Richard Nixon's Revenge
=================
I don't much admire Pat Buchanan, for his philosophy is more reactive than creative. But he has nailed this one. Clever title: Richard Nixon's Revenge. Or it could be titled, "How Spiro Agnew brought down Dan Rather." Hee, Hee, Hee. One great quote, "Somewhere Richard Nixon is smiling. Somewhere Spiro Agnew is laughing. I will not ask Dan Rather where they are—as he and CBS are just not “fair and balanced” on this question."
Facebook Badge
Saturday, February 05, 2005
Thursday, February 03, 2005
Dennis Prager: The left is worth nothing: "About 60 percent of the Iraqi people went to vote despite the fact that every Iraqi voter risked his or her life and the lives of their children, whose throats the Islamic fascists threatened to slit. Yet, the Left continues to label the war for Iraqi democracy 'immoral' while praising the tyrant of Cuba.
Leftists do so for the same reason they admired Ho Chi Minh and Mao Tse-tung and condemned American arms as the greatest threat to world peace during and after the Cold War. The Left 'does not know the difference between good and evil.' And that is why it is worth nothing."
=================
Amen. See my next post. The problem with liberals is this: they have no transcendent idea of law and morality. They recognize no God except one who is fully enclosed in the history of the world, one who could not give the Ten Commandments. They certainly cannot recognize that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, One who came down from above. There is no "above" for liberals. Whatever God there is cannot speak except in the history and consciousness of the human race. Because of this denial of transcendent law, every human experience is equally valid--and equally invalid. Who can say that Muhammed's Koran is not equal to Paul's Romans? Why cannot the religious excitement of the Hindu be equal to the regeneration of John Huss? By what standard do we evaluate truth?
These nothing-people are therefore incapable of discerning the difference in the value of a life compared to another. They will not blink at the murder of innocents in the womb, but wax hysterical over the most just deaths of Saddam's most evil sons. They cannot see any difference between the rather mild humiliation of thugs and socio-paths by US Marines in military prisons in Iraq and the rape and murder houses of Saddam. The very idea of evil is a concept they reject and they reject those who think that such a concept could be valid.
But why should we be surprised? These are the same people who defended communism and the wholesale slaughter of the gangster regimes of the USSR, Cuba, Red China, North Korea in the 20th centuries, just as their political ancestors defended Hitler and racism. Why shold we trust their moral judgment now? John Kerry was not able to know if the Iraqi war was worth it until "we know how it turns out." So much for moral clarity!
Leftists do so for the same reason they admired Ho Chi Minh and Mao Tse-tung and condemned American arms as the greatest threat to world peace during and after the Cold War. The Left 'does not know the difference between good and evil.' And that is why it is worth nothing."
=================
Amen. See my next post. The problem with liberals is this: they have no transcendent idea of law and morality. They recognize no God except one who is fully enclosed in the history of the world, one who could not give the Ten Commandments. They certainly cannot recognize that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, One who came down from above. There is no "above" for liberals. Whatever God there is cannot speak except in the history and consciousness of the human race. Because of this denial of transcendent law, every human experience is equally valid--and equally invalid. Who can say that Muhammed's Koran is not equal to Paul's Romans? Why cannot the religious excitement of the Hindu be equal to the regeneration of John Huss? By what standard do we evaluate truth?
These nothing-people are therefore incapable of discerning the difference in the value of a life compared to another. They will not blink at the murder of innocents in the womb, but wax hysterical over the most just deaths of Saddam's most evil sons. They cannot see any difference between the rather mild humiliation of thugs and socio-paths by US Marines in military prisons in Iraq and the rape and murder houses of Saddam. The very idea of evil is a concept they reject and they reject those who think that such a concept could be valid.
But why should we be surprised? These are the same people who defended communism and the wholesale slaughter of the gangster regimes of the USSR, Cuba, Red China, North Korea in the 20th centuries, just as their political ancestors defended Hitler and racism. Why shold we trust their moral judgment now? John Kerry was not able to know if the Iraqi war was worth it until "we know how it turns out." So much for moral clarity!
Wednesday, February 02, 2005
Naysayers tight-lipped since success of Iraq vote - The Washington Times: Nation/Politics - February 02, 2005: " Chicago Sun-Times columnist Mark Brown, who has consistently opposed Mr. Bush and the war in Iraq, wrote for yesterday's edition that 'it's hard to swallow,' but 'what if it turns out Bush was right, and we were wrong?'
The Chicago columnist wrote that he was struck by 'television coverage from Iraq that showed long lines of people risking their lives by turning out to vote, honest looks of joy on so many of their faces.'
'If it turns out Bush was right all along, this is going to require some serious penance,' Mr. Brown wrote. "
=================
As refreshing at it would be, and is, to hear the deafening silence from the "naysayers," after the heroic performance of the Iraqi people in the election, this quotation from Mark Brown shows the moral bankruptcy of the left.
What courage Jimmy Carter and his "Carter Center" showed by their cowardice in not going to monitor the elections, choosing rather to stay in Jordan. Those aged and crippled Iraqis who were carried to the polls had more guts than the whole bunch of carping crybabies in the blue states.
But the worst is the pragmatic ethics of Brown and the rest of his band of brothers. "If it turns out that Bush was right..." What a revelation of Brown's ethical temperature. If it works it's right. How far we have come from Patrick Henry and Nathan Hale.
Modern Pasty Henry "Give liberty unless it carries a risk of death. Then, don't bother. I won't fight for liberty unless I can be assured that I will win the battle and come out o.k."
Modern Nathan Hell: "I regret that I have only one life to give for my country. Because I have only one life, why should I give it for my country? What good will that do me? I won't be around to enjoy my country and don't enjoy it much now anyway. The war in Iraqi is for oil and what good does that do me. What a stinking world we live in."
But history does not belong to the morally bankrupt. I would rather be a Islamic fundamentalist fighting for Allah than one of this crowd that lives for nothing. Shame, shame, shame. It is better to die for something than to live for nothing.
The Chicago columnist wrote that he was struck by 'television coverage from Iraq that showed long lines of people risking their lives by turning out to vote, honest looks of joy on so many of their faces.'
'If it turns out Bush was right all along, this is going to require some serious penance,' Mr. Brown wrote. "
=================
As refreshing at it would be, and is, to hear the deafening silence from the "naysayers," after the heroic performance of the Iraqi people in the election, this quotation from Mark Brown shows the moral bankruptcy of the left.
What courage Jimmy Carter and his "Carter Center" showed by their cowardice in not going to monitor the elections, choosing rather to stay in Jordan. Those aged and crippled Iraqis who were carried to the polls had more guts than the whole bunch of carping crybabies in the blue states.
But the worst is the pragmatic ethics of Brown and the rest of his band of brothers. "If it turns out that Bush was right..." What a revelation of Brown's ethical temperature. If it works it's right. How far we have come from Patrick Henry and Nathan Hale.
Modern Pasty Henry "Give liberty unless it carries a risk of death. Then, don't bother. I won't fight for liberty unless I can be assured that I will win the battle and come out o.k."
Modern Nathan Hell: "I regret that I have only one life to give for my country. Because I have only one life, why should I give it for my country? What good will that do me? I won't be around to enjoy my country and don't enjoy it much now anyway. The war in Iraqi is for oil and what good does that do me. What a stinking world we live in."
But history does not belong to the morally bankrupt. I would rather be a Islamic fundamentalist fighting for Allah than one of this crowd that lives for nothing. Shame, shame, shame. It is better to die for something than to live for nothing.
Saturday, January 29, 2005
OpinionJournal - Extra: "It's not just the terrorists who, according to His Eminence, are creating problems for Iraq: Elections in January 'will be a starting point for a new Iraq,' he says. Yet 'Western newspapers and broadcasters are simply peddling propaganda and misinformation. . . . Iraqis are happy to be having elections and are looking forward to them because they will be useful for national unity. . . . Perhaps not everything will go exactly to plan, but, with time, things will improve. Finally Iraqis will be given the chance to choose. Why is there so much noise and debate coming out from the West when before, under Saddam, there were no free elections, but no one said a thing?' "
--------------
The Archbishop of Kirkuk gives a quite different picture of Iraq on the eve of elections. But of course, he is a Christian in Iraq, supported by the Wall Street Journal and other bastions of captalism. What would he know about democracy that the Oil for Food program, the UN, and the Germans and French don't know? They had no financial interests to support Saddam or that would make them look with nostalgia on the good old days and hope for the failure of the elections on Sunday, did they? When have the French or Germans ever sought narrow self-interest? Ask the New Republic which continues to spread gloom and doom. But of course, there is little joy is liberalism nowadays. The old liberalism of FDR, HST, and JFK has been dead a long time, and those who are left [no pun intended] are as sour as a green persimmon. Anything good that happens or could happen is a refutation of their world view, which can be summarized, "Everything stinks."
--------------
The Archbishop of Kirkuk gives a quite different picture of Iraq on the eve of elections. But of course, he is a Christian in Iraq, supported by the Wall Street Journal and other bastions of captalism. What would he know about democracy that the Oil for Food program, the UN, and the Germans and French don't know? They had no financial interests to support Saddam or that would make them look with nostalgia on the good old days and hope for the failure of the elections on Sunday, did they? When have the French or Germans ever sought narrow self-interest? Ask the New Republic which continues to spread gloom and doom. But of course, there is little joy is liberalism nowadays. The old liberalism of FDR, HST, and JFK has been dead a long time, and those who are left [no pun intended] are as sour as a green persimmon. Anything good that happens or could happen is a refutation of their world view, which can be summarized, "Everything stinks."
Friday, January 28, 2005
CF&P E-mail Update, January 27, 2005: "Today's update illustrates why tax competition is so important. Many of the pro-growth tax reforms around the world are taking place because nations are being compelled to compete."
=========
Ah, competition. What a wonderful word and concept! Instead of cussin' the multinational corporations, let them get credit they deserve for keeping taxes low. If a country raises taxes, the businesses do not build plants or offices there.
Did you notice that the formula for revitalizing businesses in the blue-state liberal east coast included a hefty chunk of tax decreases or tax incentives. Wonder why?
=========
Ah, competition. What a wonderful word and concept! Instead of cussin' the multinational corporations, let them get credit they deserve for keeping taxes low. If a country raises taxes, the businesses do not build plants or offices there.
Did you notice that the formula for revitalizing businesses in the blue-state liberal east coast included a hefty chunk of tax decreases or tax incentives. Wonder why?
Wednesday, January 26, 2005
Signs that there is true worship taking place in the church.
1. There is a good sound system.
2. The worship leader is really hot.
3. A lot of young people attend the church.
4. You can feel the love.
5. The music is really loud.
6. There are no organs.
7. People say things like, "O yes." "uh, HUH" "Yes, Jesus"
8. People are not looking down at a hymnbook; they are looking up at a screen.
9. People have their hands raised.
10. There are guitars.
11. People have their eyes closed.
12. Only a few words are sung, and these are sung over and over.
13. People roll their eyes a lot while they are doing it.
14. The worship team is really hot.
15. People roll their eyes while looking at the screen.
16. People clap their hands while they are doing it.
17. People say things like, "O yes." "uh, HUH" "Yes, Jesus" over and over.
18. Some people clap their hands AND have their hands raised.
19. You can feel the love.
20. There are a lot of women doing it.
21. There are people who roll their eyes while they have their eyes closed.
22. People stand and sway while they are doing it.
23. Many men seem embarrassed by it. They are there because their wives won't let them go anywhere else to church.
24. The worship team is very young and sexy.
25. You can feel the love.
1. There is a good sound system.
2. The worship leader is really hot.
3. A lot of young people attend the church.
4. You can feel the love.
5. The music is really loud.
6. There are no organs.
7. People say things like, "O yes." "uh, HUH" "Yes, Jesus"
8. People are not looking down at a hymnbook; they are looking up at a screen.
9. People have their hands raised.
10. There are guitars.
11. People have their eyes closed.
12. Only a few words are sung, and these are sung over and over.
13. People roll their eyes a lot while they are doing it.
14. The worship team is really hot.
15. People roll their eyes while looking at the screen.
16. People clap their hands while they are doing it.
17. People say things like, "O yes." "uh, HUH" "Yes, Jesus" over and over.
18. Some people clap their hands AND have their hands raised.
19. You can feel the love.
20. There are a lot of women doing it.
21. There are people who roll their eyes while they have their eyes closed.
22. People stand and sway while they are doing it.
23. Many men seem embarrassed by it. They are there because their wives won't let them go anywhere else to church.
24. The worship team is very young and sexy.
25. You can feel the love.
It just doesn't seem to be enough. Faith, I mean.
Humanistic faith is well promoted. "Ya gotta believe." "Believe in yourself." "Have confidence in your own heart." "Trust the child within." "How you live is more important than your creed." "There is no difference between obedience and faith."
Too often in the church there is fear that faith will prove to be vain or empty, or worse, irrelevant. The worse that can happen in the modern trendy church is for "faith" to become irrelevant. Christian are really up to date in these churches: they are happier, more fulfilled, make more money and even have better sex lives. What do they believe? Not that old fashioned stuff, you can be sure of that. People would no more be caught believing an old faith than they would in caught wearing bell bottom trousers.
There certainly is no doctrinal test for faith, as though it must be grounded in any idea that can pass as true. That implies an idea of what true is, and we don't want to get into THAT. We want a place where everyone can worship. Don't we?
In the Bible, the thing that matters is that faith be true faith, that is, confidence that the doctrine of Christ is true doctrine. 2John 1:9 "Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son." But who wants to hold to dead formulas that have lost their meaning?
Certainly not the modern existentialist church. Having Jesus in your heart, or Christ in your life, or being filled with the Holy Spirit doesn't mean anything doctrinal or anything subject to a biblical test. How do you test existentialism? Existence is before thought and knowing Christ is only marginally connected to the Bible. The Bible plays a certain role, of course, but only that of introducing us to the experience that is Christ. It must not play any part in critiquing the experience, for how can thought critique experience? Didn't the blind man say it all, "Once I was blind, but now I can see." But woe to the modern "biblicist" who asks "What is it you think you see?"
So simple faith in the message of the Bible, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God, with all the implications that this faith has for the Bible, for the nature of God, for eternal punishment and reward, for the nature of the church, worship, creation, office in the church, etc., is minimized in favor of an existential reading of the text. Feeling the text replaces understanding the text. Faith in experience replaces faith in the promises of God.
So, the modern church is very apologetic about the Bible, apologizing for that six day creation stuff, predestination, God's kingdom over all things and His judgment of the world, Paul's hatred for women, the Bible's paranoia about sodomy and lesbianism, and countless other stuff. Most important, the inerrancy and infallibility of the Bible are the first doctrines to go because how can there be an existentialist test for THAT? The faith, therefore, of the modern church, being cut off from the root of faith, is left with a faith that is of a different genre than that taught by the Lord Jesus, who taught that Scripture cannot be broken.
But then, it would be non-existentialist to derive our doctrine of Scripture from Scripture, wouldn't it?
This sorry and impotent faith must be strengthened by making it relevant, up to date, moralistic, and robust, strengthened with man's zeal, recruiting fervor, and social concerns. A whole smorgasbord of offerings for every person's whim or desire. "Come on in," is the message and we are very careful NOT to tell folks what they are coming in to. Because the young are the most existential of any age group, these are "youth oriented" churches. "The young are the church of tomorrow," goes the slogan. Heaven forbid that we should expect them to grow up to prepare for leadership in the church! Especially if mature thought is involved.
The bible is taught everywhere, of course, but in the context of "what does this verse mean to you?" Redemption becomes transforming the culture [in the name of evangelism bringing the culture of the world into the church], worship becomes feeling the presence of God [let's all roll our eyes and clap and stomp], and preaching becomes helping everyone find his/her own "ministry," from roping horses for Jesus or motorcycle gangs for Jesus or gangsta rappin' for Jesus.
Isa. 29:8: "It shall even be as when an hungry man dreameth, and, behold, he eateth; but he awaketh, and his soul is empty: or as when a thirsty man dreameth, and, behold, he drinketh; but he awaketh, and, behold, he is faint, and his soul hath appetite...."
What ever happened to the relevance of repenting of your evil deeds and ungodly life-style and turning to the Living God and His Son Jesus Christ, who alone can save the soul from the fires of hell?
I wonder if John the Baptist had a satisfying sex life.
Humanistic faith is well promoted. "Ya gotta believe." "Believe in yourself." "Have confidence in your own heart." "Trust the child within." "How you live is more important than your creed." "There is no difference between obedience and faith."
Too often in the church there is fear that faith will prove to be vain or empty, or worse, irrelevant. The worse that can happen in the modern trendy church is for "faith" to become irrelevant. Christian are really up to date in these churches: they are happier, more fulfilled, make more money and even have better sex lives. What do they believe? Not that old fashioned stuff, you can be sure of that. People would no more be caught believing an old faith than they would in caught wearing bell bottom trousers.
There certainly is no doctrinal test for faith, as though it must be grounded in any idea that can pass as true. That implies an idea of what true is, and we don't want to get into THAT. We want a place where everyone can worship. Don't we?
In the Bible, the thing that matters is that faith be true faith, that is, confidence that the doctrine of Christ is true doctrine. 2John 1:9 "Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son." But who wants to hold to dead formulas that have lost their meaning?
Certainly not the modern existentialist church. Having Jesus in your heart, or Christ in your life, or being filled with the Holy Spirit doesn't mean anything doctrinal or anything subject to a biblical test. How do you test existentialism? Existence is before thought and knowing Christ is only marginally connected to the Bible. The Bible plays a certain role, of course, but only that of introducing us to the experience that is Christ. It must not play any part in critiquing the experience, for how can thought critique experience? Didn't the blind man say it all, "Once I was blind, but now I can see." But woe to the modern "biblicist" who asks "What is it you think you see?"
So simple faith in the message of the Bible, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God, with all the implications that this faith has for the Bible, for the nature of God, for eternal punishment and reward, for the nature of the church, worship, creation, office in the church, etc., is minimized in favor of an existential reading of the text. Feeling the text replaces understanding the text. Faith in experience replaces faith in the promises of God.
So, the modern church is very apologetic about the Bible, apologizing for that six day creation stuff, predestination, God's kingdom over all things and His judgment of the world, Paul's hatred for women, the Bible's paranoia about sodomy and lesbianism, and countless other stuff. Most important, the inerrancy and infallibility of the Bible are the first doctrines to go because how can there be an existentialist test for THAT? The faith, therefore, of the modern church, being cut off from the root of faith, is left with a faith that is of a different genre than that taught by the Lord Jesus, who taught that Scripture cannot be broken.
But then, it would be non-existentialist to derive our doctrine of Scripture from Scripture, wouldn't it?
This sorry and impotent faith must be strengthened by making it relevant, up to date, moralistic, and robust, strengthened with man's zeal, recruiting fervor, and social concerns. A whole smorgasbord of offerings for every person's whim or desire. "Come on in," is the message and we are very careful NOT to tell folks what they are coming in to. Because the young are the most existential of any age group, these are "youth oriented" churches. "The young are the church of tomorrow," goes the slogan. Heaven forbid that we should expect them to grow up to prepare for leadership in the church! Especially if mature thought is involved.
The bible is taught everywhere, of course, but in the context of "what does this verse mean to you?" Redemption becomes transforming the culture [in the name of evangelism bringing the culture of the world into the church], worship becomes feeling the presence of God [let's all roll our eyes and clap and stomp], and preaching becomes helping everyone find his/her own "ministry," from roping horses for Jesus or motorcycle gangs for Jesus or gangsta rappin' for Jesus.
Isa. 29:8: "It shall even be as when an hungry man dreameth, and, behold, he eateth; but he awaketh, and his soul is empty: or as when a thirsty man dreameth, and, behold, he drinketh; but he awaketh, and, behold, he is faint, and his soul hath appetite...."
What ever happened to the relevance of repenting of your evil deeds and ungodly life-style and turning to the Living God and His Son Jesus Christ, who alone can save the soul from the fires of hell?
I wonder if John the Baptist had a satisfying sex life.
Friday, January 14, 2005
Wheat and Chaff: "Only the context of eternity can teach me the truth of what happens on earth. Trying to understand the events of this world without an eternal perspective is like using a tape measure with no numbers on it. You might know which dash the end of the board falls on, but you don't know what the dash means, or how it relates to anything else. When we measure the world without the eternal perspective, all we're left with is the judgments of man, and so we think a church with 4000 people in it is more blessed than the one with 75."
-----------
Very good article from Son Matthew. Read the whole thing.
-----------
Very good article from Son Matthew. Read the whole thing.
Tuesday, January 11, 2005
Dennis Prager: The case for Judeo-Christian values: Part II
============
My favorite Jew has done it again. I wish a Christian had written this, but many of them are incapable of it. But many of us are saying it. Without God there is no morality, just preferences. A man who does good because it is nicer [ala Mammy Yokum] may be a man of taste, but he is not moral.
God is not confused. He knows when we are worshipping ourselves rather than Him. He is not amused, either.
============
My favorite Jew has done it again. I wish a Christian had written this, but many of them are incapable of it. But many of us are saying it. Without God there is no morality, just preferences. A man who does good because it is nicer [ala Mammy Yokum] may be a man of taste, but he is not moral.
God is not confused. He knows when we are worshipping ourselves rather than Him. He is not amused, either.
Friday, January 07, 2005
George Will: Warp speed: "Dec. 26, 2004, brought another geological challenge to the biblical notion of an intervening, caring God."
======
I'm sorry, Mr. Will, but you know nothing of what you speak. December 26 did nothing of the sort. What is challenged is the humanist notion [not Biblical] that God must act according to our sentimental affectations. The modern sentimental idea of God, the result of two or three centuries of unbelief and humanistic attacks on the Bible, has nothing to do with the Bible.
Isaiah gives another perspective of God: 2:17-22 And the loftiness of man shall be bowed down, and the haughtiness of men shall be made low: and the LORD alone shall be exalted in that day. And the idols he shall utterly abolish. And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth. In that day a man shall cast his idols of silver, and his idols of gold, which they made each one for himself to worship, to the moles and to the bats; To go into the clefts of the rocks, and into the tops of the ragged rocks, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth. Cease ye from man, whose breath is in his nostrils: for wherein is he to be accounted of?
The fact that you, Mr. George Will, do not know the God of the Bible, does not mean that the God of the Bible does not know you. What December 26 did was show the world that our sentimental and shallow view that God as a benevolent grandpa that will rush to serve up whatever we want, in spite of our denial of His Word and appointed Savior, is sadly out of tune with reality. It never was true and it isn't true now. It is humanism and humanistic sentimentality that is exposed.
How dare you, Mr. Will, attribute man's fancies to the bible and then condemn them as though they were God's word! Do you think that the heavens are blind and deaf?
Isa 24:18 "And it shall come to pass, that he who fleeth from the noise of the fear shall fall into the pit; and he that cometh up out of the midst of the pit shall be taken in the snare: for the windows from on high are open, and the foundations of the earth do shake."
This is the God of the Bible, the God cannot deny Himself. He is the Creator of all things and the source of all things. Do you think you can tweak His beard and He will not pay attention? Do you think that you can turn your back on His Son and His love and not experience His wrath. The fact that you do not believe in His wrath does not make it go away.
What 9/11 and 12/26 really shows us is that God has His dark angels that know nothing of grace and mercy [Ex. 12:23 and 1 Cor. 10:10]. God's love is wrapped up in Jesus Christ [Roman 5:8], and those who reject God's Beloved Son, will someday meet these other angels. They will not like it.
Amos 9:1-4 I saw the Lord standing upon the altar: and he said, Smite the lintel of the door, that the posts may shake: and cut them in the head, all of them; and I will slay the last of them with the sword: he that fleeth of them shall not flee away, and he that escapeth of them shall not be delivered. Though they dig into hell, thence shall mine hand take them; though they climb up to heaven, thence will I bring them down: And though they hide themselves in the top of Carmel, I will search and take them out thence; and though they be hid from my sight in the bottom of the sea, thence will I command the serpent, and he shall bite them: And though they go into captivity before their enemies, thence will I command the sword, and it shall slay them: and I will set mine eyes upon them for evil, and not for good.
Hebrews 10:28-31 He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
The beloved of God, who believe in Christ and trust Him, did not perish in the waves, but were transported by angels into the bosom of Christ. What was a terrible calamity to others was a homegoing to them. Not so the ungodly.
But if you do not repent, you will likewise perish.
======
I'm sorry, Mr. Will, but you know nothing of what you speak. December 26 did nothing of the sort. What is challenged is the humanist notion [not Biblical] that God must act according to our sentimental affectations. The modern sentimental idea of God, the result of two or three centuries of unbelief and humanistic attacks on the Bible, has nothing to do with the Bible.
Isaiah gives another perspective of God: 2:17-22 And the loftiness of man shall be bowed down, and the haughtiness of men shall be made low: and the LORD alone shall be exalted in that day. And the idols he shall utterly abolish. And they shall go into the holes of the rocks, and into the caves of the earth, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth. In that day a man shall cast his idols of silver, and his idols of gold, which they made each one for himself to worship, to the moles and to the bats; To go into the clefts of the rocks, and into the tops of the ragged rocks, for fear of the LORD, and for the glory of his majesty, when he ariseth to shake terribly the earth. Cease ye from man, whose breath is in his nostrils: for wherein is he to be accounted of?
The fact that you, Mr. George Will, do not know the God of the Bible, does not mean that the God of the Bible does not know you. What December 26 did was show the world that our sentimental and shallow view that God as a benevolent grandpa that will rush to serve up whatever we want, in spite of our denial of His Word and appointed Savior, is sadly out of tune with reality. It never was true and it isn't true now. It is humanism and humanistic sentimentality that is exposed.
How dare you, Mr. Will, attribute man's fancies to the bible and then condemn them as though they were God's word! Do you think that the heavens are blind and deaf?
Isa 24:18 "And it shall come to pass, that he who fleeth from the noise of the fear shall fall into the pit; and he that cometh up out of the midst of the pit shall be taken in the snare: for the windows from on high are open, and the foundations of the earth do shake."
This is the God of the Bible, the God cannot deny Himself. He is the Creator of all things and the source of all things. Do you think you can tweak His beard and He will not pay attention? Do you think that you can turn your back on His Son and His love and not experience His wrath. The fact that you do not believe in His wrath does not make it go away.
What 9/11 and 12/26 really shows us is that God has His dark angels that know nothing of grace and mercy [Ex. 12:23 and 1 Cor. 10:10]. God's love is wrapped up in Jesus Christ [Roman 5:8], and those who reject God's Beloved Son, will someday meet these other angels. They will not like it.
Amos 9:1-4 I saw the Lord standing upon the altar: and he said, Smite the lintel of the door, that the posts may shake: and cut them in the head, all of them; and I will slay the last of them with the sword: he that fleeth of them shall not flee away, and he that escapeth of them shall not be delivered. Though they dig into hell, thence shall mine hand take them; though they climb up to heaven, thence will I bring them down: And though they hide themselves in the top of Carmel, I will search and take them out thence; and though they be hid from my sight in the bottom of the sea, thence will I command the serpent, and he shall bite them: And though they go into captivity before their enemies, thence will I command the sword, and it shall slay them: and I will set mine eyes upon them for evil, and not for good.
Hebrews 10:28-31 He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
The beloved of God, who believe in Christ and trust Him, did not perish in the waves, but were transported by angels into the bosom of Christ. What was a terrible calamity to others was a homegoing to them. Not so the ungodly.
But if you do not repent, you will likewise perish.
Elaine Donnelly on Women in Combat on National Review Online: "Forget feminist legends about Amazon warriors and push-button wars. The modern land-combat soldier carries weapons and high-tech equipment weighing 50 to 100 pounds, with body armor alone weighing 25 pounds. Such burdens would be disproportionately heavy for average female soldiers, who are certainly brave but shorter and lighter, with smaller hearts and bones, 25 to30 percent less aerobic capacity for endurance, and 40 to 50 percent less upper-body strength. "
==========
This is reality. Women do not belong in combat. The Bible forbids it, and common sense is appalled by it. Why kind of men will send their women off to war?
==========
This is reality. Women do not belong in combat. The Bible forbids it, and common sense is appalled by it. Why kind of men will send their women off to war?
Dennis Prager: Better answers: The case for Judeo-Christian values: "The oft cited charge that religion has led to more wars and evil than anything else is a widely believed lie. Secular successors to Christianity have slaughtered and enslaved more people than all religions in history (though significant elements within a non-Judeo-Christian religion, Islam, slaughter and enslave today, and if not stopped in Sudan and elsewhere could match Nazism or Communism)."
---------------
A great and sober argument from my favorite Jew, Dennis Prager, for Judeo-Christian values.
---------------
A great and sober argument from my favorite Jew, Dennis Prager, for Judeo-Christian values.
Thursday, January 06, 2005
You need to read these articles from my favorite college professor.
Mike S. Adams: The abolition of tenure: "Many of those who are unfit for any job besides that of a tenured professor would be unemployed and homeless if we abolished tenure tomorrow. Without tenure, these people would not be such an irritation at work, although they would probably be just as irritating as panhandlers once their unemployment checks ran out. "
*****
Mike S. Adams: My new life difficulty grading scale: "As controversial as it may seem, my new life difficulty grading scale will help us to achieve a goal that should make all of us feel comfortable. That goal is nothing less than the destruction of the antiquated notion that people should work to overcome life's difficulties with no advanced guarantee of the outcome they desire."
*****
Mike S. Adams: My last lecture: "Dr. Adams' alarm goes off and he awakes from a pleasant dream. After a shower, two cups of coffee, and 12 more pages of Atlas Shrugged, he kisses his wife goodbye. After he blows a kiss to his Ann Coulter Action Figure, he heads out the door for another semester. To be continued..."
*****
Mike S. Adams: From each according to his need: "By implementing this plan, I will be doing my part to reverse the harmful effects of socialism upon our great nation. If others follow, we will soon see the emergence of a large gap between the needy and the achievers in our society. But if we stay the course, we will see many of our needy brothers join the class of the achievers in the future. If they do not, we can at least say that we provided them with an opportunity to achieve. We have no other obligation. "
Mike S. Adams: The abolition of tenure: "Many of those who are unfit for any job besides that of a tenured professor would be unemployed and homeless if we abolished tenure tomorrow. Without tenure, these people would not be such an irritation at work, although they would probably be just as irritating as panhandlers once their unemployment checks ran out. "
*****
Mike S. Adams: My new life difficulty grading scale: "As controversial as it may seem, my new life difficulty grading scale will help us to achieve a goal that should make all of us feel comfortable. That goal is nothing less than the destruction of the antiquated notion that people should work to overcome life's difficulties with no advanced guarantee of the outcome they desire."
*****
Mike S. Adams: My last lecture: "Dr. Adams' alarm goes off and he awakes from a pleasant dream. After a shower, two cups of coffee, and 12 more pages of Atlas Shrugged, he kisses his wife goodbye. After he blows a kiss to his Ann Coulter Action Figure, he heads out the door for another semester. To be continued..."
*****
Mike S. Adams: From each according to his need: "By implementing this plan, I will be doing my part to reverse the harmful effects of socialism upon our great nation. If others follow, we will soon see the emergence of a large gap between the needy and the achievers in our society. But if we stay the course, we will see many of our needy brothers join the class of the achievers in the future. If they do not, we can at least say that we provided them with an opportunity to achieve. We have no other obligation. "
Monday, December 27, 2004
Boston.com / News / Boston Globe / Opinion / Op-ed / In the footsteps of FDR, Truman, JFK: "'THE SAME revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought' -- the president was speaking in Washington -- 'are still at issue around the globe: the belief that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God.'"
==================
The words are not the words of George W. Bush--but they could be. The words are those of John F. Kennedy in 1961. The idea that rights come from God comes from Western Christianity with touches of the enlightenment and the Reformation. In fact, without John Calvin and Geneva, the concept is unthinkable as a political foundation for a state.
Jesus said to "Ask, Seek, Knock," not from the state or church but "from your Father in Heaven." Those who do not have a Father in heaven will never get it. They can see no higher than the state.
==================
The words are not the words of George W. Bush--but they could be. The words are those of John F. Kennedy in 1961. The idea that rights come from God comes from Western Christianity with touches of the enlightenment and the Reformation. In fact, without John Calvin and Geneva, the concept is unthinkable as a political foundation for a state.
Jesus said to "Ask, Seek, Knock," not from the state or church but "from your Father in Heaven." Those who do not have a Father in heaven will never get it. They can see no higher than the state.
Tuesday, December 21, 2004
Dennis Prager: In defense of the 'commercialism' of Christmas: "Imagine that Christmas came around, the stores put up no Christmas decorations and no one bought gifts. Would we be a better society? To me, and I suspect to most Americans, the question is rhetorical. Of course we wouldn't. Why on earth would we be a better society if Thanksgiving to Christmas were no different than a month in October or August? Not having a special time of year such as Christmas time, a major part of which is gift buying, would be an incalculable loss to society.
----------------
Way to go, Dennis Prager, my favorite Jew!
I love Christmas, every part of it. You should read my article.
Prager again: "When you buy Christmas gifts, you bring joy to the recipients, you feel good about giving, you have spent time thinking about what the recipients would like, you keep many businesses alive, and most of all, you honor the holiday. It is incredible that all this is not obvious to everyone who cares about Christmas and about American society."
----------------
Way to go, Dennis Prager, my favorite Jew!
I love Christmas, every part of it. You should read my article.
Prager again: "When you buy Christmas gifts, you bring joy to the recipients, you feel good about giving, you have spent time thinking about what the recipients would like, you keep many businesses alive, and most of all, you honor the holiday. It is incredible that all this is not obvious to everyone who cares about Christmas and about American society."
Principle as Narcissism - How President Bush gets to believe what he does about Social Security. By Timothy Noah: "Until now, Bush has seemed either too dumb or too stubborn to recognize that Social Security privatization will necessitate either hitting up taxpayers or reducing Social Security benefits. "
-----------
Amazing! These guys think that George Bush invented Social Security and what's wrong with it is his fault. Actually, wise men said when I was a boy that Social Security was not viable and that computing the numbers shows its won't work. But Roosevelt and Democrats bought votes with it for years, and those brave enough to touch the "third rail" lost elections and disappeared from the public screen. Until now.
President Bush is a man of principle--which is "narcissism" to those who have no principles and feel good about not having any. He is also cynical about the press, perhaps, and is not going to throw any blood in the water for the sharks to feed on. Drives them crazy you know.
I suspect that private accounts for Social Security and a booming econmy will take care of the so-called cost of the small percent that will be "diverted." I dunno. I am not an ecnomist, but those guys don't have a great track record on such things. Choose your own witch doctor.
-----------
Amazing! These guys think that George Bush invented Social Security and what's wrong with it is his fault. Actually, wise men said when I was a boy that Social Security was not viable and that computing the numbers shows its won't work. But Roosevelt and Democrats bought votes with it for years, and those brave enough to touch the "third rail" lost elections and disappeared from the public screen. Until now.
President Bush is a man of principle--which is "narcissism" to those who have no principles and feel good about not having any. He is also cynical about the press, perhaps, and is not going to throw any blood in the water for the sharks to feed on. Drives them crazy you know.
I suspect that private accounts for Social Security and a booming econmy will take care of the so-called cost of the small percent that will be "diverted." I dunno. I am not an ecnomist, but those guys don't have a great track record on such things. Choose your own witch doctor.
Saturday, December 18, 2004
Yes, yes, I know, and I apologize to you faithful you have been returning here day after day for the past three weeks or so. The truth is, it has been a hectic time.
The wife and I travelled to Iowa to be with son Jim for Thanksgiving. It was a great time, but on the return we had to spend an extra day at North Platte [what's that?] Nebraska because of the snow. Got home Monday night and spent the week in bed with a bad case of a cold or flu or some idiot thing. Then back to Wichita, KS, to conduct the funeral of a dear friend, then back home to attend to duties at New Geneva Seminary and Trinity Covenant Church. Very busy, very hectic, no time to blog. No real end in sight until the end of January, when regular classes begin at New Geneva again.
I have taken time to read Wheat and Chaff and Dead Men's Voices. Excellent stuff. You should go to these sites every day, for intellectual and spiritual stimulation.
My good friend Reverend Gene Sawtelle from Greeley is suffering from acute back pain and Andy McIntyre has been travelling up there to fill the pulpit. Leaves us a little short here at Trinity because he teaches the adult Sunday School here. Richard Stetler has been gracious to fill in for him and has done a fine job.
Tomorrow is Christmas Sunday. I love every bit of Christmas. The Bible doesn't tell us how we are to celebrate Christmas, or even if we are to celebrate it. The New Testament warns us about holy days and such things, for they can become a snare. But it does leave us free to enjoy and have fun remembering the birth of our Savior. Christmas it not a day enjoined for worship, but it is a great family day and a great season of good cheer and happy memories. People who cannot enjoy Christmas have a great empty place in their hearts, perhaps. If you have no good memories of Christmas, where are your good memories? I have a bundle of them.
I don't worship Santa Claus, and don't know anyone who does. But, he is a jolly old elf that provides enjoyment right up there with Winnie the Pooh and Aragorn. I believe there is a real devil, and he is not much into good cheer and happiness. You are more apt to find him in a jihad than a Christmas celebration.
God bless you all. I expect to be posting to all my sites on a more regular basis over the next few days.
The wife and I travelled to Iowa to be with son Jim for Thanksgiving. It was a great time, but on the return we had to spend an extra day at North Platte [what's that?] Nebraska because of the snow. Got home Monday night and spent the week in bed with a bad case of a cold or flu or some idiot thing. Then back to Wichita, KS, to conduct the funeral of a dear friend, then back home to attend to duties at New Geneva Seminary and Trinity Covenant Church. Very busy, very hectic, no time to blog. No real end in sight until the end of January, when regular classes begin at New Geneva again.
I have taken time to read Wheat and Chaff and Dead Men's Voices. Excellent stuff. You should go to these sites every day, for intellectual and spiritual stimulation.
My good friend Reverend Gene Sawtelle from Greeley is suffering from acute back pain and Andy McIntyre has been travelling up there to fill the pulpit. Leaves us a little short here at Trinity because he teaches the adult Sunday School here. Richard Stetler has been gracious to fill in for him and has done a fine job.
Tomorrow is Christmas Sunday. I love every bit of Christmas. The Bible doesn't tell us how we are to celebrate Christmas, or even if we are to celebrate it. The New Testament warns us about holy days and such things, for they can become a snare. But it does leave us free to enjoy and have fun remembering the birth of our Savior. Christmas it not a day enjoined for worship, but it is a great family day and a great season of good cheer and happy memories. People who cannot enjoy Christmas have a great empty place in their hearts, perhaps. If you have no good memories of Christmas, where are your good memories? I have a bundle of them.
I don't worship Santa Claus, and don't know anyone who does. But, he is a jolly old elf that provides enjoyment right up there with Winnie the Pooh and Aragorn. I believe there is a real devil, and he is not much into good cheer and happiness. You are more apt to find him in a jihad than a Christmas celebration.
God bless you all. I expect to be posting to all my sites on a more regular basis over the next few days.
Monday, November 22, 2004
The Heartland Institute - Black Caucus Member Proposes to Eliminate Personal, Corporate Income Taxes - by John W. Skorburg: "Congressman Chaka Fattah (D-PA) unveiled his bill on September 10, while attending the 34th Congressional Black Caucus Legislative Conference in Washington, DC."
----------------
What do you know. A black liberal is out conservativing the republicans in a bill to get the government off the backs of the American people. The people who spend more would pay more.
Just think. No more invasion of privacy through the corporate and individual income tax. All the evils that the framers of the country foresaw by direct taxation has been experienced through the income tax. That is why direct taxation was forbidden by the Constitution. Roosevelt and the New Deal saw that the Constitution was amended to enable them to have a tremendous flow of power to the federal government through the income tax.
Let's get rid of it. I think this is a great idea. Representative Fattah is to be commended for his imagination and willingness to think outside the liberal box.
Cheers.
----------------
What do you know. A black liberal is out conservativing the republicans in a bill to get the government off the backs of the American people. The people who spend more would pay more.
Just think. No more invasion of privacy through the corporate and individual income tax. All the evils that the framers of the country foresaw by direct taxation has been experienced through the income tax. That is why direct taxation was forbidden by the Constitution. Roosevelt and the New Deal saw that the Constitution was amended to enable them to have a tremendous flow of power to the federal government through the income tax.
Let's get rid of it. I think this is a great idea. Representative Fattah is to be commended for his imagination and willingness to think outside the liberal box.
Cheers.
Saturday, November 20, 2004
I like Fisher DeBerry, football coach of the Air Force Academy. He is a fine Christian man of integrity and one of the finest football coaches in America. He contributes a lot to the city of Colorado Springs, and I am very proud and happy that he is at the Air Force Academy. He cannot recruit the biggest and meanest football prospects, because of size and achievement requirements for the United States Air Force, but he fields a competitive team year after year.
But he blew it this week. The same week that news stories broke about religious discrimination at the Air Force Academy, Fisher put up a banner in the football locker room, something about “being on the team with Jesus.”
Now, of course, I think the whole discrimination thing is a crock—at least I suspect it is. I know that Christians can get aggressive some times as far as preaching their faith is concerned, but missionary activity is integral to Christian faith since Jesus told His disciples to go and preach to “every creature.” True Christianity is a very serious matter involving very serious issues, like going to heaven and staying out of hell.
Some Christians are very obnoxious. They are even obnoxious to other Christians, especially to other Christians who do not share their particular views concerning the Bible, church, sacraments, or whatever. But usually very emphatic actions will drive them away. Religious liberty and free speech go hand in hand and cannot exist without each other. [See Theological Figs for Nov. 20. Use the link on that page to return here.] Most Christians I know are perfectly willing to leave someone alone if they state it very clearly that they want to be left alone. But that is another story.
But what about Fisher DeBerry’s banner? It didn’t stay up very long, and he was told to take it down, as he should have. For several reasons.
1. Obviously, some members of the football team and staff may not share Fisher’s views. Are they not on the team?
2. Faith in Christ is not a slogan, certainly not a slogan to motivate a football team. There might be many reasons for trusting in Christ; one of them is not so you can win football games. Being a Christian should help you to do your best, be fair, regard your fellow man, take victory or defeat with graciousness and manhood.
3. There are too many people who seek Christ for earthly goals. They become Christians, hoping it will make them a success in business, popular in school, have joy, joy, joy, down in their hearts, and so forth. The best reason for being a Christian is to stay out of hell, and the best reason for speaking of your faith is to keep the other person out of hell. The faith should not be trivialized.
4. America’s enemies do not trivialize their faith. Islamists are deadly serious. It will take a serious faith to overcome them: 2Ti 4:18 And the Lord shall deliver me from every evil work, and will preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom: to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
5. Fisher DeBerry’s witness for Christ and the rock-solid reputation that he has earned does not depend upon a banner, thank God. Christianity will not be spread by sloganeering, bumper stickers, and silly motivational schemes. Fisher is a serious Christian, thank God. His team is having a rough year in 2004, but it is also a serious Christian virtue to bear hardships and endure whatever God sends out way.
6. We should not compel a man to baptized and take communion; neither should we make them march under our banner. The invitation of the Gospel is the only banner that the Holy Spirit will honor in the spreading of the faith of Jesus Christ. That has proved very effective in time past, and it will continue to be effective.
At least that’s the way I see it.
But he blew it this week. The same week that news stories broke about religious discrimination at the Air Force Academy, Fisher put up a banner in the football locker room, something about “being on the team with Jesus.”
Now, of course, I think the whole discrimination thing is a crock—at least I suspect it is. I know that Christians can get aggressive some times as far as preaching their faith is concerned, but missionary activity is integral to Christian faith since Jesus told His disciples to go and preach to “every creature.” True Christianity is a very serious matter involving very serious issues, like going to heaven and staying out of hell.
Some Christians are very obnoxious. They are even obnoxious to other Christians, especially to other Christians who do not share their particular views concerning the Bible, church, sacraments, or whatever. But usually very emphatic actions will drive them away. Religious liberty and free speech go hand in hand and cannot exist without each other. [See Theological Figs for Nov. 20. Use the link on that page to return here.] Most Christians I know are perfectly willing to leave someone alone if they state it very clearly that they want to be left alone. But that is another story.
But what about Fisher DeBerry’s banner? It didn’t stay up very long, and he was told to take it down, as he should have. For several reasons.
1. Obviously, some members of the football team and staff may not share Fisher’s views. Are they not on the team?
2. Faith in Christ is not a slogan, certainly not a slogan to motivate a football team. There might be many reasons for trusting in Christ; one of them is not so you can win football games. Being a Christian should help you to do your best, be fair, regard your fellow man, take victory or defeat with graciousness and manhood.
3. There are too many people who seek Christ for earthly goals. They become Christians, hoping it will make them a success in business, popular in school, have joy, joy, joy, down in their hearts, and so forth. The best reason for being a Christian is to stay out of hell, and the best reason for speaking of your faith is to keep the other person out of hell. The faith should not be trivialized.
4. America’s enemies do not trivialize their faith. Islamists are deadly serious. It will take a serious faith to overcome them: 2Ti 4:18 And the Lord shall deliver me from every evil work, and will preserve me unto his heavenly kingdom: to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
5. Fisher DeBerry’s witness for Christ and the rock-solid reputation that he has earned does not depend upon a banner, thank God. Christianity will not be spread by sloganeering, bumper stickers, and silly motivational schemes. Fisher is a serious Christian, thank God. His team is having a rough year in 2004, but it is also a serious Christian virtue to bear hardships and endure whatever God sends out way.
6. We should not compel a man to baptized and take communion; neither should we make them march under our banner. The invitation of the Gospel is the only banner that the Holy Spirit will honor in the spreading of the faith of Jesus Christ. That has proved very effective in time past, and it will continue to be effective.
At least that’s the way I see it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)