October 31, 2003
Sola Scriptura!
On this day in 1517, Martin Luther posted his 95 Theses to the door of the church at Wittenberg and changed the course of history.
Luther posted with nails on wood in the 16th century. Today he would probably join the LSV and post his work on the new Ockhamist.
I know many will engage in pagan revelry tonight. Please try to remember the One who saved you from all of this mess and offer up thanks for His servants like Wycliffe, Luther, and Calvin.
Soli Deo Gloria
October 30, 2003
Ahhhh, The Power of Words
Claude Allen, nominee judicial appointment, is under attack for using the word "queer" in 1984. In related news, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) is opening hearings on suspending the first amendment to ban Queer Eye for the Straight Guy from American broadcasts because the show's title is offensive to both straight and homosexual citizens.
Similarly, Hillary Clinton, once called someone a "Jew bastard" and should not be allowed to run again for public office. Some would say you've got to sleep in the bed you've made. Others would write a puff piece to defend you.
I was recently bashed on a website recently for a post in which I used the social meanings of words instead of their academic meanings (or at least what the moderator thought was the academic meanings). Hey, people use words. They use them to express meaning. There is a wide range of semantic meanings for most words and they always have to be viewed in context. Some guy used "queer." Big deal. By 1984, the word certainly did not have the sting it held in the early 70's. Here is a big insight for liberals and conservatives. You do not agree! Your worldviews are divergent. You both believe the other side is out to destroy freedom, democracy, indeed the very world! I can think of a lot worse things to call someone than a queer. But if I do, I will be expressing my distaste for the culture the homosexuals represent. It is no different that anyone using the word "fundie" to describe me. Can you even imagine a Senate hearing with an elected official chastising a judicial nominee saying, "Do you understand how some people in America might take your use of this word ‘fundies’ as being negative, to denigrate them, and not respectful?" Ridiculous.
With the most public use of the word "queer" being on placards at gay parades and rallies in the phrase, "We're here. We're queer. Get used to it," the neo-fascist thought police need to get a grip and toughen their skin. The first amendment also protects people who don't agree with queers.
October 29, 2003
Surround Yourself
This is the message we have heard from him and proclaim to you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all. If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin. If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
This is why we surround ourselves with believers and items that remind us of our calling in Christianity. Sometimes it is a plaque on the wall, sometimes such trinkets are meaningless. Sometimes it is Christian music, sometimes such music is boring. Sometimes it is fellow believers, sometimes such people can make us feel inadequate. Even so, we must dwell together. Otherwise, we do not have the opportunity to be challenged and equipped. We do not always agree on everything, we do not always see eye to eye. But as long as we are all striving for the same goal – becoming of one mind/purpose in Christ and toward the proclamation of the gospel – as long as we are standing firm together as one body of Christ, we sharpen one another, we better one another, we practice the truth. And the truth will set us free.
The light exposes what was hidden in darkness. In the light, I see that I am not as smart as I like to think I am, nor as holy, nor as righteous. In the light, I realize that I am not as rich, nor as poor as I imagine myself to be. In the light, I am not an extremely gifted lover and sophisticated gentleman, but a middle class white guy who is about 20 pounds overweight, drives low-cost cars, and just got his first recliner (La-z-boy), and likes his X-box. I don’t do what I should, I don’t think what is pure, I don’t speak like I ought. There are only two ways to handle this.
The most common way to deal with light is to retreat into the darkness. “It’s not true! It’s all lies! You can’t tell me what to do!” Burying themselves deep inside themselves, wrapping a themselves in protective layers of ego, and common sense, and self-righteousness – many people hide themselves from the light that will expose their true state and lay bare all their fantasies.
The better way is to see what you really are. To see all your shortcomings. To despair that you, even you, will never reach Heaven, never accomplish all your goals, never live up to the ideal, never attain anything you have been taught to want. Secular or “Christian,” all have fallen short of the glory of God. There is none good enough. Except one. When we realize our depraved state, we can retreat back into ourselves or reach out for the loving hand of Jesus. He can make us righteous. He can make us whole. We were created to dwell in peace with him. With all our faults and foibles exposed, we may be open for the comfort that comes from being forgiven. Forgiveness is good. Forgiveness is best.
Reframe your world today. Walk in the light. Dwell with other believers. Share a message of truth and hope. Practice the truth.
October 28, 2003
Now More than Ever
We can never forget that a part of every issue, behind every statistic, inside each person who is quoted on any topic . . . is a person. A life specially and uniquely created to serve a special and wonderful purpose on this earth.
Read this woman's story about rape. Hear the pain of a 13 year old who didn't completely understand about sex. The trauma of a life that was derailed by substance abuse and a troubled youth. The agony of a soul whose material self was violated in a way it should not have been - it was not right - that is not the way it should have been.
Again I am reminded of why I am becomming a pastor. Souls need care. Remember, my friends, that our struggle is not against people made of flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.
Be careful how you speak about rape or any other subject where there are injured souls. We strive to live lives that are worthy of the gospel. That means showing respect for all individuals who are created in the image of our Creator. We fail as a church when we do not reach out and love people who have been wounded by the sin in this fallen world.
Do something eternal today. Care for somebody.
October 27, 2003
Google may live
Google continues to provide me with amusement. The Rex says, "Despite your slights against this site in the past, Google, you may continue to function."
Imagine what some guy thought when he saw the Blandus Rex entry on the first page of a search for combination of JavaScript Vs JScript. Read what Google chose to display from my text.
No wonder he clicked on it! Wouldn't you? This stuff really cracks me up....
October 24, 2003
Terri Schiavo
Get the facts about Terri Schiavo before you blog. Everyone has got something to say, but there are a lot of reports that leave out the unseemly details. Before you make up your mind, you should read this and this.
Then you must visit :
Consider whose dignity you are trying to save.
Don't You Know?
I don't know how to explain it
But I know that words will hardly do
Miracles with signs and wonders
Aren't enough for me to prove to you
Don't you know I've always loved you
Even before there was time
Though you turn away
I'll tell you still
Don't you know I've always loved you
And I always will
Greater love has not a man
Than the one who gives his life to prove
That he would do anything
And that's what I'm going to do for you
Don't you know I've always loved you
Even before there was time
Though you turn away
I'll tell you still
Don't you know I've always loved you
And I always will
Third Day, "I've Always Loved You"
Lyrics by Mac Powell / Music by Third Day
Blandus Rest
Take heed to yourselves, lest you be void of that saving grace of God which you offer to others, and be strangers to the effectual working of that gospel which you preach; and lest, while you proclaim to the world the necessity of a Saviour, your own hearts should neglect him, and you should miss of an interest in him and his saving benefits.
This is more difficult than you think. It is hard to take care of everyone you know. It is difficult to pastor people. Everyone has an opinion. Everyone has a problem. Everyone would like for you to spend more time with them. Yes, it is a joy and blessing - but not at the expense of my own soul. I have been challenged so many times this week....I need some down time to think, to rest, whatever.
October 23, 2003
For the Record...
I always cheer for the National League (and you should too). I dislike the DH very, very much. Go Marlins!
You still have made a choice...
I am disgusted with liberal media over the Terri Schiavo case. I try to give the industry the benfit of the doubt when it comes to claims that they are trying to be objective, but this case is clearly displaying the error of my ways. Perhaps it was because I had some previous knowledge of the case prior to hearing all the news reports.
Every news story I see or hear titles this the "Right to Die" case, which assumes one position in the disagreement to be more valid than the other. Every one trots out "medical ethicists" who claim that killing Terri is the right thing to do. You can't get very far in "medical ethics" unless you consistently agree with medical doctors. Medical doctors are trained to think in terms of the physical, material, "scientific" realm - not philosophically or otherwise - and are therefore poor candidates to comprehensively comment on these issues. Further, only "death is o.k. and preferable" minded people have been given time on "mainstream press." Being somewhat connected to the medical community myself, I know that there is a huge debate over End of Life issues (which would have been the most objective title for news reports) - no one doctor or "ethicist" can speak comprehensively to this issue. If no one person or group can speak comprehensively then objectivity requires a reporter to get more than one quote from varied sources. Every story I have seen slants any involvement of those who think Terri should not be killed as exerting their political strength to force their views on all Americans in a dangerous way that threatens their civil liberties. "Hey liberal media. Guess what? No one in this country has the right to kill another citizen for commercial gain."
Not my usual style today. I'm just so overwhelmed at the sheer one-sided support I see for the killing of a weak woman. The Culture War is farther along than I thought. We must fight. We must fight hard. We must not give up. We must not back down. The time for compromises is comming to an end. Fight for right. Fight for liberty. Fight for life.
October 22, 2003
Get out of my sandbox
Yesterday, on the Tavis Smiley Show on NPR, recent DC Court of Appeals nominee Janice Rogers Brown was discussed. Judge Brown is an African-American woman and currently serves on the California Supreme Court. The segment discussed the Congressional Black Caucus' opposition to her nomination. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) spoke on behalf of the Black Caucus.
What struck me about Rep. Lee's opposition was that it was based on what her notion of "law" is. Lee does not like Brown because she believes Brown works against "established law." However, the "established law" Lee referred to is several U.S. Supreme Court decisions that conservatives would claim were the result of "judicial fiat" that usurped power from one branch of government and "legislated from the bench." Lee is concerned that Brown will have a different version of the way issues should be legislated from the bench and now desires that we all proceed with "established law" - not with individual justices' interpretations of the laws.
It seems to me that the liberals are being cut by a double-edged sword and do not like the feeling. This is one reason why I consider myself a conservative. I think we have rules to manage administrative procedure and change processes so that we do not have one group running roughshod over another because of popular whim. Liberals have worked hard for 30 years to circumvent the established procedures and force their changes through the court system. The most dangerous thing (to the left) is for judges to be elected and appointed that will consult the written law instead of the cultural elite. They have only themselves to blame if conservatives begin using the same tactics to fight back.
October 21, 2003
Bad vs. Good = Win
Being a responsible parent-to-be, I just watched an hour of public television about human nature and parenting.
The little professor man from the University of Arkansas was telling me that there are three basic ways to view the behavior of children. That they were devils (this is a very bad view), that they were clay (this was a moderate view), or that they were basically good little angels (this was the proper view).
To explain the devil view, the little professor man quoted lots of historical church figures and ministers. He picked harsh sounding quotes and altered his voice to make them sound heartless and mean. He explained that a parent who held this view would react to a minor infraction by a child by "locking the child up in their room for years."
By contrast, the angel view - spoken of in an angelic voice - reasoned that kids would just be kids, and wouldn't it be better if we just worked with the children and helped them become who they already are meant to be. Oh, doesn't that just sound more like what we should be doing? You see, children are basically good.
Once again I see Jake Allen's reasoning behind defunding all public television and radio. The not-so-subtle message is, "If you listen to your minister and the teachings of the Bible, you really hate your kids and will be a bad parent." This little professor man constructed a straw man - a distorted shadow of biblical teaching - and tore him down in a systematic, soft-spoken, emotional way.
Someone has said, "All theology is personal." Perhaps the little man grew up in a very harsh Mormon environment and is revolting or something. It does not give him the right to ignore biblical theology regarding the fall of man, humanity's natural selfishness, and the goal and purpose of children.
I was appalled at his one-sided and, basically, uninformative presentation. I guess you get what you pay for.
October 20, 2003
Won't a Good Moral Life Get Me Into Heaven?
The Ockhamist recently raised the question of good people going to hell. I have been reflecting on this for the last few days and his blog motivated me to reproduce the following from Paul Little. I highly recommend his book.
Q. Won’t a Good, Moral Life Get me to Heaven?
A. “This question reflects a very prevalent attitude of our age. “Isn’t living a good moral life all I need to do to get to heaven?” Or as a student at Duke University said after a discussion, “If God grades on the curve, I’ll make it.” His words are an apt summary of the confusion today about religion in general. Most people will accept this philosophy that all we need to do is our best, and then everything will be all right, or at least we’ll be able to squeak by. In this wistful hope we see an incredible optimism about humanity’s righteousness and an appalling ignorance of God’s infinite holiness. God doesn’t grade on the curve. He has an absolute standard, Jesus Christ.
“Light, when it is turned on, destroys darkness. Likewise, the character of God so blazes in its purity that it consumes all evil. If we came to him without any help, we could not abide in his presence but would be consumed because of the corruption in our lives. The perfect righteousness of Jesus Christ is the only basis on which we can come into fellowship with the living God.
“An illustration helps people to see their misunderstanding here. Suppose the entire human race lined up on the West Coast with one objective, to get to Hawaii. We’ll equate their goal with God’s standard of righteousness. The gun is fired and all the swimmers jump in. As we watch the swimmers we see the most moral person of all. She’s been a wonderful professor and a good person, always doing her best and following high moral standards; yet she would be the first to admit her imperfection and sinfulness. But she’s out there in the water seventy-five miles from shore.
“Next we pick out the Joe College Fellow who’s not quite ready for Sing-Sing or Cook County Jail. he does cheat on exams a little and goes on a binge now and then; he gets into a few scrapes and does things that are wrong. But he’s not really too bad. He’s gotten about ten miles out. A derelict from Skid Row is practically drowning one hundred and fifty yards offshore. Scattered about in the water between the two extremes of the spectrum we see the rest of the human race. As we look from the bum on Skid Row to the Joe College type to the tremendously moral professor who’s gone seventy-five miles, we see the difference. It’s an enormous difference. But what’s the difference in terms of Hawaii? Everyone will drown.
“A set of swimming instructions won’t help at this point. We need somebody who will take us to Hawaii. This is where Jesus Christ comes in. If you can make it to Hawaii by yourself, if you can live a life that is absolutely perfect in thought, word and deed, you can make it to heaven on your own steam. but no man ever has or ever will succeed. All the other religions of the world are essentially sets of swimming instructions, suggested codes of ethics for a wonderful pattern of life.
“But people’s basic problem is not lack of knowledge about what they ought to do; it is lacking the power to live as they ought. The good news of Christianity is that Jesus Christ, who invaded human history, does for us what we couldn’t do for ourselves. Through him we may be reconciled to God given his righteousness and enabled to have fellowship with him in his very presence.”
October 17, 2003
Google Gorilla
Google is now censoring their content. They have removed every obvious pro-marriage website (including yours truly) from their listing of the search "defense of marriage week". They have taken over Yahoo! (produces the exact same results) and AskJeeves does not list any hits whatsoever. This is a sad sad day for the freedom of the internet. I will blog on. . .
Defense of Marriage : The Enemy Within…
It pains me to say it, but marriage needs to be defended . . . against Christians. With a divorce rate slightly higher than the mainstream and some estimates of male unfaithfulness at double their secular counterparts, Christians treat God’s wishes as trivial and defame the name of Christ. Should I be the one to remind every Christian that we are to live our lives as worthy of the Gospel? Does this mean that we should sin all the more that grace might increase? May it never be!
Now let me say a few things about these social surveys that look so bad for Christians. I don’t know how much stock I put in their conclusions. First of all, they don’t usually define a “Christian.” For all I know, they are surveying a bunch of Episcopalians and the data is horribly skewed. Another thing I find disturbing is that I usually see statistics for secular marriages that end in divorce and Christian people who have been divorced. They then compare the two percentages and see that the Christians are higher. But if a Christian couple divorces, then there are two people showing up – double counting! – when added to Christians who were divorced by an unbelieving spouse, then the “Christian rate” edges up a bit. Also, there is a fundamental flaw in the way divorce rates are currently calculated. In 1992, some brainiac at the Census Bureau noticed that there were about 1 million divorces in 1990 and 2 million new marriages. Viola! Half of all new marriages will end in divorce. Poppycock. He failed to take into account the about 52 million existing marriages. The correct divorce rate should be [(Divorce) / (Current + New)]. Unfortunately, people having heard this statistic for 10 years have begun to fulfill what could only be a self-fulfilling prophecy. Maybe I should be blogging about protecting marriage from government, or stupid people, or math.
At any rate, however the numbers are calculated, Christians’ should be much lower. The fact that they are not is damning. What have we done with the grace we’ve been given? Have we been so afraid of not being cool, sophisticated, part of the in-crowd that we have neglected to call sin a sin and work to restore broken marriages? Have we been so self-involved that we have not provided an environment where hope and healing can take place? Have we been so busy with our building projects that we have neglected to build up the body? Sadly, the answer is “Yes.”
Christians need to recover their mandate for pastoral care. Each local church is to be a community of faith that supports one another and looks out for each member of the flock – standing firm in one spirit, with one mind striving side by side for the faith of the gospel, and not frightened in anything by our opponents. An interested people who uphold the standards of the faith community. No one wants to return to a stereotypical gossip-laden busybody congregation, but we should be aware of what is going on in each other’s lives and be willing to step in and help – or correct. We must exhort one another every day, as long as it is called “today,” that none of us many be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. We, as Christians, have a responsibility to one another in Christ. The current ambiguity in the average Christian’s understanding of individuality, sexuality, and marriage testifies mightily to our failure.
This is one reason why I am becoming a pastor. I don’t want to take my responsibility lightly. The people need a place they can go to be accepted and meet Christ. Truth must be proclaimed. One of my buddies tells me that I am idealistic and in store for a rude awakening. No, I say. I have seen the problems in the church. I have witnessed the depravity of man. I will take the first step. If none go with me, I still will follow the one path of my risen Savior. I will trust him. I will do as he directs. I will preach as he has spoken. I will stand for Scripture. I will stand for Christ. I will stand for the gospel. I will stand for what is right. And this week – I take a stand for marriage.
October 16, 2003
Defense of Marriage : Update! The Bible was not Written in English!!!
It may come as a surprise to some people, but the Bible never uses the word homosexual. Actually the Bible, in the original languages, is curiously devoid of any English words whatsoever. The GLBT population would like you to believe that they have definitive proof that the Bible does not really contain negative references to homosexual behavior. Since they are the ones who finally got people excited about marriage, it seems appropriate for me as a biblical Christian to at least attempt to address the issue this week. I do not have time to cover everything, but we can look at three short passages.
1 Timothy 1:8-11
In this passage, Paul is telling Timothy that the law is used to restrain lawbreakers. Lawbreakers are those who act contrary to sound doctrine according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God. One of the categories of people mentioned is translated variously as "men who practice homosexuality", homosexuals, perverts, and sodomites. The word is formed from two Greek words meaning "man" and "bed". The word we translate "bed" often is classically used as a verb coyly referring to the action a man performs with a woman in a bed. It refers to sexual intercourse or a seminal emission. In classical usage, when the two words appeared together, they were used in a phrase like "men bedding men like other men bed women." Paul squished these words together to make a new word roughly meaning something like "the man-bedders." I.e. men who have sexual intercourse with other men. So, no - the word "homosexual" does not appear in the Bible, but "man-bedder" does. I think it is the same thing really.
1 Corinthians 6:9-10
This is part of a larger, beautiful passage about our liberation from sinful bondage through Jesus Christ. The same word, "man-bedder", comes up again in 6:9 describing an unrighteous class of people that "will not inherit the kingdom of God." Today, I am not in the business of completely unpacking that phrase, but a brief word needs to be said - I think that homosexuals can become Christians. Verse 11 says simply that some Christians were previously "man-bedders." I differ from homosexuals in that I believe that once you accept Christ and his Mastery or Lordship over your life, you will cease homosexual behavior (like the others mentioned in verse 11). Whatever you think about Paul, it seems pretty clear that he was referring to homosexuals (defined as those men who have sex with other men).
Romans 1:26-27
This one is my favorite to refute because it gets at the heart of the worldview issue. Part of a larger passage about following God's desires and not selfish desires, these two verses are dealing specifically with idolatrous people who worship the creature rather than the Creator. Homosexuality is described as a selfish desire to please oneself, rather than God. This is the essence of sin. Paul describes homosexuals as having "degrading passions," and a "debased mind." Specifically though, we are concerned with whether or not the Bible refers to homosexuals, per se.
In verse 26, the word "lesbian" is not used, but the literal phrase is "for their females exchanged the natural function of sexual intercourse for that which is contrary to nature." Sure, this may mean something else, but in context the easy reading is that we are talking about lesbianism.
In verse 27, the words "gay" or "homosexual" are not used. But a literal rendering would be: "In the same way, men also abandoned the natural function of sexual intercourse with women, they were inflamed in their lustful passions for one another, men in men working out shameless acts." Whew. "Men in men working out shameful acts." Gotta tell ya, sounds like homosexuality to me.
So, briefly, we see instances of "man-bedders", "contrary to nature women", and "men in men." All these categories of behavior are condemned in scripture. To defend homosexual behavior by appealing to the lack of a word strictly meaning homosexual is linguisticly unjustifiable. Imagine a textbook from Sociology 101 in the year 3050 A.D. :
~ In the American times, there were many who denounced "gays" and "homosexuals." The gays were simply happy people - not any different than anyone else, but more pleasent to be around due to their liberal attitudes and flair for fashion and style. There was a different group called homosexuals - who apparently wanted to live "with the same sex." This practice of men living with men was common throughout the culture, particularly on college campuses in units known as fraternaties. There is no reason to interpret these terms as "men having sex with men." Let us state it strongly - there is no word in the ancient world that can be translated as the modern term manbedder. Attempts to discredit the current practices of manbedders by appealing to ancient literature is misguided and uninformed. ~Give me a break. Stop reading modern notions of gay theory into our ancient literature. Please stop with the "it is not really in there" lunacy.
Again I would like to say to the readers of my blog that I am not necessarily against gays or whatever. But I am pro-God and whatever He has to say. It is clear that homosexual behavior is not something God wants us to engage in. The scripture speaks very strongly on the matter. Therefore, I hate homosexuality. I hate it like the plague of sin and rebellious selfishness that it is (knowing that it is not the only sin). My desire is to see homosexuals receive healing and come into a right relationship with their Creator same as I have. I don't think this post will convince any of them, but it is good to speak the truth and let it carry the day. The more we know of the truth, the more prepared we will be when we encounter various situations where it can transform lives. If you struggle with this, click here.
Marriage is for one man and one woman. I believe this. I believe this because it is a clear scriptural teaching. I have every right to vote and move and protest to get my way encoded into law as anyone else. Don't step on my 1st Amendment Rights and try to claim that because I am religious I cannot participate. This is who I am and the Constitution and the Law must be blind to how I became this way. Fight for right. Fight for liberty. Fight for marriage.
October 15, 2003
Defense of Marriage : Cultural Pressure
As we continue discussions inspired by Marriage Protection Week, we note that the institution that is marriage is sometimes attacked directly, sometimes indirectly. Marriage is part of the overall plan the Lord has for society. When speaking in secular settings, even without mentioning God, we can make a good argument for (1 man, 1 woman, 4 life) marriage as a bedrock of a healthy and progressive civilization. The point is that marriage is part of a larger interrelated package. Work against one part of the package, you weaken the whole thing.
To go way out into left field to show the interconnectedness of all things, I will today discuss Christian Music. The link is tenuous, I admit. But again, the goal here is to show the reality of a cultural oppression that shares proponents and opponents.
Music is understood to be the primal call of a people. Originally a religious device, (many today would shun the term "religious," instead preferring "spiritual") music was the tribal pulse and pound of a people's search and desire to find meaning, to express, to explain. For many, music symbolizes the humaness of being human. Art in its purest form, the expression of the inexpressible, the longing for the unattainable, the passion borne out of man's symbiotic relationship with all that the universe is and means to him (/her). Many still recognize these roots of music and strive to appreciate the longings of primitive man. This is why there is always a "World" music section in the record stores. Music is what we are, the hope of what we can become.
This is also why music is so personal. Folks who like Country music, really like country. People who don't, hate it. To the latter, Country is an affront to their sense of progressivism. It is a return to an unenlightened past that does not share their city convictions. To the former, it is a passioned description of real life. Not borne of fancy-pants ne’er-do-wells who think they are better than "us," but from honest people, described in an honest way. Those university professors and cultural elites who describe the Symphony as the only legitimate musical form cringe when they hear the posses and gang-bangers described as "artists." The repetition, the noise, the W O R D S work against the purity, the harmony, the mathematical precision they desire for their own lives. Meanwhile, the Rap musicians offer up their impassioned plea for meaning. Describing the pain of their universe in graphic, over-the-top language that cries out, "Take me seriously, I matter too..." The suffering and pain is evident in their most harshly described behavior. A people still struggling to be free from the daemons that enslave them. As a cultural art form, American music takes many forms - all disliked by some - all representative of people with a particular point of view.
Christian music is no different. It is the heart cry of a people who have been liberated from sin and bondage in an already / not-yet situation. A people who desire to do, and to be, good. A people who do not desire for themselves, but recognize the control of the Creator. A people who believe in a Heaven and a Hell, and desire that many would enter the former and none would enter the latter. A culture of people who desire to express the longings of their own hearts for a better world. The cultural instruction of believers in a code of behavior encouraging others in the same situations. This is music from a people who believe the message is more important than the instrumental medium. Christian music, like any other genre, is indicative of the people group it represents.
But Christian music is universally qualified as "bad" music. It is music that does not live up to the "standards" of the industry. "If those artists made better music," they claim, "We would listen/play them more often." Right off, it is easy to see that this is a bogus claim. Have you heard some of the unformatted 3 minute pop crap that passes for Country these days? Have you heard the discombobulated noise and vacuous lyrics that pushes the Top 40? Did you catch any of the contemporary junk that fills the college concert halls? Have you been disgusted with the idiotic lunacy that takes place at the Apollo? Every genre has its bad artists and stupid sounding songs. Comparing bad to good will guarantee you a win every time. Bad to bad - I think Christians win - at least they are trying to say something intelligible. Good to Good - I would put the likes of Stephen Curtis Chapman, Toby Mac, and Third Day against anyone you could send me in terms of musical composition and lyrical quality. Sure, you may prefer one genre over another, but an honest evaluation will not deny the musical competence of these artists.
The main problem with Christian music is not the music but the message. "The world" does not like the message. It does not like Jesus Christ. It does not like to admit the root of sin and the call for repentance unto salvation. It rejects the Master and seeks its own self. Popular culture rejects the Christian message, Christian music, and Christians. It couches its criticism in elitist talk and double-speak in order to give the appearance of discreditation to a people it wishes would just go away. Christians who are overly critical of the "quality" of Christian music have bought into the lies and value system of a demonic system.
This is a relatively unimportant issue for most people, Christians included. There are not a lot of big stories in the "music wars." However, the same cultural bias against biblical Christianity that works itself out in discriminatory music selection works itself out in opposition to concepts of marriage that align with the biblical vision. We hear talk of the 1st Amendment prohibiting Christians from promoting proper marriage. We hear talk that divorce is acceptable and does not really harm anyone. We hear talk that gays are o.k. and should have the same "rights" as everyone else. Talk that traditional marriage supporters are unenlightened, unintelligent, and unsophisticated. Rabbit trails and double-speak to get around the main issue : Jesus Christ, God and his demands, sin and the need for redemption - the Gospel.
Friends, we have to understand these cultural pressures to squeeze Christianity out of existence. They are working against marriage, which is a part of God's plan - and therefore, part of our concern. Families have a lot of people trying to tear them apart and force them to reject the aims and laws of God. Those people are winning. Fight back. Stand up to opposition and unwarranted criticism. Shine the pure light on their emotional arguments and expose them for what they are. Live in a manner that is worthy of the Gospel of Christ. Do something to help someone out this week. Do something to encourage a family. Do something to support them in the name of Christ Jesus. Do anything, but do something. The time to win this world is now.
October 14, 2003
The Last Straight Man on Earth?
According to Google, I am the primary person defending marriage during Defense of Marriage Week, also known as Marriage Protection Week. World, watch out!
You Should Read This...
This is quite an article on abortion and what the Catholics can start doing to stop it. Thanks to ~gauche for the reference.
Defense of Marriage : What God Hath Joined Together…
Marriage needs to be protected from Divorce. Well, duh. Of course it does. Well, why isn’t it? This article gives a decent introduction to the topic. I want to concentrate today on the interplay between divorcing parents and how divorce affects children. Much of the following is condensed from a paper I wrote on the subject.
Thirty years ago, the divorce rate was skyrocketing and many psychologists tried to convince the public that children would not suffer long-term harm from a family breakup. Today’s scholarship recognizes the truth of a statement made by psychologist and researcher Judith Wallerstein in her pioneering longitudinal study, “One cannot predict long-term effects of divorce on children from how they react at the outset.” As researchers gain greater access to the behaviors of children of divorce (as children, adolescents, and adults) they find a large number of disruptive outcomes due directly and indirectly to parental divorce. These unhealthy behavior patterns begin at the time of divorce and last a lifetime. By studying some effects of divorce on children, we reveal the sinful selfishness that underlies most divorces today - and give another reason to defend marriage.
For children of all ages, the emotional problems manifested in the early stages of the divorce process are rooted in feelings of depression and anxiety. For example, the children in Wallerstein’s study experienced a high incidence of intense loneliness due to absent working parents, single parents who were dating, and newly remarried parents. Her description of the findings is still referenced by much of the literature on the subject:
“We found 37 percent of all the children and adolescents to be moderately to severely depressed. As at the eighteen-month check point, depression was the most common psychopathological finding and was manifested in a wide variety of feelings and behavior, including chronic and intense unhappiness (at least one child with suicidal preoccupation), sexual promiscuity, delinquency (drug-abuse, petty stealing, some alcoholism, breaking and entering), poor learning, intense anger, apathy, restlessness and a sense of intense, unrelenting emotional deprivation.”
It is really in adulthood that children of divorce suffer the most when in search of love, sexual intimacy, and commitment. “Adults whose parents divorced when they were children are significantly more likely to marry early, have a history of divorce and remarriage, and have an unhappy relationship, and they are more likely to mistrust other people.” (Wallerstein) The “life-courses” of children of divorce follow statistically distinguishable patterns that contribute to less education, lower socio-economic levels, problems with interpersonal development, and higher levels of adult depression than children whose parents did not divorce.
The factors that cause the emotional stress that begin these destructive life-courses are related to parents working for their own interests at the expense of the children. The greatest time of stress for children is intensified by parents’ self-seeking behavior as they engage in the process of separating and legally divorcing. During this time, it is the excessive conflict between parents that causes the most psychological trauma to children. The anger, depression, and separation that often accompanies divorce also reduces the ability of parents to effectively engage in parenting activities.
Additional stress and psychological harm occurs with the remarriage of the custodial spouse. This is significant for a large number of children as approximately 80 percent of divorced fathers and 75 percent of divorced mothers marry a second time. Contrary to popular assumption, remarriage, even with its additional economic security, does not tend to have an overall protective effect for children of divorce. This is in part due to the higher rate of divorce for secondary marriages, 60 percent, compared to 45 percent for first marriages. Remarriage does not mitigate the effects of a first divorce. The same selfish people who divorced one partner find it as easy, or easier, to divorce another.
The biblical case is thus: God has created humans in his own image (Gen 1:27). As creatures reflecting the image of God, men and women are personal, or relational beings. This relational impulse is further described by Genesis 2:17 as God says, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.” This relational creation is the basis for marriage as described in Genesis 2:24, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” The institution of marriage is based on the creative acts of God that yield personal, socially-orientated men and women. When God gives two people in marriage, he grants them a special relation that flows from the divine act of his creation.
Within the context of this relationship, humans are instructed to be fruitful and multiply in Genesis 1:28 as God blesses the first human family. This binds the presence of children to the existence of the relationship given by God in marriage. Just as no other helper was suitable for Adam, save that which came from his own body, no manner of engaging in the work of the earth was suitable save that which came from the one-flesh body of marriage shared with Eve. Children are binding symbols of the one-flesh relationship given by God and the calling of obedience God has on his creation.
Children exist as, among other things, a symbol of the unity of creation and calling; as both a part of humans’ biological self and as a reminder of the responsibility humans have in the work of God on the earth. The Westminster Larger Catechism succinctly summarizes a host of biblical instruction on the responsibilities of parents to their children:
“It is required of superiors [parents], according to that power they receive from God, and that relation wherein they stand, to love, pray for and bless their inferiors [children]; to instruct, counsel, and admonish them; countenancing, commending, and rewarding such as do well; and discountenancing, reproving, and chastising such as do ill; protecting, and providing for them all things necessary for soul and body: and by grave, wise, holy, and exemplary carriage, to procure glory to God, honour to themselves, and so to preserve that authority which God hath put upon them.”
Parents concerned with Scripture need to understand that divorce in any case must be seen as a last option and as a failure of two humans to adhere to the biblical standards for marriage. Divorce is selfish. The same sinful selfishness that characterizes divorce characterizes bad parenting. Again, the Westminster Larger Catechism summarizes much of the biblical teaching regarding the lack of fidelity to biblical standards of parental influence:
“The sins of superiors [parents] are, besides the neglect of the duties required of them, an inordinate seeking of themselves, their own glory, ease, profit, or pleasure; . . . dissuading, discouraging, or discountenancing them in that which is good; . . . careless exposing, or leaving them to wrong, temptation, and danger; provoking them to wrath; or any way dishonouring themselves, or lessening their authority, by an unjust, indiscreet, rigorous, or remiss behaviour.”
This description perfectly describes the behaviors and attitudes involved in divorce. As parents selfishly seek their own interests, children are harmed. This is true for both emotional and separational divorce and is seen in the increased inability of these children to establish stable and healthy relationships as adults. The stress of divorce leaves children with discouragement as to what is good and higher rates of depression, anger, and lack of trust follow. As parents become less effective in their parenting after divorce, they leave their children to excess danger and temptation. Higher rates of promiscuity, early marriages, repeated divorces, drug-abuse, and delinquency are the results. Further, parents who divorce dishonor themselves by tarnishing both the gift and responsibility of marriage.
The culture of easy divorce must be stopped. Work politically, make all the laws you want, etc, etc. The problem is partly legal, but it resides more in the hearts and minds of careless individuals who do not prepare themselves to accept a role God has outlined for them. Marriage is not the easy answer for guilt-free sex. There are consequences to this biblical action that must be considered. Parents most influence society through the proper parenting of their children. When parents fail to guard their marriages from divorce, they contribute to generation after generation of moral decay and the ripples of their decision create a wake in the waters of social stability. Marriage is important. Parenting children to mature adults is important. Do something beneficial for yourself and your society – improve your marriage, better your children - stay married.
October 13, 2003
Defense of Marriage : The Pornography Plague
Don’t be an idiot - Pornography hurts marriages. You can get a bunch of ACLU flag-burners and Librarians together who will swear up and down that what really harms people is not exposure to deviant sex, but repression of natural human impulses. If you’ve ever been exposed to pornography, you know better.
Marriage needs to be defended against pornography for several reasons:
1) Porn breaks the marriage covenant. If you are lusting after women (or men) with your heart, you have already committed adultery. There are no ifs, ands, or buts – no excuses – no victimless crimes - You have violated the promise you made to your spouse and to your God.
2) Porn increases the desire for private sexual actions. Porn is an addictive spiral. You may think you can control yourself, but the data shows that over time you will need more quantity and graphic quality to maintain the same level of excitement and satisfaction. Sexual behavior apart from the marriage relationship is condemned in scripture.
3) Excessive masturbation (for men) has one of two effects. It will either desensatize you to sexual activity (thus decreasing your ability to perform sexually) or it will train your body for premature ejaculation (thus decreasing your ability to please your partner). Either way, you violate your wife's access to her "marital rights." Your body is not your own.
4) Studies show that long exposure to pornography leads to increased instances of anger and manipulative behavior. It leads to lower respect for the opposite sex and supressed emotions. These are not qualities that contribute to successful marriages.
5) Porn violates the dignity of persons. You are denigrated as one who is rebelling against what God created you to be. You dishonor your spouse by focusing attention and sexual energy away from the marriage bed. You also support the industry that subjects people to humiliating behavior for commercial gain. As you look at porn – imagine your daughter or sister being forced to pose by an overbearing boyfriend or because she can’t make her rent this month. These women are somebody’s family members. They are created in the image of God and you support their explotation.
Q. Great. Porn is bad for marriage, but so is death by automobile accident. Why do we need a whole day on this blog to defend marriage against it?
A. Because it is becoming more prevalent and the industry is targeting you.
Of course porn is addictive. If it was not, the “first one is free” approach would not be used so often - and the industry knows it. Addiction is why porn continues to grow and expand. Like reflections of Satan, porn pushers are always on the prowl, working to deceive, trying to get men (& women) to stray. One industry insider describes how far-reaching porn has become – and that it was the Presidency of Bill Clinton that made it possible for porn to become firmly entrenched in modern American Culture – while complaining of new self-regulatory practices the industry is implementing to keep porn mainline.
Many ACLU-types help the porn industry by promoting an agenda of loose morals and attempting to steer discussions of the harmful effects of sexually deviant materials toward the Free Speech bandwaggon. They boldly engage in the typical selective recall and doubletalk, but not all feminists will agree their slutty sisters.
Pornography is not just harmless fun. It is a destructive force that is being pushed into the lives of everyday Americans at an aggressive pace. Sex sells – movies, tv, advertisements, etc – all trying to redefine your reality to pull you into the World and keep you from Christ. Soulless executives working for profit at the expense of decency, morality, and family. If you do not work to combat this evil, it will find and affect you. It cannot simply be ignored.
Porn is selfish. Marriage is selfless.
Porn destroys. Marriage builds up.
Porn limits. Marriage increases.
Porn violates marriage.
Defend your marriage (and yourself) against the pornography industry.
October 10, 2003
Marriage Protection Week
Well, faithful readers, October 12-18 (next week) has been declared the Defense of Marriage Week. You can find some basics at, naturally, MarriageProtectionWeek.com. Another decent site about what concerns marriage traditionalists is MarriageDebate.com.
This week has been declared in no small part to draw public awareness to the need for and benefits of traditional marriage under attack by homosexual activist organizations like Lambda Legal. The homosexual argument seems to be : "Since bad people suffer from bad decisions, we should force people to think like us." Darlene chose not to fulfill her work requirements? Let's marry gays! A young man has an altercation after "cruising" in the public showers? Let's redefine marriage! I'm not sure what "cruising" is, but if he did it to me, I'd probably beat his ass too. (No pun intended). Look! Instead of pursuing a proper life and seeking counseling for aberrant behavior, we chose to live with other men and have deviant sex a lot and now we can't see each in the hospital or pay each other's bills - Redefine society to please us! These arguments (?) are not convincing.
The "problem" of marriage is ultimately one of worldviews:
* If you think nothing of marriage - if everything we see and believe and interact with are human constructs of thought that our enlightened postmodern brains can now change with our every whim - well, why not change everything for those with the loudest voices? Why not fight and go to war with one another so the dominant culture will prevail? Will not-believing in my bullet keep it from destroying your body?
* If you think that human social constructs serve a purpose of stabilizing culture and allowing society a framework in which to operate and progress, then let's talk about not intentionally hurting people who choose the gay lifestyle and slowly and reasonably work on evolving our social constructs. In-your-face activism and fast action against the majority opinion on this (or any other) core societal issue will eventually end in civil war. No, homosexuals are not like black people.
* Of course, if you are a biblical Christian, you have very little room for debate. Homosexual activity is expressly prohibited in scripture and, as such, gays and lesbians should not be allowed to defame the sacred institution of marriage. Contrary to liberal belief, my religion is a part of me and has every right to influence my stands in the public square. Let your voice be heard.
Not all marriage defense is about gays. SGA-people have created the most pressing battle front, but they are only able to do this because so many heterosexual people have neglected and harmed marriage themselves. High divorce rates, cheating on spouses, neglecting children - all have been rising for years, but only get the tsch-tsch from conservatives and Christians. People of faith are now (as a large group) waking up only because gays are forcing themselves through the system and more directly affecting the institutions and constructs we hold dear. It is good that we have responded to the "yuck factor," but it is sad that we did not do more to convince secular heterosexuals regarding the importance of marriage.
Over the next week, I will be posting several things that are related to the theme of marriage and the issues the subject inspires. Faithful readers, you have all weekend to get your thinking caps on . . . Marriage Smackdown 2003 begins next week!
P.S.
"The bullet comment" was more about postmodernists and civil war than about homosexuals. Please do not shoot any homosexuals this weekend because you think I said so. If you do, I will kick your ass as well. It is a shame I even have to think about posting this. Morons.
October 09, 2003
The World Behind Me, The Cross Before Me…
If the Republicans think that Schwarzenegger is the wave of the future, they had better think again. Let it be said, Blandus is not a Republican. Blandus is a conservative as the present labels go. A social conservative at that.
There has been a lot (and more will come) of scuttlebutt regarding Gov. Arnold heralding the new image of a conservatism that has been "liberated" from the oppressive, intolerant, hate-mongering, anti-everything, cultural right-wing wackos (me). The predatorial gays are hard at work "meekly" crying out for some fairness, some equality, some tolerance in the party of Lincoln. "Please, conservative brothers," they seem to be saying, "let us be a part of what we can all agree upon." They sound very reasonable as they ask, "Please use our logs in your planks..."
I will not vote for a party that works against - or even adversely compromises - the issues that are most dear to me. The Republican party and conservative wonks have done a good job of fooling many biblical Christians into thinking that Christianity = Conservatism.
Christians need to remember and realize that Christianity is not concerned with Conservatism, it is concerned with devotion to Christ and living a life that is worthy of the Gospel - such that the gospel may be proclaimed and men saved by his grace.
As Republicans shift to the left on cultural issues in a way that runs counter to biblical Christianity, they leave behind those who will stand firm for the gospel, biblical ethics, and a worldview that does not allow compromise with "the world". Quite simply, as they leave us behind, we should not vote for them. Biblical Christianity reflects an absolute standard of reality. Right, Left, Liberal, and Conservative are artificial constructs that overlay our present debates. As American Christians, we must participate in our political process in a way that holds true to our biblical convictions. To do any less is to practice idolatry and brings shame to the Christ we serve.
If you just don't get it....
Sometimes reading Quinefan is fun.
{hint : this is one of those times}
October 08, 2003
A Parabolic Tale...
There was once a young man who entered the woods. He had recently come of an age where he must strike out and make his mark on the world. His family behind him, the young man looked ahead to adventure and glory like the stories of old. With his head high and back straight, he boldly entered the unexplored forest. His name was Olem.
Olem wandered for weeks and weeks in the woods. Since his family had always provided the food, he found it difficult to forage. He became weak and unhealthy. One day he stumbled into a small village and many villagers came to his aid. "I didn't know how difficult it was just to survive in the world," he told his new friends. The villagers did not have much, but they provided food and shelter until he regained his strength and was again ready to make his mark on the world. He thanked the villagers and strode confidently into the deeper parts of the forest.
Olem again struggled to survive. The foliage was thicker and the animals larger here. The simpler traps the villagers had taught him were not sufficient to handle this newer environment. Some of the techniques seemed applicable, but many of his ideas did not work out, and he again became weak and hungry.
Olem came upon a small city on the edge of a trade route. He staggered into a building and asked for help and food. The owner of the building ran a logging business. "Boy," he said, "This is the city. If you want food, you'll have to work." Olem accepted a job with the man and went to work as a logger. It was hard work, many hours, little pay. Olem had enough to get by, but he grew weary with the work, with the lack of adventure, with the lack of glory. "What has this guy every really done for me?" he said. Olem set out once more.
This time Olem fared much better. His knowledge of the deep forest had increased during his time as a logger. His body was strong and his sense of life was more balanced. He began to realize that the difficulties he experienced getting started had helped him to be prepared for these moments. He roamed the forest. He trapped every kind of animal. He tested his vigor and his strength - and no one noticed. Olem began to wonder, "Is this what I have been hoping and working for?"
He began hiring out as a guide for game hunters and as a guard for long-distance travelers. He enjoyed mild success and was competent at his job. The travelers he guided wondered at all the adventure that must fill his life. They did not understand that the stories of the forest did not reflect the reality of the woods.
Olem guided a group of settlers across the forest one day. On that trip he was introduced to a beautiful, flaxen-haired maiden who quickly fell in love with him. When the settlers reached their destination, Olem realized that the unskilled men and women would not survive long in this part of the woods. He accepted an offer to stay for a time and teach the men of the new village how to hunt, trap, traverse, and survive. The people voted him the Village Counselor and he began spending more time among the tiny huts and lean-tos, seeing to the needs of his new community. Eventually, he married the maiden and built a hut of his own. He cleared the trees and farmed the land and foraged and set simple traps. A family raised. A body grown worn and frail. Time spent teaching a grandson how to read the signs of the forest.
At his death, the town gathered for his funeral. After an announcement to name a meadow in his honor, the grandson, now 20, stood to speak.
"Olem the Wanderer was my grandfather. As a young man he braved the elemental forces of the forest. He trained and gained skills as a logger. He experienced these woods like no one else and had the kinds of adventures we only read about. He saved countless lives and helped many in need as he guided and traveled. He helped to found this town, and without him, none of us would be here. He was a father to my mother and a grandfather to me. He learned and he invested in the lives of others. He was a great man. May it be said and understood truly, Olem was a great man."
October 06, 2003
She was, An American Grrl....
The next generation of sluts and whores will be the downfall of our existence. I’m walking through a store the other day and get stuck behind a 14-15 year old girl pushing her little brother in a cart. The girl is wearing a skin tight shirt showing every curve of her emerging young body and tailored sweat pants that leave little to the imagination. Soft curves. Typically I barely notice this kind of thing and just grieve for humanity and move on. But, the girl had the words “Baby Girl” artistically sewed on each cheek of her rear. Naturally, I read words that are there to be read and find myself viewing her slowly rolling buttocks as she strolls down the aisle. Suddenly I find myself wanting to grab a piece of what she is selling.
I am a good man. I love Christ and his church. The majority of my time is spent trying to live a pure life and serve my Master in Heaven. But this is a sinful and fallen world. My desires are strong and able to be tempted. To a great extent, I am responsible for my own thoughts and actions. In fact, I am always responsible for my actions – but, a female who dresses in an intentionally provocative way – a style of dress that invites male sexual attention – bears much of the responsibility for the attention she receives.
The sad thing is that I have had occasion to interact with a lot of pre- and early-teen young women. I know that they do not desire to invite the sexual advances of middle-aged men. They just want to look “cute,” they just want to be “pretty.” They think if they are pretty then teenage boys will like them. Often they have no idea of the actual thoughts they produce in men of all ages. The very idea shocks and repulses them. But they are young - how are they to know any better? The answer is Parenting.
I blame the mother of this young girl for the impure thoughts she produces. I blame the mother for the early sexual trauma this girl will experience as she learns the hard way what guys really want. I blame the parents for the low self-esteem and sense of unworthiness she will develop as she comes to realize people only value her as a sexual object. Parents – parent your children!
It is o.k. to say, “No,” to your children. It is o.k. to go against popular culture and protect them from harm. It is o.k. to be a prude now and again – that’s your job. Sometimes, because God loves us, he protects us from ourselves even when we don’t realize what is best for us. You must do the same for your children. What kind of sense does it make to send a girl out looking like a whore or easy-lay slut and just hope (against hope) that she “doesn’t get into any trouble”?
I catch flak for saying these kinds of things. “Oh, those clothes are just cute.” “Don’t be such a prude.” “Your lack of self-control is not my problem.” Whatever. I live in the real world where men, even future ministers, sin. If parents, especially parents in the church, abandon their responsibility to properly train their daughters – even going so far as to intentionally tempt every man in visual distance – how can we ever hope to save our culture from destruction?
October 04, 2003
Peeps and Homies
This is my every-so-often shout out to people who done me right on the web.
I'd first like to thank my patron James, who is expending fantasy capital to invest in my blog shares. World - link to me, help a brother out. Thanks, James.
Also a big shout out to The Chairman. He uses blogrolling, which puts a smiley face next to my name everytime I update. Well done, Richard Anderson. You may just be the One.
The Ockhamist paid me a nice complement this week. Even though he eats chewable gummy bear kiddie vitamins, his is still my favorite website.
The ever-winsome ~gauche posted some new stuff this week.
Blogs4God listed me in their directory and gave me some traffic. Thanks, guys!
I have not yet acknowledged Bob, who was one of the first to read and interact with my site. Watch your wafer around this guy...
Finally, the GreenFlash over at BlogMatrix got my free RSS feed working again (I think). So kudos to the man in tights.
October 03, 2003
Who Gets all the Land when God smites the Canadians?
Who wants it really? Seriously though, I get Geddy Lee's bass. Really, I called it - first dibs.
Talk about your liberal media. There are many ways that a journalist could cover a story about the Oxford Canadian Dictionary unilaterally deciding what the definition of "marriage" should be. You could state just the facts. You could state just the facts and get quotes from both sides of the issue. Or, you could just quote a gay magazine's website and "to Hell with objectivity." To hell with the Advocate is more like it.
Let me tell you something, internet community. It does not matter what the Latin origins of words are. What matters is how the word was used and understood all of the times it was used. It is misleading, and outright lying really, to suggest that the term _marita_ only means "joined to a man." In every usage, classical to the present, the word and all words derived from it to this point in time, the meaning has been woman joined to a man. It was the word for wife, get it? This is what liberal cultural warriors try to do - and they do it very effectively - they take a word and massage the meaning until they can use it in a newly defined way. If you want to add or subtract meaning to a term - by definition (why do I have to explain this?) - you are altering the definition of the term.
My defense of limiting marriage to one man and one woman does not stand or fall on this one issue of a definition of terms. I merely point out for my discerning readers that it is backhanded and dishonest to redefine the concept of redefinition so that your redefinition is considered the definition to begin with. Confused? You bet. That is how they want you to be so that you are scared to speak up. They do not care about truth or honesty...they only want you to go away, they only want to win.
If Christians are going to resist the onslaught from its enemies, then we must call these deceivers out in the workplace, in the social clubs, in the everyday encounters of life and take a stand for truth - living our life of faith in a way that is worthy of the gospel of Christ. I pray that we will be standing side by side for the faith of the gospel, and not frightened in anything by our opponents. This is a clear sign to them of their destruction, but of our salvation, and that from God. For it has been granted to us that for the sake of Christ we should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake, engaged in the conflicts of our times.
Jesus told us that we will give an account of every careless word we speak. Don't risk the cultural destruction for every word you did not speak.
National Do Not Call List : Reloaded
After drawing some first rate criticism from faithful reader, ~gauche and my #1 Hombre' the Ockhamist, I recognize that I need to clarify my position.
I am not the one that began the noise about 1st Amendment Rights. That honor goes to a Federal judge in Denver [see related story]. I can't find the source of my Senator quote because it was on NPR (tuesday 9/31?) and I am not going to pay for the transcript.
Facts as I see them :
(1) We got two rulings against the FTC and the NDNCL. One from Oklahoma that says no authority to enforce. The other from Denver saying that the law violates telemarketers 1st Amendment Free Speech rights.
(2) "The Telemarketers" are following up with legal challenges in Denver, where they have a judge that is concerned for their first amendment rights.
(3) We got a Senate rushing to curtail the effects of both rulings by passing more detailed laws designed to enforce rules limiting the speech (or activity) of telemarketers.
(4) A chief reason the Senate is doing this is the popularity of the rules.
This has nothing to do with my personal views on what kind of speech telemarketers have a right to. If the debate were framed differently, then I probably wouldn't be posting about it. (I don't want them calling me either.)
However, we have a cultural-legal system in which jurists create law from the bench - no matter what the legislature may say or do. Jurists provide their reasoning for these judicial fiat decisions by picking and choosing the case law and historical facts they think best fits their own cultural outlook and worldview. That is how we look to case law enforcing the enslaving of humans to justify killing children. That is how we ignore US Legislation to side with more liberal nations in celebrating homosexuality and destroying traditional and legal marriage definitions. - And - I fear - it is how we will decide as a nation that some minorities don't fit in and need to be "corrected." It apparently only takes about a third of the people to do it. Those who believe in actual, biblical, Christianity are fast becoming a minority these days, and an unpopular one at that.
I will not support any action that provides case law for something so dangerous over something so trivial. The mortality of Socrates is irrelevant.
Movin' on Up....
I have "made it" onto various search engines and the people are starting to take notice of the Rex. Yes, due to a recent post, AOLSearch has me at #11 (on page 2) if you search for "slutty fashions". This stuff cracks me up.
In honor of this achievement, I would like to post the following:
Has anyone heard that Jennifer Lopez might perform with Beyonce Knowles at Soldier Field on an NFL broadcast of Monday Night Football on Halloween with guest appearances by Robert Novak, Jessica Biel, the Boston Gorilla, and the cast of Lord of the Rings? Will this distract from the debate over the National Do Not Call List?
October 02, 2003
What goes around...
I am opposed to the National Do Not Call List. I don't like telemarketers any more than anyone else. I have my own way of dealing with them that has probably gotten me on a private list or two - all you telemarketers know what I'm talking about. (I apologize. Really. I do.)
I am opposed to the NDNCL because of what I heard on the radio the other day. Senator Something-or-Other says
I am sure there are many groups that can scare up 50 million signatures (many would just fake half of them) to say that they did not want me to preach in their country anymore. Maybe I don't even have to be the focus of such nationwide attention. If 1/3 of the people voting in my city voted to banish me and "my kind" would that be enough? How low is the threshold to decide that "people can't be wrong, let's run roughshod over their speech." The legislative challenge to recent court decisions is chilling and wrong-headed. It is a cheap power grab to place oneself and one's party as the populist "party of the people." They will not do it at the expense of my liberties. Christians are already facing a swelling tide of public opposition. Let's not make it easier by backing the wrong arguments. If the price of my preaching the gospel is constant interruption from unwanted callers, so be it. It is a small price to pay for the freedom to pursue the glory of God.
E-mail your Senator. Oppose dangerous arguments for the NDNCL.
October 01, 2003
One Crying Out in the Darkness...
My wife, the Regina, is pregnant with a baby boy. Little Rex is due in January, but is currently living in the Regina's tummy. This freaks me out. There is an actual person LIVING INSIDE of my wife. It is like an alien or something. It is weird. This idea facinates and horrifies me.
Ever wonder what life is like for baby in there? All he knows is relative darkness. He hears some muted sounds, maybe. He gets hunger pains, then they go away. I am becomming more and more aware that children think with developed mental capacities far earlier than I had previously thought. What does he think inside the womb? That this is all there is? Does he come up with anything like ergo cognito eimi? Does he think he's got a good handle on things? Thinks about how great it is to be him, in his little universe? Maybe he thinks he is huge because his universe is so small. Does he ever wonder or fear the strange pressure and movement when the noise is loudest and things most red? After nine months of this - it must seem like a long time to a baby - he probably feels pretty comfortable with that he's got everything figured out.
Then, something weird happens. Strange new feelings and noises. A tremendous pressure. Such light. Prickly sensation on skin. Pressure on lungs. Noise. Light. Cry. What happened to my universe? And, then and there he figures out that he really knew nothing at all and there is a whole lot left to learn.
That is what we are like here on Earth - in this universe for that matter. We think and think and think and study and measure and pronounce, but when it all comes down to it. We can only know what we see and hear and touch. If we are vain, then we think that is all there is. But it is not the truth. Just like the experiences inside the womb would make more sense if there were someway to communicate to the child what was going on - our experiences in this life would make more sense if there were only some way for us to know what was beyond.
That is the role of revelation. That is why we study and take the Scripures seriously. Yes, some of us go overboard and misuse or misunderstand what we've been given, but they are better off than the many who reject it outright. We have been communicated to. We have received instruction. We have been visited by the Beyond Himself, Jesus Christ. Let's not waste that knowledge. Let us prepare ourselves for eternity.