Christian Worldview - Does the Bible Really Matter?

Well Ken Ham has done it again! Christians everywhere are upset with this noted apologist because he dared to tell the truth....again. Last year, it was challenging Bill Nye the Science Guy to a debate after Nye made disparaging comments about the literal Creation account and those who believe it. Now, Genesis creation is again involved, but on a different front.

Ken Ham - Teaches a Literal Genesis Creation

 It must be admitted, though, that this time was a little different. He was a little too specific for the comfort of many. The specifics involved particular people. Ham named them!

So, now many are attempting to calm the rocking boat amidst this tempest of truth from one known for relying on the Bible for his doctrine and lifestyle.

The problem? Ken Ham named those who have publicly, verbally and in their writings, denied a literal six day creation as detailed in the first part of the Book of Genesis. Coupled with that assertion is the belief that Genesis only has doctrinal value in the allegorical interpretation of the stories in the book of Genesis rather than the literal  historical narrative account.

Ken is to be commended for taking the proper stand on such a vital issue. We need more men like him in this day of relativistic teachings coming from pulpit, podiums and publications!

Wild At Heart - Searching for Truth in All the Wrong Places

Wild at Heart - Discovering the Secret to a Man's Soul

 If you've ever read this book by John Eldridge and are familiar with the overall content and teaching of the Bible, then you know that is is severely lacking in biblical integrity. It fails miserably to identify the needs of men and God's provision for them as revealed in the Scriptures. This book is filled with nothing more than popular psychological philosophies merged with secular ideas and Bible verses. These ideas do nothing but destroy men and their loved ones.

For a more detailed analysis of this book, please visit Christian Worldview.

Beth Moore - Are We Listening to God's Written Revelation?

Beth Moore, as an extremely popular teacher of women, has repeatedly made an assertion in and about her life that she is attempting to make common with women everywhere. She asserts that she regularly has God "speak" to her and "reveal" things to her. She also shares the details of the practices that make these interactions with God possible.

Beth Moore - God speaks to her personally

What makes these claims so important is that these revelations form the basis for her writings and, subsequently, her speaking. And while, obviously being vital in their relation to the whole scope of her ministry, they are serious in another way. How many can claim to have God speak to them on a regular basis? How many can claim to speak and write as a direct result of God speaking to them? She is in essence claiming to speak and write the words of God. This is weighty, indeed!

For that matter, should we be so glib and lax in our approach to such claims? Should we be careful to make sure that what we are hearing and, maybe to put into practice in our own lives, is in reality, the Truth?

With that in mind, the words of God through the Prophet Isaiah are vital to us today in such a climate of competing voices and competing messages to us. Isaiah records in chapter 8 verse 20 the following; "To the law and to the testimony; if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them."

The prophet makes a vital connection between the Word of God and light. The Psalmist also makes the same connection when he says in chapter 119, verse 105, "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path." Again in verse 130 he says, "The entrance of thy word giveth light; it giveth understanding unto the simple."

Let's make sure that the message we are hearing and following agrees with the Word of God, His light for us. Let's make sure that His message, as revealed in the written Word, is the standard for all other revelation, whether it be from man, woman, angel or any other being. May He guide us into all Truth!

Beth Moore - What's the Final Authority?

I previously posted a warning about popular women's speaker Beth Moore. I continue that warning here by linking to a short video segment of Moore beginning to talk about what God revealed to her about the body of Christ.

Popular Teacher - Beth Moore

In this post, I continue to voice my concern for those who may be swayed by the teachings of Moore and those she recommends and whose doctrine she espouses. Though containing many innocuous sounding biblical words and phrases that are linked to the activities she endorses and recommends, the practices must be examined. We should not be so quick to accept practices just because familiar terms are used to describe them.

Once again, we must be reminded that, whatever doctrine we are examining and whoever the person may be that presents a particular doctrine, the Word of God is to be the final authority to determine its correctness. To make this statement, I refer to this verse in Isaiah 8:20, "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them."

Crystal Clear Delusion

With the continuing debacle at the Crystal Cathedral comes this observation from Craig Huey of Election Forum.

The sad part of this observation is that the Gospel of Christ and the longtime message of Crystal Cathedral Founder Robert Schueller are thought to be the same. Sadly, many others think so, too.

The strong delusion promised by God for those continuing to seek such waywardness abides still, even in the hearts of professing Christians.

The Final Authority

When it comes to life, we all have a final authority. When it comes to Christians or those professing a right relationship with God through His Son, Jesus the Messiah, nothing changes.

The only difference may be in the consistency of someone's professed Final Authority. While many proclaim God and/or His Word to be their Final Authority, the reality is sometimes painfully evident. It usually ends up being the thoughts of men regarding various areas of life which are exalted and practiced. The true Word of God is, somehow, explained away to the point where it negates Truth. All is left is a plethora of conversation and discussion concerning the exalted nature of their pursuit of that which mimics Truth.

Who is Your Final Authorrity? How Truthful are you when it comes to this issue?

Emerging Conversation: The Limits of Friendly Dialogue

The following is a post from more than a year ago. I returned to the Jesus Creed site again just to have another look around and found that nothing has changed. My conversations with other emerging types has revealed the same. How about you?

I've been visiting the well known and popular Emerging Blog named Jesus Creed, moderated by Scot McKnight, Professor of Religious Studies at North Park University in Chicago, Illinois. Other emerging Leaders are Brian McLaren, Alan Hirsch, Dan Kimball, Mark Driscoll, D. A. Carson, Leonard Sweet, Doug Pagitt, Ed Stetzer, John Burke, Scott A. Bessenecker, and Dennis M. Doyle.

Actually, I've been participating in the conversation for awhile. I've found it interesting, thought provoking, frustrating, enlightening and most of all, revealing. Emerging or The Emerging Church Movement is a major religious movement which has made a major impact in many parts of the world, not the least of which is the United States. The American Evangelical Church, otherwise know as Protestants and other non Roman Catholic churches have been impacted greatly by this movement over the last 10-15 years. In fact the impact has been so great that most have not known exactly how to respond to the Emerging refusal to go along with the traditional religious life of Evangelicals. They have increasingly put pressure on leadership to, not only listen to their complaints and suggestions, but to agree with their complaints and implement their suggestions. Otherwise, they will leave to start their own ministries. And they have. And Evangelicals are suffering because of it.

As I said, Evangelicals don't know how to respond to prevent or counteract their influence. One of the hallmarks of Emerging is Conversation. They will talk about anything, anywhere at anytime. Open and honest dialogue is encouraged among all. No question is considered taboo. Answers are provided in high quantity. If you disagree, that's OK! Simply verbalize your disagreement. You are accepted in spite of any disagreement you or anyone else may have. But conversing about that disagreement is guaranteed which means your participation in the conversation is also guaranteed. This is one area where Emerging frustrates Evangelicals. Emerging provides a forum as well as acceptance for the religiously downtrodden, marginalized and rejected. In other words, those not traditionally accepted by Evangelicals for various reasons, legitimate and not so legitimate.

But I found out today that their friendly dialogue has its limits. Yes, their are certain things they will not talk about.

I wonder if others have encountered this outer limit of Emerging Dialogue. If you have, tell me about it.

Would you care to hazard a guess as to what the subject matter could possibly be to so suddenly send Emerging types into a blatantly silent refusal to acknowledge reality?

Jesus Creed & Truth Intolerance

Months ago, I was blocked from posting of the blog site of Scot McKnight, Jesus Creed. I returned yesterday to see if my blogging presence remained unwelcomed. I am sad to report that nothing has changed.

I posted a comment under the blog post, "White House God 2," which was removed before too long. The comment was in the vein of finding it very interesting that someone who would profess a belief in Christ would, in the name of serving that same Christ in public office, disobey a direct command of Christ by swearing an oath of office.

Being dismissed is really not too surprising in this day of intolerance. I find that the most intolerant people in America are those usually espousing their tolerance of all things, even those things they may disagree with. I have consistently found these people to be disingenuous at best. All piety and platitudes aside, Truth doesn't seem to be the topic of choice, nor do they want to entertain the rigors of examination.

In the case of Scot McKnight and Jesus Creed, I'm not surprised. If you were to begin to join in the dialogue on Jesus Creed, you will find that most of the regular commentors don't desire to contemplate the words of someone who readily works his way through the rhetoric of analysis and gets to the core of an issue. That's too divisive and doesn't tend to unify the readers. So, attempts are regularly made to keep the conversation away from Truth and the consistently logical analysis of that same Truth.

Instead, new thinking is encouraged. New paradigms are sought in order to encourage the faithful rebellion toward most things established. Of course, the aim is a new consensus which does away with old norms by establishing new boundaries through the collective energy and input of everyone.........everyone except those who do not agree with the majority consensus. Those dissenters are not allowed to establish any disagreement. Either they will conform to the consensus or they will be discharged from participation within the consensus. This assures order within the group, or I should say, it assures disorder.......consistent, persistent chaos.

That which has been the same in the past and will continue to remain so in the future are, ultimately, not welcome. Truth is cast out. Lies are welcomed and embraced. Such is the tolerant world of Jesus Creed and the Emerging Brethren.

Jesus Creed, Dialogue & Emerging Submerging

On an earlier post, I mentioned that I have been part of the online conversation at Jesus Creed, the blog for The Emerging Church, The Emerging Movement or Emerging. It is the creation of Scot McKnight, Karl A. Olsson Professor in Religious Studies of North Park University in Chicago, Illinois.

I have found a very interesting phenomenon while participating in the conversation at Jesus Creed. Yes, it is true that eveyone is encouraged to particpate in the online dialogue. But there are limits to this open conversation. It has nothing to do with crossing the boundaries of decorum as in vulgar speech or personal attack. It has to to with the tenor and breadth of conversation actively encouraged and advertised.

No topic is considered taboo and questions are almost considered mandatory. This is because of the supposed openness of questioning anything and everything historically traditional within the realm of Christendom. Biblical texts and all related issues as well as historical settings, subsequent epochs and all recorded actions of personalities of note are fair game.

But their appears to be a few unspoken caveats. Certain conclusions deemed unsuitable to the Emerging modus operandi are not acceptable. However, the only way of ascertaining these boundaries is through the experience of asking questions, participating in the dialogue and, then, drawing conclusions. And certain conclusions are not agreeable to Emerging conclusions. This is true in spite of any claims to the contrary.

One caveat can be found when scrutinizing certain Emerging conclusions. Questions and dialogue are OK as long as absolutes are not taken only from Scripture or from an historically traditional view of Scripture. In some areas, it seems that absolutes are not welcome at all. The area in question remains open to individual thoughts and conclusions.

Another unspoken caveat is ascertained by taking a consistent stand regarding a particular issue and not backing down. This is not respected. To think you are right about that particular issue is unacceptable. You may have others challenge you on various points about that issue, yet, if you remain steadfast, you are considered to be arrogant. This is viewed as an attempt to impose your will on the others in the conversation.

Another Emerging caveat is unveiled more quickly by any thought deemed to put The Emerging Movement in a negative light or to identify Emerging with certain movements outside of Traditional Christianity. For example, if Emerging practices or teachings are said to be the same as those in Eastern Religious practices such as Mysticism, Transcendental Meditation, Spiritism, Spiritualism, etc., the one intimating such thoughts is instantly challenged, if not outright called out on the blog. Receiving rebukes and reprovals by certain ones in the conversation can accumulate quickly.

Of course, the particulars of the dialogue are not put to the strict scrutiny of Scripture. There may be lame attempts of using Scripture outside of context or literal meaning, but strict scrutiny consistently using Scripture is not allowed.

Eventually, the caveats become unashamedly overt. You will be warned and if you do not abide by their strict standards of conduct on the blog, your posts will be removed and your IRL temporarily blocked from further participation in the conversation. Failure to heed the Emerging caveats results in a permanent block. I

have nothing of a personal nature to say against Scot McKnight except to say that there are certain topics he will not allow to be discussed on his blog. This is perfectly fine because, after all, it is his blog. And he is allowed to determine the parameters of conversation; but not when the idea promoted is that the conversation is open.

So, it seems that Emerging is really all about Submerging, submerging Truth, submerging certain Truth. Believe it or not, Emerging types are being led down a path containing the aromatic tinge from below.

Emerging Vacuum

When is Black not black? When is up not up? When is good not good?..........................................................................................................Give Up?

Well, silly you,..............when its Emerging! Anybody should know that!

Please, doubting me about this will do you no amount of good............not that good is really good..........and who are you to determine such things? If I say good is bad, then that's good!

Of course, the most important part of good not being good is the fact that the truth of good being good was questioned. Truth not questioned cannot be truth can it? So we question. And truth begins to take on the bright luster of darkness. Isn't it amazing?

Imagine the new twists and turns available to the one who questions. What you thought to be true is pregnant with the possiblity of falsity. And what you thought to be false blossoms into absolute truth. Reality takes on any number of different dimensions only limited by the amount of questions posed.

Just think. All that past asurance and confidence carries a high probability of being chaos and confusion. How could you have missed the obvious, chaos and confusion being the place of security and vitality?

All I can say is that I am so happy for you and your newfound understanding of Life. Emerging fits you very nicely. You look good! You look confident! You look as if you have everything figured out..........finally! The real you has finally Emerged!

Welcome to a new existence, where everything is exactly as it appears not to be. Otherwise, there's no confidence in your knowledge of nothing. No problem as long as you know the difference betwen nothing in its appearance and nothing in its reality, the essence of Emerging.

The Child of God & Politics - Rome or Jesus?

Below is a post on Jesus Creed by Michael Kruse in which he is responding to statements from me. Also below is my response to his response. I encourage you to read his separate article through the link provided.

I believe you will begin to see a few dividing points between modern politics as practiced by many American Christians and that politics espoused by Christ and His Word.

Your thoughts would be appreciated.
***************************************************


Benjamin #40

Jesus taught us to pray “Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.” I don’t take that as a command to set passively by, hoping it will come. I take it as a call to engage the world, always recognizing that the Kingdom will not fully come until Christ returns. We are to be an image of the future New Creation living in the present, giving witness of what is to come.

I wrote a post sometime back called Paul’s Subversion of the Empire. There were no police forces in Greco-Roman. Government entities and voluntary organizations for addressing the needs of the common people did not exist. The fundamental institution for keeping the social order was the household. The paterfamilias (male householder) was to rule over his household and compel order. He theoretically had the power of life and death over the members of the household (though this was changing by NT times.)

Paul introduces a new ethic. There is no longer the slave nor free, Jew nor Gentile, or male and female. We are made one body in Christ. He subverts the Greco-Roman model of order by domination with an ethic other-centered love and mutual submission (see my analysis of Ephesians 5 and 6 in the linked post.) Were this ethic to spread from household to household, the entire political and social power structure of the Empire would have been transformed. Regrettably, initial gains were reversed as the Church allowed itself to become re-infused with the power hierarchies of the age. But the initial implication of Paul’s teaching was deeply subversive and deeply political.

In our present context, we have the opportunity to have direct input into governance that Paul would not have dreamed of. Generally speaking, I think the role of the Church, with regard to the state, is not to compel Christian behavior (regardless of whether that compulsion is from the right or the left.) There is a legitimate role for state use of power. I think it is to restrain evil enough that it “creates room for good things to run wild.” (A little Chesterton there.) The changing of people’s hearts and minds needs to come from the other-centered love of Christians giving birth to more other-centered believers. Eventually society is transformed but never to the utopia that the world will be upon Christ’s return. That is how I see it.

Michael Kruse
******************************************************


Michael,

First of all, Jesus said to pray "Thy Kingdom come." It is a prayer for God to do something, not a command from God to go and bring the kingdom to fruition.

When Jesus said, "The kingdom is among/within you," He's telling us the kingdom was already present. He also dealt with the present reality of the Kingdom when He spoke to the Pharisees in Matthew 21:24 saying, "....The Kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof."

This new nation is nothing more than the distinct dichotmy established with the murder of Abel by his brother Cain. Those who have chosen to obey God in faith have been at odds with those who have chosen to live outside the Presence of YHWH. The standards of both groups have been different and remain so today.

I believe it is a mistake to give the impression that what Paul was saying was completely new and, because of its newness, it was subversive. It wasn't. It was a continuation of the way of God for His People, a way which sinful rebellious man has always found to be contrary to what man wants to do. What is revealed in the NT is no different than what is revealed in the OT. Paul makes that clear with his numerous references to OT Scripture.

It is true that Paul dealt with scenarios in the Greco-Roman world of his day, which we essentially have today, scenarios which needed clarifying in the way they should be dealt with and lived out. But, for the most part, what Paul said was basic OT.

This is true also when Paul deals with the household structure. Your article deals only with one aspect of household relationships in isolation of the remainder of NT passages dealing with the same issues. (I simply point this out, not as a negative. You may deal with it elsewhere.)
You point out that Roman society had worship and voluntary organizations. Though you mentioned none specifically (maybe the synagogue), one was the Ekklesia. Interestingly enough, this was an assembly which called out the men to conduct the official business of the assembly. Though the household relationships of Romans were different (as you mentioned), this particuar Greco-Roman political entity fit perfectly God's structure of the household as well as government on a large scale for His Body. Once again see, see OT.

You also mentioned the exemptions the Jews had under Roman rule from the requirements of these organizations. That's true, but more interestingly, when they reorganized under the captivity from Babylon, they possess the ability to rule themselves, including the execution of sentances against criminal conduct, something they didn't possess under Roman rule. They could try a person, one of their own, then they must deliver that person up to Roman authorities for either the execution of the sentence or the determination & execution of the sentence. This is what happens to Jesus and Paul alludes to this process in 1 Cor. 5, dealing with the man committing fornication.

Most people don't realize that this has not changed in modern times. American Law gives these exact same exemptions to the true Ekklesia as well as the ability to govern themselves according to God's law, even in matters of criminal behavior among their own. Most of God's people are ignorant of this reality. I wonder why Christian Attorneys don't mention this?

The availability of God's people to live with their distinctives intact is there for us. As Christ said, the World and its citizens will always hate us because they hated Christ first. We are not called to change their society. We are called to live and preach to world citizens the message of reconciliation to a God whose political society is completely different. The most their society will have is reformation, the temporary reformation of sinners. Our political society is one of complete newness in The Eternal Lord of Lords. This is the narrow way of Christ.

Do we choose that narrow way....or......do we choose the broad way of the World?

I Want the Truth......and I Want it NOW!!!!

In this age of ease and convenience, many American Christians are no different than the American culture around them. Actually, they and the culture are separate only in word. Most American Christians are just as worldly as the lost people they claim to be trying to reach with the message of the Gospel of Christ. And the World is demanding. And what they demand, they demand now!

Christians, on the other hand, have been introduced to a God who seems to have taken His sweet time in clothing Himself in flesh and initiating His work among men. He even waited thirty years to begin His public ministry. He even walked with his disciples for more than three years. There is nothing instantaneous about His actions toward man.

You would think that we in America would allow some of these facts to seep into our conscious thought. Having been introduced to the living embodiment of Truth, you would think that we would exhibit a little more patience when attempting to allow Christ to give us the wisdom He has promised to those who ask Him. Never mind that the Wisdom were are requesting is not ours to begin with. Never mind that He is completely responsible for the timing of that gift to us. Never mind that He desires our best in the whole scenario. We simple think that we, for whatever reason, have a right to receive that Wisdom immediately. We seem to act as if God may be completely unaware of our situation. .............MMMph! Of all the nerve!

Are we willing to wait? Are we willing to ask? Are we willing to seek? To study? To meditate on His Word? To compare this spiritual Word with other portions of the spiritual Word?

For something so precious, why can't we wait?

If it's as valuable and needed as we say it is, why can't we trust god to provide our need in His perfect time?

Godly Candidates & The Culture War

In this commentary by Janet Folger on World Net Daily, she addresses the issue of having and electing godly candidates for the purpose of winning the war for the culture of the United States of America.

Questions:

1. Where in the Bible are Christians ever commanded or encouraged to conquer any culture of this World on behalf of Christ?
2. Where in the Bible are Christians ever commanded or encouraged to enter the Politics of any culture of this World on behalf of Christ?
3. Where in the Bible are Christians ever commanded or encouraged to pass laws or change policies of any culture of this World on behalf of Christ?
4. Where in the Bible does Jesus ever identify Himself with any culture of this World?
5. Where in the Bible does Jesus ever command or encourage His Disciples or Followers to identify with any culture of this World?
6. Where in the Bible does any true Disciple or Follower identify with any culture of this World?

If Janet is right about "The Lord performing His word," and I believe she is, wouldn't it be a safe thing to make sure that we actually have marching orders from our Commander in Chief (not President Bush) before engaging the enemy, especially on enemy turf? And if there aren't any marching orders, what then? Do we just proceed anyway, trusting in our motivation to serve the Lord to make up for the lack of orders? Are we trusting in our motives to overcome, what could be considered, disobedience? Is this where we are in our service to our King? Do your own thing, as long as it is accomplished on behalf of the King?

I think King Saul might offer us a word of wisdom about this very issue. Are we listening?

Jesus & The Secret: Fulfilling The Law

Well.........now we know. If only Jesus had known! If only Jesus would have, somehow, become privy to this universal Law. Just imagine what Jesus could have accomplished. Just think of how much of His potential, as God, He could have performed for the benefit of mankind. Just think of how much more the Creator could have created.................if only He had known.

What a waste! Just think of all the things in His life that could have been different..........from the very beginning. Why, even as a baby, this law of attraction could have been implemented to, not only secure the positive political affirmation of Herod, but prevent the useless slaughter of innocent babies in Bethlehem. The eternal destiny of Judas could have been altered had He approached the traitor, Judas, differently with the sop. The remainder of His Apostles could have escaped martyrdom, yes, ruled Israel as Jesus had promised. Had this law been aimed toward the religious leaders of His day, they would have realized the attractive nature of His persona and presented Him to the people as the Messiah, instead of trying Him as a criminal. Furthermore, the Roman power despised by many could have been used for the glory of God if He had only woven His tapestral attraction within the mind and heart of Pilate. The guards would have refused to mutilate and mock him. Why, Satan Himself could have been converted back to the eternal fold, forever abandoing personal delusions of deity.

More desperate people could have been fed, healed, clothed, set free, mended, unified...............if only............if only.............Jesus could have been more attractive.

But, alas, we are left with a Savior who was defeated on the cross in death. Yes, There is the issue of raising from the dead. It does have a certain quality about it that speaks of a certain amount of uniqueness, but attractive? No, at least, not to enough people of the World. For those to whom it is attractive, like President Bush, the attraction lies in the fact that Jesus makes one feel loved, not guilty. Factor in the fact that the guilt of mankind's sin was the reason for His death and one might understand how this feature of the Gospel of Repentance and Faith, is not viewed as attractive enough as "The Secret."

No, in hindsight it must be admitted. Christ had no idea of what He was doing. As God in human flesh, He had the right motives in trying to elevate the status of man, but His omniscient methodology, while crude and accomplishing far more than most would have thought possible, was lacking in its political adaptability to the current demands of the World.

No, it's time to admit that, had Jesus known this secret, life as we know it would be completely different. It's time that Jesus found out what He's been missing all this time. If you see Him, please bring Him up to date.

God will be so glad you did!

Emerging Direction: Which Way Do We Go?

After 15 seconds of meditative meandering, I have decided that the definition of up needs to be modified. No, I'm not going to redefine it, just adjust it to the point where other people can legitimately question the reality of up and feel good about themselves in the process. That way, no one has to feel guilty about not understanding the true nature of up.

Is up really up? Or is there more to Up than we first thought? Maybe up is really made simple by understanding that up is simply not down. Or, it could be not as down as directly down. It is less down. It could be sideways or sorta sideways. Or it could be East, presuming East is not as down as any other direction. But we are not to exclude any other direction. Let's not let our lack of exactness lead us toward inexactness, regardless of our direction. We must be sure, even in our doubt. As long as we doubt not our doubt and are sure of our lack of direction. If there's anyone I hate, it's the person who is sure he's lost.

Maybe up is best defined by the person is is consistently living life on an arc. So, while he's currently in a state of down, he's headed toward up, which means he's headed toward down. Of course, our new definition, I mean modification, of up must be taken into consideration when dealing with such pinpoint accuracy, seeing that such pinpoint accuracy is constantly in a state of flux, which means that the arc possesses flexibility not unknown to the life of meandering reality.

Welcone to Emerging, where everthing is open to question and conversation, but bound to get lost in the pursuit, seeing that the pursuit of Truth is the reason for conversation and dialogue. For if we actually arrive at and grasp Truth in any shape, manner or form, the conversation and dialogue are, then, ended. So................we keep talking........and pursuing the multitudinous facets of non graspable Truth..........or, at least someone's perception of it.

Do I detect the odor of Brimstone? Let's converse!

American Media, Moral Decline & The Culture War

This article from the Washington Times reveals the results of a recent survey of 2000 Americans by The Culture and Media Institute about the media and its relationship to and role in America's moral decline.

Not surprisingly, most think the media is a leading cause in this moral decline and fails to represent the values of the mainstream of American culture. Surpisingly, though, most Americans think tha the media should fairly and accurately portray the various aspects of American Culture.

It is also acknowledged by many that the Culture War is very real. And included in this war are Muslims, whose faith is constantly attacked by the various portayals of decadence and depravity in the media. Almost shockingly, a certain portion of those surveyed think that Conservative Americans and Muslims should join forces to battle the moral decline of American Culture.

What about the genuine Believer in Jesus Christ? What should be the thoughts of a Child of God on such issues? Since we must live in the World, what is our relationship to this World system and what it produces?

More importantly, what is the standard for answering such questions and addressing such issues?

Is the election of President and other National, State and local political offices the answer? Do we engage in trying to get the right group of people elected in order to change the laws, thereby changing the culture? Do we support organizations engaged in the battle to promote values we agree with, such as Pro Family values, Traditional Marriage, Free Market Capitalism, Pro Life, Anti Abortion, Anti Gay Rights & Civil Unions, Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Speech, Homeschooling, etc?

What about the Laws of God as revealed in the Bible? And what about our ability in this country to live according to those laws? Are the laws that have been passed or are about to be passed somehow preventing us from living according to the laws of God?

Is it possible that the laws currently on the books completely enable the consecrated Child of God to live according to the dictates of his conscience and the Word of God?

If that is possible, what difference does it make to us?

Do we really care?

Would it really matter that all the activity currently engaged in by many in order to change the culture is absolutely unnecessary?

Or is that too much to contemplate? If so, why?

The Standard of Life; Do You Have One?

I have a question for you.

If every law on the books in the United States were officially abolished today, by what standard would you live your life? How would you conduct your life? How would you treat others? How would you conduct business?

How would this affect your current obligations and responsibilities? Would you abandon them or continue to fulfill them? Why?

Do you live your life by a standard that goes beyond the mere civil laws passed by men? If so, what is it? And why does it matter? What makes this standard better than another standard outside the laws of men?

Emerging Conversation: Rifles Not Allowed

I mentioned on an earlier post that I had been involved in the conversation on Jesus Creed, an Emerging Church website moderated by Scot McKnight. I also mentioned that


Emerging is publicly against much of, what they consider to be, the negative aspects of Traditional Christianity. If you listen for awhile, you begin to realize that what they are really upset about is not being allowed to participate in Traditional Christianity. They have been marginalized. Why? Because they are new, innovative, hip, tolerant and outside the Evangelical Box. In other words, they are modern hippies (not always in looks) who don't fit in and don't really want to fit in. They don't want to conform to the standards of worship and ministry tradition handed down within their respective faith families because, many times, those standards require one to look, be and act different from the world.

So, in the spirit of the age, they have rebelled and launched out into the deep on their own in order to create their own autonomous bodies, usually in the most unexpected places. That way they can be close to the ones they are attempting to minister to, which means that they get to create an atmosphere which makes them feel comfortable as well as those they are attempting to reach with the good news of Jesus. And did I mention they get to have fun at the same time? That may not be the most important aspect, but is surely mentioned alot.

As stated before, one of the hallmarks of Emerging is Conversation. By encouraging participation in conversation by as many as possible, all are included to the best extent possible. Inclusiveness within Community is also another major hallmark of Emerging.

One problem with this conversation emerges, though. Addressing particulars within a conversation tends to exclude a certain number of participants because of the various levels of expertise and experience within the body of available conversants. Another problem emerges when there are so many opinions and thoughts about a given particular that the only conclusion among the conversants is that there are many opinions among the various conversants. That's because arriving at objective truth is not the aim of conversation, conversation is the aim of conversation.

So when somone attempts to focus on a particular and refuses to let it go, this is not considered a positive within the immediate conversant community. After all, a person who refuses to let go of a particular point is considered to view himself as right about that point. That is not a positive either, especially if it conflicts with the consensus of the conversant community.

It's rather amusing to watch members of Emerging react to people in the same manner with which they have been treated in the past. You would think that they would be a little more sensitive to someone in a similar plight as their own, that of not being accepted by the group.

But when you bring a rifle to an outing when everyone else has brought shotguns, the disparity is obvious. And so is the discomfort.

James Dobson & Mitt Romney: A Pro Family Duo

According to this report from One News Now, Focus on the Family founder James Dobson is seriously considering supporting Mitt Romney in his campaign for President.

OK! Let me get this straight (no pun intended)! James Dobson has established a career promoting Pro Family values such as Traditional Marriage and Anti Gay & Lesbian Rights. In the past he has publicly refused to endorse candidates not possessing the same Pro family stance as well as the historical voting record.

All of a sudden, the general public is supposed to believe that the Pro Family Advocate is throwing all political caution to the wind and will endorse Romney, who has an established record supporting such anti family activities????? And this is supposed to be good for American families???????

Do I smell something?? Is that a hint of brimstone politics. Does this mean that Dobson is coming out of the political closet? Are his true colors about to be revealed????? Has this been the real Dobson all along??????

Actually, I have reason to realistically believe such a proposition. For it was the week prior to the last Presidential election that Dobson, along with every other Pro Family Advocate in this nation, to my knowledge, failed to inform their supporters, Republican and Democrat, of the statements of President Bush in a public interview. President Bush informed everyone that, regardless of the initiatives of anyone, the final result of the entire Gay rights fight would be a Federal Marriage Amendment or Federal Marriage Statute as well as civil unions. To my knowledge, that conspicuous silence has continued to this day.

And now this!?

When you consider that Pro Family, Pro Constitutional Advocate and Civil & Religious Rights Attorney Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice has also agreed to support Mitt Romney for President, nothing is surprising any more.

President Bush - Emerging in Latin America

Is it time for a little Latin American Public Relations? A little Backyard Foreign Policy? Is it time to get out of the kitchen?

With the conviction of former Bush aide Scooter Libby, the timing of this trip is convenient. I know, I know!!! It probably has been planned for weeks or months, buuuuuuut................it makes for good conspiratorial conversation, which makes for interesting conversation! You must admit, though, that the thought does come to the forefront of your thinking, since Libby's conviction is not a positive for the Bush Administration.

So, instead of dealing with the devilish details of the Libby the Convicted Criminal, we head off to the warm and charming atmosphere of Hugo Chavez and the myriad of protests planned for Bush while in Latin America. At least there, all they only refer to Bush as an "assasin," which is akin to being Chavez's "devil." But at least Bush knows that he'll not face this type of protest every day at home, so a temporary change of scenery must be welcome.

You never know, though! Maybe he'll meet His Vatican counterpart, the Pope! After all, Latin America is ancient stomping grounds for all things Pontiff!