Making it Clear
Sandra and I have been in Norway nearly a week now.* We’ve lectured at the University of Oslo; we’ve led several seminars; I preached to a multinational congregation today. But tomorrow, I have a session with just men. This is the only session about which I have any doubts. I thought I knew what I would say to them, but now I’m not sure. So much to say; so little time! The needs here are great; but they are just as great in my own country, my own town, my own home.
God says (in Isaiah 45:19):
I have not spoken in secret, from somewhere in a land of darkness; I have not said to Jacob’s descendants, “seek me in vain.” I, the Lord, speak the truth; I declare what is right.
This is what I need also to proclaim: God’s truth! What does His Word tell us about how to be men; to be leaders; to be witnesses? That’s what needs to be told. In Nehemiah 8, we read that Ezra read the law to the people and they bowed down and worshiped. The Levites went around in the crowd and instructed the people where they stood, “making it clear and giving the meaning so the people could understand what was being read.” (verse 8).
So we can’t go wrong tomorrow if I proclaim God’s Truth – and make it clear.
God, “Open my eyes that I may see wonderful things in your law.” (Psalm 119:18). Help me to make them clear to the people – starting with me.
*Interestingly, as I started to post this blog, I had difficulty because I am, of course, using a Norwegian sever at the moment. All the instructions are in Norwegian. It took me ten minutes just to figure out how to log on!
Monday, May 12, 2008
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Mouthpiece for God
In a blog entry dated April 10, Dr. Albert Moehler wrote this:
I am certainly supposed to be a mouthpiece for Scripture, a human instrument through which the Scripture is heard and received by God's people. But the human preacher's authority only reaches the human ear. It is only God himself who can take his word from the human ear to the human heart.
I stand by this answer, and by the large comments I made in the interview about the fact that the preacher is actually a mouthpiece for God only when the Word of God is rightly preached. As the Reformers made clear, preaching is the means by which God speaks to His people as a gathered community. Through the preached Word and the ministry of the Holy Spirit, God actually speaks to His people.
This was in agreement with some things written by Billy Graham in the 1950s.
Just curious; what's your comment on this quote?
Wednesday, April 02, 2008
News and Views
OK, it has been a while since I last posted on this blog. Life is exciting - and busy. Easter is a busy time - and a joyous one. After that my wife and I went to a missions conference for four days. Getting back, she had to unpack, do the laundry, and repack for a missions trip to foreign places. You can read about that - and sign up for updates "From the Field" if you wish - by going to our website and at the "Contact Us" page, signing up.
We are also gearing up for the next big set of seminars, talks, teas, and other events, which will take place in May - in Norway.
However, I have not been hiding under a rock. I've kept up on the news. First, I have decided that I will go to the polls. Holding my nose, I will vote for John McCain. This decision is based upon the plans I recently saw for the three candidates regarding health care. McCain's plan calls for no mandates (as do the two Democrats), and seems to allow for freedom of choice. Not a resounding endorsement, I know. Besides, none of the candidates is holding his/her breath waiting for my endorsement. Such as it is, however, there you have it.
Regarding Jeremiah Wright, I have little to say that hasn't already been said, read, and forgotten. I only state that worship services are supposed to be about worshiping God. Sermons are supposed to be expositions of God's Word - with references. I try to do that. I know that sometimes I might get a little caught up in political and cultural issues, but I try to relate them to living in the world as a follower of Jesus Christ.
There you have it. Comments welcome.
OK, it has been a while since I last posted on this blog. Life is exciting - and busy. Easter is a busy time - and a joyous one. After that my wife and I went to a missions conference for four days. Getting back, she had to unpack, do the laundry, and repack for a missions trip to foreign places. You can read about that - and sign up for updates "From the Field" if you wish - by going to our website and at the "Contact Us" page, signing up.
We are also gearing up for the next big set of seminars, talks, teas, and other events, which will take place in May - in Norway.
However, I have not been hiding under a rock. I've kept up on the news. First, I have decided that I will go to the polls. Holding my nose, I will vote for John McCain. This decision is based upon the plans I recently saw for the three candidates regarding health care. McCain's plan calls for no mandates (as do the two Democrats), and seems to allow for freedom of choice. Not a resounding endorsement, I know. Besides, none of the candidates is holding his/her breath waiting for my endorsement. Such as it is, however, there you have it.
Regarding Jeremiah Wright, I have little to say that hasn't already been said, read, and forgotten. I only state that worship services are supposed to be about worshiping God. Sermons are supposed to be expositions of God's Word - with references. I try to do that. I know that sometimes I might get a little caught up in political and cultural issues, but I try to relate them to living in the world as a follower of Jesus Christ.
There you have it. Comments welcome.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Technology
I love technology. I hate technology. Yes, I know that I do not have to explain my bi-polar feelings on the subject to most of you. Today, despite the many frustrations I have experienced recently in this realm, I love technology.
Here I am typing out my words onto a screen that, when I post them, will have the possibility of being read by millions (probably billions) of people in every corner of our globe. Of course I am very well aware that this is only the potential. The reality is that very few people will actually read these particular words. The potential is there, however.
Yesterday, after several frustrating (there's that word again) attempts, I was able to post a brand new incarnation of Lifework Forum's website. Again, potential and reality won't necessarily match, but....
Last night I began uploading mp3 files of sermons from Covenant Baptist Church to the web. it's a slow process, but I got a few of them up and I will be adding slowly. Amazingly, overnight there were more than 70 downloads from the nine sermons I had been able to post so far. Now that does not match the thousands that are downloaded from a lot of places, but it amazes me. If you're interested those can be found at sermonaudio.
I'm not an IT guy. But, I can do this stuff with technology! This is a tool that God has given us to reach and teach people; to communicate with one another openly (iron does, indeed, sharpen iron); and to read and study more about His Word and His world. I marvel at His goodness in many ways.
Today I am marvelling at His goodness through the internet.
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
What is this thing called Evangelicalism?
In the 1970s, when I became a Christian, people were already asking the question, “What is an Evangelical?” In the context in which I lived at the time, Europe, the answer was really quite simple. It meant “Protestant.” But that did not solve the matter. I did have to come back to my native land.
Arriving in the USA and heading off to a seminary (known to some as “saint school”), I found the same question being asked. The answers given at the time were historical or theological in nature. They were also inconclusive.
I still ask the question. Why? Because there are so many people who want to crawl under this umbrella with whom I discern very little commonality of belief or practice. Wheaton College defines the modern term this way:
There are three senses in which the term "evangelical" is used today as we enter the 21st-century. The first is to see as "evangelical" all Christians who affirm a few key doctrines and practical emphases. British historian David Bebbington approaches evangelicalism from this direction and notes four specific hallmarks of evangelical religion: conversionism, the belief that lives need to be changed; activism, the expression of the gospel in effort; biblicism, a particular regard for the Bible; and crucicentrism, a stress on the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. A second sense is to look at evangelicalism as an organic group of movements and religious tradition. Within this context "evangelical" denotes a style as much as a set of beliefs. As a result, groups as disparate as black Baptists and Dutch Reformed Churches, Mennonites and Pentecostals, Catholic charismatics and Southern Baptists all come under the evangelical umbrella-demonstrating just how diverse the movement really is. A third sense of the term is as the self-ascribed label for a coalition that arose during the Second World War. This group came into being as a reaction against the perceived anti-intellectual, separatist, belligerent nature of the fundamentalist movement in the 1920s and 1930s. Importantly, its core personalities (like Harold John Ockenga and Billy Graham), institutions (for instance, Moody Bible Institute and Wheaton College), and organizations (such as the National Association of Evangelicals and Youth for Christ) have played a pivotal role in giving the wider movement a sense of cohesion that extends beyond these "card-carrying" evangelicals.
(To read the entire article, click here).
There really isn’t a lot of help there, is there? Maybe we can understand this a little better if we recognize that the word often has an adverb attached to it. Very often people (in the USA) refer to something they call “broadly evangelical.” Now we’re getting somewhere – I think. Why do I think that? Because I can look at the wide array of theological systems (and non-systems!), and the worship and lifestyle practices of those claiming to be “broadly evangelical” and note that, in fact, very little is meant by the term. Mormons lay claim to the mantle as easily as do Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, various Church or Christ groups, and myriad other groups. The “Emerging Church” claims what is left after evangelicalism and mainstream denominationalism finish off our spiritual sensibilities. I have no problem at all confusing broadly evangelical groups with liberals, heretics, and generally mixed-up folk.
So, what to do? You can call me a Christian, or a Protestant, or a Calvinist (that’s a definition waiting for another essay). Those are just a few of the many names I have been called! I would prefer it, however, if you didn’t refer to me as either evangelical or broadly evangelical.
How about you?
In the 1970s, when I became a Christian, people were already asking the question, “What is an Evangelical?” In the context in which I lived at the time, Europe, the answer was really quite simple. It meant “Protestant.” But that did not solve the matter. I did have to come back to my native land.
Arriving in the USA and heading off to a seminary (known to some as “saint school”), I found the same question being asked. The answers given at the time were historical or theological in nature. They were also inconclusive.
I still ask the question. Why? Because there are so many people who want to crawl under this umbrella with whom I discern very little commonality of belief or practice. Wheaton College defines the modern term this way:
There are three senses in which the term "evangelical" is used today as we enter the 21st-century. The first is to see as "evangelical" all Christians who affirm a few key doctrines and practical emphases. British historian David Bebbington approaches evangelicalism from this direction and notes four specific hallmarks of evangelical religion: conversionism, the belief that lives need to be changed; activism, the expression of the gospel in effort; biblicism, a particular regard for the Bible; and crucicentrism, a stress on the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. A second sense is to look at evangelicalism as an organic group of movements and religious tradition. Within this context "evangelical" denotes a style as much as a set of beliefs. As a result, groups as disparate as black Baptists and Dutch Reformed Churches, Mennonites and Pentecostals, Catholic charismatics and Southern Baptists all come under the evangelical umbrella-demonstrating just how diverse the movement really is. A third sense of the term is as the self-ascribed label for a coalition that arose during the Second World War. This group came into being as a reaction against the perceived anti-intellectual, separatist, belligerent nature of the fundamentalist movement in the 1920s and 1930s. Importantly, its core personalities (like Harold John Ockenga and Billy Graham), institutions (for instance, Moody Bible Institute and Wheaton College), and organizations (such as the National Association of Evangelicals and Youth for Christ) have played a pivotal role in giving the wider movement a sense of cohesion that extends beyond these "card-carrying" evangelicals.
(To read the entire article, click here).
There really isn’t a lot of help there, is there? Maybe we can understand this a little better if we recognize that the word often has an adverb attached to it. Very often people (in the USA) refer to something they call “broadly evangelical.” Now we’re getting somewhere – I think. Why do I think that? Because I can look at the wide array of theological systems (and non-systems!), and the worship and lifestyle practices of those claiming to be “broadly evangelical” and note that, in fact, very little is meant by the term. Mormons lay claim to the mantle as easily as do Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, various Church or Christ groups, and myriad other groups. The “Emerging Church” claims what is left after evangelicalism and mainstream denominationalism finish off our spiritual sensibilities. I have no problem at all confusing broadly evangelical groups with liberals, heretics, and generally mixed-up folk.
So, what to do? You can call me a Christian, or a Protestant, or a Calvinist (that’s a definition waiting for another essay). Those are just a few of the many names I have been called! I would prefer it, however, if you didn’t refer to me as either evangelical or broadly evangelical.
How about you?
Monday, February 25, 2008
Nuff Said
This came in today. It says heaps. Enjoy!
Louis Farrakhan heaps praise on Barack Obama
Louis Farrakhan heaps praise on Barack Obama
Fred Jackson - OneNewsNow - 2/25/2008 8:15:00 AM
Nation of Islam minister Louis Farrakhan says Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama is the "hope of the entire world."
Associated Press reports that Farrakhan, addressing some 20,000 people Sunday at the annual "Saviours' Day" celebration in Chicago, never explicitly endorsed Obama but spent most of a nearly two-hour speech praising the Illinois senator. AP says Farrakhan compared Obama to Nation of Islam founder Fard Muhammad, who also had a white mother and black father. He suggested that Obama "could turn out to be one who can lift America from her fall."
According to the Chicago Tribune, Farrakhan spoke about the war in Iraq, the nation's economic problems, and the increase in natural disasters, saying the world was in a perilous state and Obama could help it recover. "This young man is the hope of the entire world that America will change and be a better place," he said.
The Tribune reports that Obama's people moved quickly yesterday to try to downplay the praises of Farrakhan, who has a history of controversial remarks -- particularly regarding the Jewish people. The newspaper quotes Obama spokesman, Bill Burton, who said that "Senator Obama has been clear in his objections to Minister Farrakhan's past pronouncements and has not solicited the minister's support."
Saturday, February 09, 2008
Non-American by Choice
(I know that the color in my headline is a difficult color to read on a website, but it was chosen for the obvious reason)
Telling the people who stand between you and chaos; who defend you from the imposition of Sharia Law (see entry of February 7) is neither wise nor moral. As I have suggested before, especially in the case of denizens of Hollywierd who so often proclaim they're moving to another country (Michael Moore, can I help you pack?) - GO, please. We do not need you. You are welcome to stay, but please shut up.
(I know that the color in my headline is a difficult color to read on a website, but it was chosen for the obvious reason)
In the past two weeks two American cities have told the US Marine Corps that they are not welcome. Read one of the news reports here. Toledo, Ohio has joined Berkley, California (that's shocking, huh?) in making these unAmerican demands. I have solutions, of course.
- First, strip them of all Federal aid including tuition assistance for college students; funding for road projects; WIC; and Aid for Dependent Children. Keep the money coming in for all veteran-related expenses, like the GI Bill and GI Loan mortgages.
- Next, deny them access to any of the functions of the National Guard. And do not allow any of their citizens to join any branch of our military.
- Finally, allow them to create their own militia for protection of their fair cities, since we should offer no protection for them in the event of an invasion (anybody remember Red Dawn?).
Telling the people who stand between you and chaos; who defend you from the imposition of Sharia Law (see entry of February 7) is neither wise nor moral. As I have suggested before, especially in the case of denizens of Hollywierd who so often proclaim they're moving to another country (Michael Moore, can I help you pack?) - GO, please. We do not need you. You are welcome to stay, but please shut up.
Thursday, February 07, 2008
Convert or Die!
I read an article this morning which doesn't surprise me; but does shock me. The Archbishop of Canterbury (no friend to Christianity as far as I can tell) wants to complete the Islamicization of Great Britain. The long and the short of it is that the Archbishop not only believes it inevitable that Sharia Law will become the law of the land in England - he believes it should!
This has been predicted by many Christians for years. When Muslim populations grow in Western nations, they will seek the implementation of this Islamic system of law. It will become the vehicle for the persecution of all who refuse to submit to Islam. It will be the manner by which religious leaders continue to abuse women and minorities. It will not allow Muslims to co-exist peacefully with their non-Muslim neighbors.
What can you do about it? Let me suggest three manners of response:
Resist the devil and he will flee from you (James 4:7).
"So we say with confidence, 'The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid. What can man do to me?'" (Hebrews 13:6).
Late breaking addition. Here's how this Sharia Law works out in practice.
What say you, my brothers and sisters?
I read an article this morning which doesn't surprise me; but does shock me. The Archbishop of Canterbury (no friend to Christianity as far as I can tell) wants to complete the Islamicization of Great Britain. The long and the short of it is that the Archbishop not only believes it inevitable that Sharia Law will become the law of the land in England - he believes it should!
This has been predicted by many Christians for years. When Muslim populations grow in Western nations, they will seek the implementation of this Islamic system of law. It will become the vehicle for the persecution of all who refuse to submit to Islam. It will be the manner by which religious leaders continue to abuse women and minorities. It will not allow Muslims to co-exist peacefully with their non-Muslim neighbors.
What can you do about it? Let me suggest three manners of response:
- PRAY. Pray for England. Pray for the Archbishop. Pray for the Christians of England to be able to resist.
- READ. Read your Bible. Read about Islam (try to understand something of Christianity first!). Educate yourself regarding the evils of this system of belief that wants to overcome the world - and either subjugate or kill all who resist.
- EVANGELIZE. "I tell you, now is the time of God's favor, now is the day of salvation," the Apostle Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 6:2. Your friends and neighbors need to be told.
Resist the devil and he will flee from you (James 4:7).
"So we say with confidence, 'The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid. What can man do to me?'" (Hebrews 13:6).
Late breaking addition. Here's how this Sharia Law works out in practice.
What say you, my brothers and sisters?
Monday, January 28, 2008
Joe McCarthy was Right (So was Dan Quayle!)
Friends,
I just thought I'd let you know about a piece that was published today and to acquaint those of you who may not be aware of it with the Pearcey Report. Comments still welcome!
Blacklisted by History Jeopardizes Standard Liberal Storyline
Wild-Eyed Myth Encounters the Real Joe McCarthy
Friends,
I just thought I'd let you know about a piece that was published today and to acquaint those of you who may not be aware of it with the Pearcey Report. Comments still welcome!
Blacklisted by History Jeopardizes Standard Liberal Storyline
Wild-Eyed Myth Encounters the Real Joe McCarthy
By Curt Lovelace
At Friendship Street School in the early 1950s, we were taught that hiding under our school desks would save us from nuclear attack –- which, in the lingua franca of the day, the Satan-loving Commies in the Kremlin were poised to rain down upon us at any moment. These exercises were the famous “duck and cover” drills.
Yet, while we feared Communist-initiated death from the skies, as a nation we tolerated -– even fostered -– Soviet activity within our own government. While trying to find a place to hide from nuclear destruction, we somehow felt safe enough to vilify Joseph McCarthy, a U.S. senator from America’s heartland who tried to root out the Reds from service in our federal apparatus. So successful were efforts against the senator that the term McCarthyism has become synonymous with wild-eyed fanaticism.
To read the rest of this article, at the Pearcey Report, click here.
Saturday, January 26, 2008
While We're on the Topic...
Puritans, that is. Let me inform you about a wonderful resource for those who would rather listen that read. iTunes now has a section called iTunesU. If you have an MP3 player you can download lectures from many colleges and universities (You will need to download iTunes. You can do that by clicking here.) One of the schools is Reformed Theological Seminary. You can access and listen to lots of good lectures, including Theology and Church History - even chapel sermons.
Back to the Puritans... One of the series available for download is a series on the Puritans given by Dr. J. I. Packer.(Did I mention that these are all FREE?!)
Puritans, that is. Let me inform you about a wonderful resource for those who would rather listen that read. iTunes now has a section called iTunesU. If you have an MP3 player you can download lectures from many colleges and universities (You will need to download iTunes. You can do that by clicking here.) One of the schools is Reformed Theological Seminary. You can access and listen to lots of good lectures, including Theology and Church History - even chapel sermons.
Back to the Puritans... One of the series available for download is a series on the Puritans given by Dr. J. I. Packer.(Did I mention that these are all FREE?!)
In more than 11 hours of lectures, Packer covers …
1. The Puritan Identity – pt. 1 (45:14)
2. The Puritan Identity – pt. 2 (33:10)
3. Puritan Theological Concerns – pt. 1 (45:54)
4. Puritan Theological Concerns – pt. 2 (45:03)
5. The Bible in Puritan Theology – pt. 1 (46:53)
6. The Bible in Puritan Theology – pt. 2 (46:01)
7. Salvation by Grace – pt. 1 (46:41)
8. Salvation by Grace – pt. 2 (46:37)
9. Faith and Assurance – pt. 1 (46:32)
10. Faith and Assurance – pt. 2 (46:16)
11. The Good Fight – pt. 1 (46:22)
12. The Good Fight – pt. 2 (31:45)
13. Conscience (44:06)
14. Reformed Monasticism (43:01)
15. The Christian Minister (44:22)
16. Worship, Fellowship, and Discipline in the Church (27:40)
Saturday, January 12, 2008
Read the Puritans???? Me?
In 21st century America - and probably in most places - the word Puritan has negative connotations. It symbolized the sexually repressed and the laughless. Neither of these characterizations is true, but perceptions are reality to most people. Well, here's a challenge for those of you who would like some good (though not easy) reading in 2008.
Join the Puritan Reading Challenge.
This challenge, started by a fellow named Timmy Brister, whom I have never met, involves a list of 12 books. Actually, hundreds (literally) of people have already signed up and committed to read one of these books per month during this year. Before you panic, let me point out that most of these books are paperbacks under 200 pages long. The first , The Bruised Reed by Richard Sibbe, is only 128 pages long.
Now, why would you want to get involved in such an endeavor, especially with books that are all more than 300 years old?
I'm glad you asked. These are books which have impacted countless lives. They are not the kind of fluff and warm fuzzies we are accustomed to reading today. They contain theological truth - and application. They are even written in complete sentences! I have already read some of these and parts of others, but I am signing on and will make every effort to read through this list this year. In fact, I just ordered the whole set. Let me tell you about that.
Reformation Heritage Books has bundled the set and made the whole list available for the incredible price of $65. I know I don't need to say this for most of you, but, I am not in any way affiliated with Reformation Heritage Books or any subsidiary. I gain nothing from their books sales. In fact, I just laid out my $65 for this set!
I want to encourage each of you (both of you?) who read this blog to join the challenge. It's worthwhile reading, even if you can only do it when the kids are down and you're already exhausted or you just finished working a double shift. You can only read these books in short snippets at any one sitting anyway!
When you sign, let Timmy Brister know. He's keeping an informal count and will be involving people in discussions if they wish to join in. Let's do this together.
And let me know if you join in, too.
In 21st century America - and probably in most places - the word Puritan has negative connotations. It symbolized the sexually repressed and the laughless. Neither of these characterizations is true, but perceptions are reality to most people. Well, here's a challenge for those of you who would like some good (though not easy) reading in 2008.
Join the Puritan Reading Challenge. This challenge, started by a fellow named Timmy Brister, whom I have never met, involves a list of 12 books. Actually, hundreds (literally) of people have already signed up and committed to read one of these books per month during this year. Before you panic, let me point out that most of these books are paperbacks under 200 pages long. The first , The Bruised Reed by Richard Sibbe, is only 128 pages long.
Now, why would you want to get involved in such an endeavor, especially with books that are all more than 300 years old?
I'm glad you asked. These are books which have impacted countless lives. They are not the kind of fluff and warm fuzzies we are accustomed to reading today. They contain theological truth - and application. They are even written in complete sentences! I have already read some of these and parts of others, but I am signing on and will make every effort to read through this list this year. In fact, I just ordered the whole set. Let me tell you about that.
Reformation Heritage Books has bundled the set and made the whole list available for the incredible price of $65. I know I don't need to say this for most of you, but, I am not in any way affiliated with Reformation Heritage Books or any subsidiary. I gain nothing from their books sales. In fact, I just laid out my $65 for this set!
I want to encourage each of you (both of you?) who read this blog to join the challenge. It's worthwhile reading, even if you can only do it when the kids are down and you're already exhausted or you just finished working a double shift. You can only read these books in short snippets at any one sitting anyway!
When you sign, let Timmy Brister know. He's keeping an informal count and will be involving people in discussions if they wish to join in. Let's do this together.
And let me know if you join in, too.
Wednesday, January 09, 2008
You Are Somebody
We’ve been in a presidential campaign cycle for a long time. Now we are finally getting to the home stretch. Yet, we hardly know anything about most of the candidates. They all say that they want to let us know who they are so that we can make our electoral decisions. None of them is letting too much info slip, however. Their real identities are still a mystery to me. I would like to be able to vote for Fred Thompson. He seems to be conservative – and several commentators have told me that he is. But, Fred Thompson has told us next to nothing about who he is and what he believes.
This is not a political blog entry! I only use that introduction on identity to get to my real topic; my “thought for the day.”
Identity truly is the great quest of mankind. From the philosophers asking “who am I”, to the passion since the 1960s for going off somewhere to “find ourselves,” and even including our everyday questions about what life is all about; we all want to know who we are – and whose we are. In our social climate, which includes a massive divorce rate; domestic partnership; same sex pseudo-marriages; blended families; dysfunctional families; drug and alcohol ravaged families; knowing who we are and where we fit in is difficult; especially for the children in these situations. This makes individual identity even more important. Please read these two brief portions of Scripture (God’s Word, the Bible).
We’ve been in a presidential campaign cycle for a long time. Now we are finally getting to the home stretch. Yet, we hardly know anything about most of the candidates. They all say that they want to let us know who they are so that we can make our electoral decisions. None of them is letting too much info slip, however. Their real identities are still a mystery to me. I would like to be able to vote for Fred Thompson. He seems to be conservative – and several commentators have told me that he is. But, Fred Thompson has told us next to nothing about who he is and what he believes.
This is not a political blog entry! I only use that introduction on identity to get to my real topic; my “thought for the day.”
Identity truly is the great quest of mankind. From the philosophers asking “who am I”, to the passion since the 1960s for going off somewhere to “find ourselves,” and even including our everyday questions about what life is all about; we all want to know who we are – and whose we are. In our social climate, which includes a massive divorce rate; domestic partnership; same sex pseudo-marriages; blended families; dysfunctional families; drug and alcohol ravaged families; knowing who we are and where we fit in is difficult; especially for the children in these situations. This makes individual identity even more important. Please read these two brief portions of Scripture (God’s Word, the Bible).
I will not leave you as orphans; I will come to you. Before long, the world will not see me anymore, but you will see me. Because I live, you also will live. On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you. (John 14:18-20)If you are a follower of Christ, sister; if you believe that He is your Lord, brother; then you are not only a member of the family – you’re an important partner in the family. You have identity in Christ. You’re somebody. At the end of the day, you can count on still being in Christ and in Christ’s family. Take that to work with you today; or to the grocery store; or to court; or wherever you have to be. If you are a Christian you don’t have to search for identity. You are somebody.
How great is the love the Father has lavished on us, that we should be called children of God! And that is what we are! The reason the world does not know us is that it did not know him. (1 John 3:1)
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
Iranians Should Need to Worry; Probably Don’t
My question: what good is it being the world’s only remaining superpower if punk non-super powers can push us around like this? They got a stern warning. President Bush did say that this was a “provocative act.” Iranians should have to worry about us. They should not have the national temerity to tweak us. But this is what happens when “girly-men” (and sometimes not-so-girly women) run our government; train our would-be “intellectuals”; inhabit our halls of justice and our pulpits.
Jeremiah 29:7 says this: Also, seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the Lord for it, because if it prospers, you too will prosper." Neither peace nor prosperity will result from a weak, insipid response to bullies. Not only will this weakness negatively affect the United States of America, but it will harm all nations and peoples who seek peace.
America: get a spine.
Once again, US ships have been threatened by those of a foreign nation. My readers need only look down a few inches to the entry of December 22, 2007, to be reminded of another such incident which didn’t turn out so well. Here’s a snippet from the report from FoxNews:
WASHINGTON — The United States issued a stern warning to Iran Monday following an incident near the Strait of Hormuz in which Iranian speedboats veered dangerously close to three U.S. Navy ships and intercepted radio signals said U.S. "ships would explode."
U.S. ships blew whistles, issued radio warnings and took evasive maneuvers to avoid striking the Iranian boats, which motored as close as 200 yards from the American ships by one account. The naval ships armed their weapons, and the five unmarked Iranian boats — believed to belong to the Iran Revolutionary Guard — sped away.
My question: what good is it being the world’s only remaining superpower if punk non-super powers can push us around like this? They got a stern warning. President Bush did say that this was a “provocative act.” Iranians should have to worry about us. They should not have the national temerity to tweak us. But this is what happens when “girly-men” (and sometimes not-so-girly women) run our government; train our would-be “intellectuals”; inhabit our halls of justice and our pulpits.
Jeremiah 29:7 says this: Also, seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the Lord for it, because if it prospers, you too will prosper." Neither peace nor prosperity will result from a weak, insipid response to bullies. Not only will this weakness negatively affect the United States of America, but it will harm all nations and peoples who seek peace.
America: get a spine.
Thursday, January 03, 2008
Art Historians To Save Us From Global Warming
You may have seen mention of this in The Limbaugh Letter. I found it hard to accept, even from the pen of El Rushbo, so I went and looked it up. The gist of the article is that from artwork of the 19th century, artist/scientists can tell us how badly we have wrecked our environment. Among other things, the AP report, states:
Obviously, these graduates of Art History 100, are also cross-credentialed as Environmental Scientists. Funny (ha, ha) that when some (real) scientists question man-made global warming, they are scoffed at as unqualified if they are mere climatologists or earth scientists. Al Gore has no credentials in any scientific filed – he’s not even an art history scholar – yet his word is gospel. Gee, I wonder why.
You may have seen mention of this in The Limbaugh Letter. I found it hard to accept, even from the pen of El Rushbo, so I went and looked it up. The gist of the article is that from artwork of the 19th century, artist/scientists can tell us how badly we have wrecked our environment. Among other things, the AP report, states:
A group of scientists has studied the colors in more than 500 paintings of sunsets, including many of Turner's 19th-century watercolors and oils, in hopes of gaining insights into the cooling effects caused by major volcanic eruptions.
By better understanding past changes in climate, they hope to improve computer models for future climate change.
Obviously, these graduates of Art History 100, are also cross-credentialed as Environmental Scientists. Funny (ha, ha) that when some (real) scientists question man-made global warming, they are scoffed at as unqualified if they are mere climatologists or earth scientists. Al Gore has no credentials in any scientific filed – he’s not even an art history scholar – yet his word is gospel. Gee, I wonder why.
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
Monday, December 31, 2007
Did You Ever Wonder…
o …Why are there always rocks handy when young men wish to riot?
o …Why rich liberals seem to think that if their revolutionary, radical friends should ever win they won’t be the first ones “purged”?
o …Why Al Gore, famous for inventing the internet, is considered a serious scientist (despite evidence to the contrary)?
o …Why, in this age of global warming, we’ve had the snowiest December on record here in Maine?
o …How people who claim to be rational can believe that humans evolved from amoebae or fish or apes?
o …Why we Americans cannot get a decent candidate for President – from either side of the aisle?
o ...Why Christians expect pagans to act like anything other than pagans?
Dear friends, may you have a blessed 2008. Please expand this list of "Did You Ever Wonder..." questions with your own quaint queries.
o …Why are there always rocks handy when young men wish to riot?
o …Why rich liberals seem to think that if their revolutionary, radical friends should ever win they won’t be the first ones “purged”?
o …Why Al Gore, famous for inventing the internet, is considered a serious scientist (despite evidence to the contrary)?
o …Why, in this age of global warming, we’ve had the snowiest December on record here in Maine?
o …How people who claim to be rational can believe that humans evolved from amoebae or fish or apes?
o …Why we Americans cannot get a decent candidate for President – from either side of the aisle?
o ...Why Christians expect pagans to act like anything other than pagans?
Dear friends, may you have a blessed 2008. Please expand this list of "Did You Ever Wonder..." questions with your own quaint queries.
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Remembering the USS Liberty
I try to remind people about the USS Liberty every now and then. This saga is a reminder to all that the Reagan policy of “Trust, but verify,” needs to apply to all, including our nation’s alleged allies.
In June, 1967, Israeli forces attacked the USS Liberty (AGTR5), a basically unarmed US naval vessel in international waters. Thirty-four American sailors were killed, 174 more were wounded. Israel has never acknowledged the seriousness of this war crime. There is absolutely no excuse for the attack and even less credence to Israel’s claims that they didn’t properly identify that ship bearing the American flag and having a very distinctive profile.
American evangelical Christians like to characterize the political entity of modern Israel as the Israel of the Bible. Therefore, they accept anything and everything that happens in and through that state as being some form of fulfillment of prophecy. While Israel has been an ally in many instances and is viewed as a bulwark against Islamic fanaticism, it cannot and must not be given a pass on international honesty and trustworthiness by the United States. Israel’s interests are Israel’s safety and security. That is as it should be. The US, however, must not be naïve in accepting that Israel’s interests will always be the same as ours.
Once again, I call upon Israel to confess regarding its piracy on the high seas, and the murder of American sailors.
God bless America, please.
Saturday, December 15, 2007
“No thank you,” Governor Romney
This campaign is already overcooked. We have been subjected to campaigning for the Presidency since 2004. Senator Hillary has been at it longer than that.
One of the issues has been whether or not Christians can vote for a Mormon. Of course I have a few thoughts on that.
First, let me clear up any thoughts of Romney being a Christian. He is not. He is a Mormon. Mormon theology is not Christian theology. There are many areas of divergence, not the least of which is that the Trinity of the Bible is not the trinity of Mormonism.
Romney made a major speech, recently, in which he made the case for his religion to be left out of the equation in the Presidential campaign. That’s fine with me. Mormonism is not the reason I will not vote for Mitt Romney. I will not vote for him because he is not a conservative and because I do not trust him.
When Romney came back to Massachusetts to ascend the gubernatorial throne, I worked as a political reporter. I covered the Republican convention and the campaign. Romney is an elitist who immediately upon receiving the nomination froze out all the grass-roots supporters who had worked so hard for him. He also named his own running mate, after the convention nominated someone he didn’t want. He had stated that he would allow the convention to choose his running mate. He lied. (By the way, when that running mate, Kerry Murphy-Healey, ran for Governor on her own, he did absolutely nothing to help her defeat the liberal Democrat who now occupies that seat).
Romney is hailed as the great hero of health care reform in Massachusetts. He imposed a system which requires Bay State residents to have health insurance or face fines. Now having health insurance is a fine idea. I wish I could afford a better plan. The government, however, should not be allowed to mandate that I spend money on health insurance. Nor should an entire new bureaucracy be created to make sure that we comply.
While he claims to be a defender of family values, Romney was the Governor who ushered in the only legal homosexual marriage law in the US. Did Romney support this? Well, he didn’t fight it very much. When running against Ted Kennedy for the US Senate, in 1994, Romney said that the gay and lesbian community “needs more support from the Republican Party.”
So, I simply do not trust the man. Who do I vote for? I don’t have a clue. Presidential politics in this country has long been a “hold your nose and vote for the least worst” situation. This is the worst crop in a long time.
I’m glad God’s in charge.
This campaign is already overcooked. We have been subjected to campaigning for the Presidency since 2004. Senator Hillary has been at it longer than that.
One of the issues has been whether or not Christians can vote for a Mormon. Of course I have a few thoughts on that.
First, let me clear up any thoughts of Romney being a Christian. He is not. He is a Mormon. Mormon theology is not Christian theology. There are many areas of divergence, not the least of which is that the Trinity of the Bible is not the trinity of Mormonism.
Romney made a major speech, recently, in which he made the case for his religion to be left out of the equation in the Presidential campaign. That’s fine with me. Mormonism is not the reason I will not vote for Mitt Romney. I will not vote for him because he is not a conservative and because I do not trust him.
When Romney came back to Massachusetts to ascend the gubernatorial throne, I worked as a political reporter. I covered the Republican convention and the campaign. Romney is an elitist who immediately upon receiving the nomination froze out all the grass-roots supporters who had worked so hard for him. He also named his own running mate, after the convention nominated someone he didn’t want. He had stated that he would allow the convention to choose his running mate. He lied. (By the way, when that running mate, Kerry Murphy-Healey, ran for Governor on her own, he did absolutely nothing to help her defeat the liberal Democrat who now occupies that seat).
Romney is hailed as the great hero of health care reform in Massachusetts. He imposed a system which requires Bay State residents to have health insurance or face fines. Now having health insurance is a fine idea. I wish I could afford a better plan. The government, however, should not be allowed to mandate that I spend money on health insurance. Nor should an entire new bureaucracy be created to make sure that we comply.
While he claims to be a defender of family values, Romney was the Governor who ushered in the only legal homosexual marriage law in the US. Did Romney support this? Well, he didn’t fight it very much. When running against Ted Kennedy for the US Senate, in 1994, Romney said that the gay and lesbian community “needs more support from the Republican Party.”
So, I simply do not trust the man. Who do I vote for? I don’t have a clue. Presidential politics in this country has long been a “hold your nose and vote for the least worst” situation. This is the worst crop in a long time.
I’m glad God’s in charge.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Where is the Compassion Police?
I keep waiting. It's been two full days at this point and I have not heard a word of outrage from Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson. Christians have been shot to death because they are Christians. Where's the outrage? Perhaps there's nothing in it for them. Using words which are on the "bad" list is a hate crime. Is murder of Christians OK?
Maybe, it's because the victims were not....
I keep waiting. It's been two full days at this point and I have not heard a word of outrage from Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson. Christians have been shot to death because they are Christians. Where's the outrage? Perhaps there's nothing in it for them. Using words which are on the "bad" list is a hate crime. Is murder of Christians OK?
Maybe, it's because the victims were not....
Saturday, December 08, 2007
One Man Rule (or the French-Frying of America)
We usually associate the term “One Man Rule” with dictatorships. The names Stalin, Mao, and Idi Amin come to mind. Cesar Chavez wanted to join the club – and he may yet. But how about Guillermo Lopez? Sr. Lopez is a leader in the Latino Leadership Alliance somewhere in Pennsylvania. It is he who seemingly spearheaded (can I use this term?) the move to have the name “Pork Chop” removed as the name for a minor league baseball mascot. He was offended because, for some unknown reason, he finds it offensive to Latinos, Hispanics, or somebody. We don’t really need to know the reasons, just know that someone felt disrespected. First the “Frito Bandito,” now this. So, for the sake of this one man, the team caved in. (He will probably claim there were a great number of people who agreed with him. The principle is the same).
We have become so thin-skinned in this nation that we are afraid to speak many words, phrases, and concepts simply because they may offend someone; some one.
My rights to free speech have been abridged. We have become so politically-correct and offense-conscious that we might as well live in France where the collective national spine is as rigid as a French Fry (or “Freedom Fry” if you’re still using that term). This, my friends, is a continuing consequence of the feminization of this great land that was built by great, courageous men – and their strong, supportive women.
Because I happen to be a minority (white, heterosexual, conservative, Christ-following, male), my free speech is often termed “hate speech.” What’s hate speech? Anything that liberals think will upset somebody they are trying to use for more votes, therefore more power.
If I believe that homosexuality is a sin, I should really keep it to myself. That may be hate speech; a crime. Nor are we allowed to speak of our religious beliefs in the workplace or at school, unless we happen to be a pagan of some stripe. We wouldn’t want someone to be scarred for life because he or she heard the name Jesus.
All over the land there are people rising up and saying, “no” to offensive school mascots (you know, "the Fighting Native Americans"), town seals with (oh, no!!) Bibles or Biblical words, displays of American flags or nativity scenes or menorahs. And because of our national fear of one another and absolute dread of the power of actual thought, we cave in and give these fools their way.
Americans, be strong. Resist while you can. Say a word today that they don't like. Then smirk and be on your way!
We usually associate the term “One Man Rule” with dictatorships. The names Stalin, Mao, and Idi Amin come to mind. Cesar Chavez wanted to join the club – and he may yet. But how about Guillermo Lopez? Sr. Lopez is a leader in the Latino Leadership Alliance somewhere in Pennsylvania. It is he who seemingly spearheaded (can I use this term?) the move to have the name “Pork Chop” removed as the name for a minor league baseball mascot. He was offended because, for some unknown reason, he finds it offensive to Latinos, Hispanics, or somebody. We don’t really need to know the reasons, just know that someone felt disrespected. First the “Frito Bandito,” now this. So, for the sake of this one man, the team caved in. (He will probably claim there were a great number of people who agreed with him. The principle is the same).
We have become so thin-skinned in this nation that we are afraid to speak many words, phrases, and concepts simply because they may offend someone; some one.
My rights to free speech have been abridged. We have become so politically-correct and offense-conscious that we might as well live in France where the collective national spine is as rigid as a French Fry (or “Freedom Fry” if you’re still using that term). This, my friends, is a continuing consequence of the feminization of this great land that was built by great, courageous men – and their strong, supportive women.
Because I happen to be a minority (white, heterosexual, conservative, Christ-following, male), my free speech is often termed “hate speech.” What’s hate speech? Anything that liberals think will upset somebody they are trying to use for more votes, therefore more power.
If I believe that homosexuality is a sin, I should really keep it to myself. That may be hate speech; a crime. Nor are we allowed to speak of our religious beliefs in the workplace or at school, unless we happen to be a pagan of some stripe. We wouldn’t want someone to be scarred for life because he or she heard the name Jesus.
All over the land there are people rising up and saying, “no” to offensive school mascots (you know, "the Fighting Native Americans"), town seals with (oh, no!!) Bibles or Biblical words, displays of American flags or nativity scenes or menorahs. And because of our national fear of one another and absolute dread of the power of actual thought, we cave in and give these fools their way.
Americans, be strong. Resist while you can. Say a word today that they don't like. Then smirk and be on your way!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)