church plants in Baghdad we do well to also remember that people all across the globe die for their faith in Christ each day. Please pray for our brothers and sisters in Christ.
4 martyred in Iraq
4 martyred in Iraq
Friday, April 3, 2009
Thursday, April 2, 2009
ELCA choices made easy.?.
A few years ago the decision of polity for the ELCA was narrowly defeated with those who rejected homosexual clergy being victorious. And so the issue has come up again and this time the vote will be a simple majority. Keep your eyes on this one in August.
click here
click here
What happened Mr. President?
Recall the flap that Candidate Obama took over his position of sitting down and talking with world leaders without preconditions and such. Now we hear that he is ready to confront the Jewish leaders on the West Bank. Confront or sit down...hmmm
click here
click here
The Obama Whirlwind [or World Wind]
Maybe you're like Winnie the Pooh and me..."a bear of little brain" or maybe you're on top of things. Either way I have felt like Obama is moving so fast that I can't even think straight and so I am grateful for other eyes.
click here legal eagles
click here legal eagles
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Don't think...and don't stop.
Hard to believe but I guess if it's in the AP...then it must be true. I'm in quite a cynical mood this morning.
police profiling
police profiling
Monday, March 30, 2009
Is this in the Constitution? Did we elect Obama for this?
I trust that you will understand the implications of the link below. Maybe those who voted for President Obama did elect him for this? Maybe not...but I wonder where it will end? Is this socialism? I'm guessing...indeed it is.
Wall Street Journal
Wall Street Journal
Friday, March 27, 2009
Never going to see this on CNN...Katie, Charlie, Brian...ahhhh Nope
What a wonderfully wry address...anyone game in Congress?
Putting truth aside...let's hear what he has to say.
President Obama at Notre Dame. [the link is the title above]
What I would like to point out is the contrast between two paragraphs that appear in this article. Paragraph number 1...
"Many Catholics are angered by Obama's planned appearance at the May 17 ceremony because of his decisions to provide federal funding for embryonic stem cell research and international family planning groups that provide abortions or educate about the procedure."
and paragraph number two...
""People are definitely entitled to their outrage, but I think the main thing is to see that it's an honor to have the president of the United States come to speak here whether you agree with him or not," said Katie Woodward, a political science junior from Philadelphia."
The anger that is felt by the Catholics in the first paragraph is based upon their understanding that abortion is wrong and their disagreement with President Obama in signing into law legislation that stands in direct opposition to their held beliefs. These held beliefs are founded upon a Scriptural understanding that life is to be honored by all mankind because we are created in the image of God. That is the baseline "truth" that they are operating from.
The second paragraph is a representation of one student from ND that appears to be shared by others at the University. The article says that it is a consensus that the President should be allowed to come and speak because "it's a honor" for ND to have him come. The point here is that "even if I disagree with you I'm willing to have you honor our institution with your speech." The baseline truth that Katie seems to be operating from is a personal aggrandizement. It's good for ND. The problem Katie is that your toleration is selfish. If you as a Catholic believe that it is wrong to abort babies then how can you tolerate any law that infringes upon that truth? Or associated with that does what you believe make a difference in your decisions as to what is honoring? Maybe you don't believe that abortion is wrong and therefore you have created enough space in your moral toleration to have the very person who has signed legislation to end human life come and honor ND. But then I must ask how that aligns with your Catholicism?
The problem here is one of truth. If abortion is wrong and that is based on truth then any toleration of it is against truth. There can not be any hint of untruth in truth or it isn't truth. Jump through all the ethical hoops you want but at the end of the day we tolerate things because we don't hold the truth behind them as truth.
Ok I'm done ranting but I'll pick this up later
What I would like to point out is the contrast between two paragraphs that appear in this article. Paragraph number 1...
"Many Catholics are angered by Obama's planned appearance at the May 17 ceremony because of his decisions to provide federal funding for embryonic stem cell research and international family planning groups that provide abortions or educate about the procedure."
and paragraph number two...
""People are definitely entitled to their outrage, but I think the main thing is to see that it's an honor to have the president of the United States come to speak here whether you agree with him or not," said Katie Woodward, a political science junior from Philadelphia."
The anger that is felt by the Catholics in the first paragraph is based upon their understanding that abortion is wrong and their disagreement with President Obama in signing into law legislation that stands in direct opposition to their held beliefs. These held beliefs are founded upon a Scriptural understanding that life is to be honored by all mankind because we are created in the image of God. That is the baseline "truth" that they are operating from.
The second paragraph is a representation of one student from ND that appears to be shared by others at the University. The article says that it is a consensus that the President should be allowed to come and speak because "it's a honor" for ND to have him come. The point here is that "even if I disagree with you I'm willing to have you honor our institution with your speech." The baseline truth that Katie seems to be operating from is a personal aggrandizement. It's good for ND. The problem Katie is that your toleration is selfish. If you as a Catholic believe that it is wrong to abort babies then how can you tolerate any law that infringes upon that truth? Or associated with that does what you believe make a difference in your decisions as to what is honoring? Maybe you don't believe that abortion is wrong and therefore you have created enough space in your moral toleration to have the very person who has signed legislation to end human life come and honor ND. But then I must ask how that aligns with your Catholicism?
The problem here is one of truth. If abortion is wrong and that is based on truth then any toleration of it is against truth. There can not be any hint of untruth in truth or it isn't truth. Jump through all the ethical hoops you want but at the end of the day we tolerate things because we don't hold the truth behind them as truth.
Ok I'm done ranting but I'll pick this up later
Ok I'm not mad anymore
Well if you noticed I haven't posted since the tourny began but now since the best team ever to step out on a court is out of this year's tournament...I've lost most of my interest. Next year Mike. And I hope Villanova takes it all the way now.
Monday, March 16, 2009
NCAA!!!!
Ok it's March and I'm Mad...wooooohooooooops.
Of course I've got Duke all the way to the championship. And UNC out in the first round. I never said I was smart about these things...LOL.
Just in case you need a bracket...
click here
Of course I've got Duke all the way to the championship. And UNC out in the first round. I never said I was smart about these things...LOL.
Just in case you need a bracket...
click here
Friday, March 13, 2009
Numbers...not the TV show!
From the highly respected Wall Street Journal. It appears that President Obama's campaign modus operandi isn't working as well after the election. Click the title for the link.
God and Obama: Let's begin
Recently I have been reading blogs of a few acquaintances and their posts concerning some of the newer legislation that is being signed into law by President Obama. Their thoughts range across the board from complete euphoria to unmitigated gaul. It has been intriguing to think through some of their ideas but it occurred to me that as I do my thinking I need to keep in front of me what Truth has been revealed about government in God's Word for a follower of Christ.
We start where we should always start...with God. Everything that exists flows from that starting point. Any other starting point begins from an idolatrous point and that is not wise. Our first post, therefore, will reflect upon what has been revealed in God's Word as to the character and nature of God that is reflected in government.
An excellent place to start is God's providence. Providence is a big word that basically, when it is applied to God's character, means that, He being the creator of all things, maintains that which He has created and ensures, by His direct activity, that they function as He has created them to function while always functioning in such a way to accomplish His purposes. [reread as often as necessary]
Government is one of those things that demonstrate God's providence. Romans 13.1 and following states, "Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God." Not only does this verse clearly tell us from whence comes a governments authority but it also tells us that the government that exists is established (i.e. maintained) by God. Regardless of one's euphoria or gaul the clear fact of truth is that the current administration is acting perfectly within the providence of God.
For clarity sake this does not mean that what they are doing is morally right nor good for those whom they govern. That is entirely another post. [see below] As you mull this over there is another pertinent idea from God's Word that we can rightly apply here and it comes from 1 Timothy 2.1-4, "First of all. then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, for kings and all who are in authority, in order that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." As a follower of Christ we are commanded to pray for those whom God has placed over us in positions of authority.
Next Post in Series: God and Obama: Why???
We start where we should always start...with God. Everything that exists flows from that starting point. Any other starting point begins from an idolatrous point and that is not wise. Our first post, therefore, will reflect upon what has been revealed in God's Word as to the character and nature of God that is reflected in government.
An excellent place to start is God's providence. Providence is a big word that basically, when it is applied to God's character, means that, He being the creator of all things, maintains that which He has created and ensures, by His direct activity, that they function as He has created them to function while always functioning in such a way to accomplish His purposes. [reread as often as necessary]
Government is one of those things that demonstrate God's providence. Romans 13.1 and following states, "Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God." Not only does this verse clearly tell us from whence comes a governments authority but it also tells us that the government that exists is established (i.e. maintained) by God. Regardless of one's euphoria or gaul the clear fact of truth is that the current administration is acting perfectly within the providence of God.
For clarity sake this does not mean that what they are doing is morally right nor good for those whom they govern. That is entirely another post. [see below] As you mull this over there is another pertinent idea from God's Word that we can rightly apply here and it comes from 1 Timothy 2.1-4, "First of all. then, I urge that entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings, be made on behalf of all men, for kings and all who are in authority, in order that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." As a follower of Christ we are commanded to pray for those whom God has placed over us in positions of authority.
Next Post in Series: God and Obama: Why???
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
See here's a problem
Below you will find two links. The first one is a story that appears from the Associated Press writer Eric Gorski on the recent stem cell research ban being overturned and how the religious community is responding to it. There is a divide that is occurring on the issue. But the story indicates that proponents of the reversal of the ban want to make sure the embryos "were not created for the research, nor bought and sold."
click here for Eric Gorski
The next link appears at OneNewsNow and briefly tells of women who are selling their eggs to fertilization organizations in order to make ends meet.
click here
See here's the problem. Leaving aside the religious aspects of the stories for the moment but only for the moment. Where will the researchers get the embryos from? The story said that they were embryos that were going to be discarded in any case. Who is going to discard them? Will it be fertility organizations? Embryos that were produced from the sold eggs of these women as well as the contribution from the males? I'm inclined to think that will at least be apart of it. So ethically speaking I wonder how those of the community of faith that "oppose the buying and selling" of embryos used in research to relieve human suffering divorce their ideas from this one?
Ethics are tough and ethical questions do not stand alone so where can a person turn to find some clarity on such diverse and difficult issues? Picking up the religious argument again. Since the first article enlisted differing faith traditions to illustrate the "religious divide" over the issue of stem cell research we are well within our rights, for clarity, to ask those same faith traditions from what basis are they arguing for their position on the issue. Do they come from a position of truth as defined by humanity? Or do they come from a position of truth from some outside source? i.e. The Revealed Word of God = The Bible.
I would give those faith traditions the benefit of the doubt and say that they would in some way connect to the Bible. As a matter of fact simple google searches would suffice to show us that is indeed the case. If we, however, dig a bit deeper we would find that those faith traditions involved in the article do not hold the Bible as the inerrant Word of God as defined from the beginning of church history with a special emphasis upon the reformation. For example the United Church of Christ in a forum on the Inerrancy of Scripture flatly states that the Bible is not inerrant. It isn't the official Denominational Faith Statement but then again the official Faith Statement doesn't say anything about the Bible. So where do they find the authority to answer the ethical issues involved? And what will those "christians" from the UCC do when they discover that embryos are being sold for research purposes. Well they were sold for fertilization purposes not for research but that is simply an intellectual excuse. If you cannot see the connection you need a dose of intellectual honesty with yourself. I have a hunch that the intellectual dishonesty will continue and that Truth will not matter.
click here for Eric Gorski
The next link appears at OneNewsNow and briefly tells of women who are selling their eggs to fertilization organizations in order to make ends meet.
click here
See here's the problem. Leaving aside the religious aspects of the stories for the moment but only for the moment. Where will the researchers get the embryos from? The story said that they were embryos that were going to be discarded in any case. Who is going to discard them? Will it be fertility organizations? Embryos that were produced from the sold eggs of these women as well as the contribution from the males? I'm inclined to think that will at least be apart of it. So ethically speaking I wonder how those of the community of faith that "oppose the buying and selling" of embryos used in research to relieve human suffering divorce their ideas from this one?
Ethics are tough and ethical questions do not stand alone so where can a person turn to find some clarity on such diverse and difficult issues? Picking up the religious argument again. Since the first article enlisted differing faith traditions to illustrate the "religious divide" over the issue of stem cell research we are well within our rights, for clarity, to ask those same faith traditions from what basis are they arguing for their position on the issue. Do they come from a position of truth as defined by humanity? Or do they come from a position of truth from some outside source? i.e. The Revealed Word of God = The Bible.
I would give those faith traditions the benefit of the doubt and say that they would in some way connect to the Bible. As a matter of fact simple google searches would suffice to show us that is indeed the case. If we, however, dig a bit deeper we would find that those faith traditions involved in the article do not hold the Bible as the inerrant Word of God as defined from the beginning of church history with a special emphasis upon the reformation. For example the United Church of Christ in a forum on the Inerrancy of Scripture flatly states that the Bible is not inerrant. It isn't the official Denominational Faith Statement but then again the official Faith Statement doesn't say anything about the Bible. So where do they find the authority to answer the ethical issues involved? And what will those "christians" from the UCC do when they discover that embryos are being sold for research purposes. Well they were sold for fertilization purposes not for research but that is simply an intellectual excuse. If you cannot see the connection you need a dose of intellectual honesty with yourself. I have a hunch that the intellectual dishonesty will continue and that Truth will not matter.
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
Stem Cell Primer
We heard about the fulfilled promise of the President yesterday when he repealed the restriction on embryonic stem cell research. In case you are not aware of what the issues are I am posting a link to a page that I find incredibly helpful.
click here
Also here is a link to articles written and posted at the CBHD site.
click here
click here
Also here is a link to articles written and posted at the CBHD site.
click here
Saturday, March 7, 2009
I'm laughing again...Hillary...ous
Ok that's twice in like the same weekend...my sides hurt.
click here
"RESET" or "OVERLOAD" you decide.
click here
"RESET" or "OVERLOAD" you decide.
Friday, March 6, 2009
Missing the obvious for Jesse Logan
Not many news wires have picked up on this tragedy. Not sure if they will but it was on the Today show this morning and so MSNBC had the print version. It is linked through the title if you want to read the story.
I am glad the Jesse's Mom, Cynthia will be working to make her daughter's story public so that teens everywhere will be warned of the dangers that her daughter faced. It's hard enough being young without the added bullying from irreverent, disrespectful, thoughtless others. I am deeply grieved that this young woman felt the only way to end her pain was to take her own life.
And so I am writing to ask Mrs. Logan to seriously consider making a part of her presentation a call to personal purity for young people. The story admits that Jesse made an error in judgement when she sent her boyfriend those texts. Maybe it was an error in judgement that the young man sent the picture to others? Or maybe it was an error in judgement that the other girls taunted her with names and such? And maybe it was an error in judgement that the School Administration didn't do more? And we all make errors in judgement. So I am not sitting here impugning Jesse's morality but rather I am impugning the decades long assaults upon moral standards, given by God for personal purity, manufactured by those portions of our culture that have systematically tried to remove God and His standards from all aspects of our society. How many will have to die before we wake up to what we have done?
1 Thessalonians 4.2-5 "For you know what commands we gave you through the Lord Jesus. For this is God’s will: that you become holy, that you keep away from sexual immorality, that each of you know how to possess his own body in holiness and honor, not in lustful passion like the Gentiles who do not know God."
http://www.bible.org/netbible/index.htm
I am glad the Jesse's Mom, Cynthia will be working to make her daughter's story public so that teens everywhere will be warned of the dangers that her daughter faced. It's hard enough being young without the added bullying from irreverent, disrespectful, thoughtless others. I am deeply grieved that this young woman felt the only way to end her pain was to take her own life.
And so I am writing to ask Mrs. Logan to seriously consider making a part of her presentation a call to personal purity for young people. The story admits that Jesse made an error in judgement when she sent her boyfriend those texts. Maybe it was an error in judgement that the young man sent the picture to others? Or maybe it was an error in judgement that the other girls taunted her with names and such? And maybe it was an error in judgement that the School Administration didn't do more? And we all make errors in judgement. So I am not sitting here impugning Jesse's morality but rather I am impugning the decades long assaults upon moral standards, given by God for personal purity, manufactured by those portions of our culture that have systematically tried to remove God and His standards from all aspects of our society. How many will have to die before we wake up to what we have done?
1 Thessalonians 4.2-5 "For you know what commands we gave you through the Lord Jesus. For this is God’s will: that you become holy, that you keep away from sexual immorality, that each of you know how to possess his own body in holiness and honor, not in lustful passion like the Gentiles who do not know God."
http://www.bible.org/netbible/index.htm
Ghosts
In our local weekly paper dated March 4th, 2009 an article appeared entitled, "Paranormal researcher claims state has many haunted places." The researchers name is Chad Lewis and it seems that he is well educated. According to the article, "Lewis is not a wild-eyed ghost buster obsessed with the hereafter. (Lewis has a master's degree in applied psychology from the University of Wisconsin-Stout.)
The line form the article that I am interested in came a bit before his credentials when it was time for audience q&a. "Another woman said her religion equated ghosts and spirits with demons and satanic possession. Lewis acknowledged some religions take that view. "I leave it up to the person. Make up your own mind," he said.""
First, I want to give the woman who said this credit for taking a stand. I wasn't there so all I have to go on is the way the paper reported her comments. Whether or not the dialogue was longer and more Biblically involved I do not know. In any case at least she made a stand.
My interest in engaging the comments of Lewis with respect to the ladies comment. Once again all I have is what the paper reported and so I am willing to give Mr. Lewis the benefit of the doubt. That being said, I find his trivialization of the woman faith typical and sad.
The line form the article that I am interested in came a bit before his credentials when it was time for audience q&a. "Another woman said her religion equated ghosts and spirits with demons and satanic possession. Lewis acknowledged some religions take that view. "I leave it up to the person. Make up your own mind," he said.""
First, I want to give the woman who said this credit for taking a stand. I wasn't there so all I have to go on is the way the paper reported her comments. Whether or not the dialogue was longer and more Biblically involved I do not know. In any case at least she made a stand.
My interest in engaging the comments of Lewis with respect to the ladies comment. Once again all I have is what the paper reported and so I am willing to give Mr. Lewis the benefit of the doubt. That being said, I find his trivialization of the woman faith typical and sad.
I will be doing a follow up article on the Biblical understanding of "ghosts" but for now I simply want to point out Mr. Lewis' dismissal of the religion of the woman. He shows his own illogical bias in his statement as quoted in the paper. At first glance it looks logical and I am sure that many people would agree with his statement but if it is looked at a bit closer you can see it's flaw.
To start with he acknowledges that some religions take that view. That is true and a logically consistent statement with respect to the woman's comment. In the direct quote, however, he makes a judgement that he does not apply consistently. He is quoted as saying that it is up to the person and that they should make up there own minds. There are two glaring flaws with his quote.
First, his statement makes the assumption that the woman has not used her own mind. How we know this is by saying that he leaves it up to the individual. The unstated premise is that she is not using her own mind but rather excepting what her religion tells her. Second, his statement also betrays his bias in that he believes that her religion or any religion that holds this view cannot possibly be right. How we know this is the same as before. He gives ultimate authority and judgement on such matter to the individual. Making up one's own mind is the ultimate autonomy. And for believing Christians who follow Christ might I remind you what happened when Adam and Eve "used their own minds" and ignore the Word of God?
So if I apply Mr. Lewis' own standards of judgement to his claims of haunting and the "technology" he uses. Sir with all due respect you are at the very least a scam artist and at the very worst you are of your father who was a liar from the beginning. You see I have used my own mind to come to that conclusion based upon what my own mind's understanding of Scripture is, which, by the way, acknowledges and yields to a spirit on such matters as authority and right and wrong and especially Truth...His Spirit. So I guess we do agree that Spirit exists.
Thursday, March 5, 2009
Why another blog and why this one?
This is my third blog. The first one I stayed with for a while and it's still out there. The second never really got off the ground because I wasn't as committed to the idea and so I lost interest and deleted it. So I ask myself, "Why another blog?"
Recently I have become convinced of the need for followers of Christ to speak the truth, to live the truth, to advocate the truth and to contend for the truth. In Jude 3 God calls His people through Jude, "Dear friends, although I was eager to write to you about the salvation we share, I felt I had to write and urge you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints."
In the days when Jude wrote the Gospel was proclaimed and people were saved. Jude wanted to write about the salvation that they shared but The Holy Spirit moved him in another direction and as he put pen to paper he addresses that falsehood had crept into the body of belief of the Christian faith. So he implores his readers to go to war, fight the fight, and contend for the faith. The term used for contend earnestly was used in those days for the stadium contests. When the author of Scripture used it the meaning was nuanced in several ways. The one I am interested in is, "the thought of the goal which can be reached only with full expenditure of all our energies...the struggle for the kingdom of heaven allows for no indolence, indecision or relaxation." -Stauffer
The intent of this blog is to do just that in the whole of life. You may find posts about politics, religion, culture, society, sports, television, radio...you name it. The point, however, will be to bring to bear upon those things the Truth.
I hope that you may be challenged and that this will not degenerate into some kind of thoughtless ranting. I'm not the sharpest knife in the box but if you want to comment feel free and I'll try and explain things further.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
