Activist Judges...

...or spineless, activist governors?

This past weekend, I violated the old adage of not talking religion or politics. No, this wasn't a first date (I'm happily married, thank you.) or at work (it was the weekend), but with gathered family. I tried to explain something I had just been reminded of, but obviously didn't explain it well, based on the replies and blank looks I received. Well, here's Gregg Jackson explaining it well:

About a month ago, the California Supreme Court, in a 4-3 decision, issued a declaratory opinion that Proposition 22, which states that, "Only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California," enshrined into statutory law by 61.4% of California voters in 2000 (over four million voters), was "unconstitutional" on the basis that "gender discrimination" violates the equal protection clause of the state constitution.

The LA Times reported:

"The California Supreme Court struck down the state's ban on same-sex marriage Thursday in a broadly worded decision that would invalidate virtually any law that discriminates on the basis of sexual orientation."

Sadly, many of the leading "conservative" and "Christian" pro-family organizations such as AFA (American Family Association), Liberty Council, ADF (Alliance Defense Fund), FRC (Family Research Council), ACLJ (American Center for Law and Justice) and Focus on the Family have been in full surrender mode conceding this same liberal talking point that the court "legalized same-sex marriage in California" and that the only way to ensure preserving traditional male-female marriage is through a state constitutional amendment scheduled to be on the ballot in November.

The California Supreme Court issued a declaratory opinion that, in the view of the bare majority, banning same-sex couples from marrying was unconstitutional and that the language of the initiative statute limiting marriage to one man and one woman must be stricken from the statute. Unfortunately however, the court doesn't have the constitutional authority to re-write the marriage statute nor any other initiative statute for that matter. According to the California Constitution, only the people can revoke or amend an initiative statute such as Prop 22. Same-sex "marriage" remains, therefore, illegal.

...

Nemo dat quod non habet, ("You cannot give what you do not have.") In other words, the California Supreme Court cannot give to the Legislature, what neither it, nor the legislature, has: the power to overturn the people's initiative legislation. No branch of government, even the branch that claims to be the final arbiter of a Constitution can gain legal authority which it does not possess. To claim then "the court legalized same-sex marriage" by "striking down" the people's initiative statute limiting marriage to one man and one woman has absolutely no constitutional basis.

Governor Schwarzenegger has violated his sworn oath to uphold the California Constitution to only enforce the current laws and statutes of the state of California by illegally authorizing changes [http://www.worldnetdaily.com:80/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=65755] to, and issuance of, marriage certificates to same-sex couples.

Like former Massachusetts Governor Romney before him, Governor Schwarzenegger has falsely asserted that the court's opinion, containing no valid or enforceable court order, "legalized same-sex marriage" and that it is his obligation to enforce the "court's decision." Romney illegally authorized [http://www.undergroundjournal.net/igroops/theunderground/adminpages/Letter-To-Romney-JAN-07] the Department of Public Health to change the marriage certificates from "husband" and "wife" to "partner A" and "partner B" and ordered Town Clerks and Justices of the Peace to perform and solemnize same-sex "marriages," or tender their resignation (which one did), without an accompanying statute approved by the legislature.

...

Since courts lack the authority to enforce their own opinions and cannot make law, they can only be considered "activist" when the executive branch enforces their opinion as if it were the "new law." While a bare majority of four members of the court no doubt issued an illegal opinion and should be impeached for doing so, Governor Schwarzenegger alone authorized the issuance of the illegally altered marriage certificates. Executive tyranny, not "judicial activism," is what occurred in California (and Massachusetts).

The bottom line is this: Same-sex "marriage" is not legal anywhere in the United States of America from Massachusetts to California. Now if only somebody would explain this basic legal concept to our superstar "conservative" leaders, lawyers, and radio-pundits who incessantly swear that it is.

(Read the full article.) Now if only we could get some elected officials to show a spine and actually side with the people who put them into office. But it sure is too bad that Romney is not the Republican nominee. Who wouldn't want a Republican who proved by his record to support gay marriage, abortion, and socialized medicine?

The "Jefferson Bible"

Coming off of the Independence Day weekend, I found this article interesting, especially for those who insist on calling America a "Christian" nation. It's about the so-called "Jefferson Bible," an edited version of the gospels put together by Thomas Jefferson:

Making good on a promise to a friend to summarize his views on Christianity, Thomas Jefferson set to work with scissors, snipping out every miracle and inconsistency he could find in the New Testament Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

...

In a letter sent from Monticello to John Adams in 1813, Jefferson said his "wee little book" of 46 pages was based on a lifetime of inquiry and reflection and contained "the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man."

He called the book "The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth." Friends dubbed it the Jefferson Bible. It remains perhaps the most comprehensive expression of what the nation's third president and principal author of the Declaration of Independence found ethically interesting about the Gospels and their depiction of Jesus.

"I have performed the operation for my own use," he continued, "by cutting verse by verse out of the printed book, and arranging the matter, which is evidently his and which is as easily distinguished as diamonds in a dunghill."

...

In Jefferson's version of the Gospels, for example, Jesus is still wrapped in swaddling clothes after his birth in Bethlehem. But there's no angel telling shepherds watching their flocks by night that a savior has been born. Jefferson retains Jesus' crucifixion but ends the text with his burial, not with the resurrection.

Was Jefferson a "red-letter Christian" before the phrase existed? Or worse? I find it troubling that he would compare the parts he cut out to "a dunghill." Especially when he cut out the resurrection. In the words of the apostle Paul, "if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins." (1 Corinthians 15:17) But I suppose Jefferson cut that out, too.

Knowing God

I just recently finished reading J.I. Packer's classic "Knowing God." I bought the book for a theology class in college, but don't remember reading it very carefully at the time. (I didn't do much reading for class in college at all.) I'm glad God brought me back to it now. It really is a terrific book. If you can get your hands on a copy, I would especially recommend reading these three chapters:

• Chapter 18 - "The Heart of the Gospel" - probably the best defense of and explanation of the doctrine of propitiation I've ever read. Says Packer, "The basic description of the saving death of Christ in the Bible is as a propitiation, that is, as that which quenched God's wrath against us by obliterating our sins from his sight." (p. 189)

• Chapter 19 - "Sons of God" - the doctrine of adoption. "To be right with God the Judge is a great thing, but to be loved and cared for by God the Father is a greater." (p. 207) "... were I asked to focus the New Testament message in three words, my proposal would be adoption through propitiation, and I do not expect ever to meet a richer or more pregnant summary of the gospel than that." (p. 214)

• Chapter 22 - "The Adequacy of God" - basically a commentary on Romans 8. A taste: "... the cross was not an isolated event; it was, rather, the focal point in God's eternal plan to save his elect, and it ensured and guaranteed first the calling (the bringing to faith, through the gospel in the mind and the Holy Spirit in the heart), and then the justification, and finally the glorification, of all for whom, specifically and personally, Christ died." (p. 265)

"Sermons Don't Produce Spiritual Maturity"

After a long hiatus, I'm back ... at least momentarily. I've been checking out another blog recently - "Vincit Omnia Veritas" (which means, Truth Always Prevails, or Truth Conquers All) - where I found this video clip:



You can agree with Rick Warren, or you can agree with the Holy Spirit-inspired apostle Paul:

"When I came to you, brothers, I did not come with eloquence or superior wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God. For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified. I came to you in weakness and fear, and with much trembling. My message and my preaching were not with wise and persuasive words, but with a demonstration of the Spirit's power, so that your faith might not rest on men's wisdom, but on God's power." - 1 Corinthians 2:1-5 (NIV)

If you check out Vincit Omnia Veritas, you may also want to check out it's "companion site," so to speak, Apostate Arminian.

Do Your Ears Itch For This?

"In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge: Preach the Word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage-with great patience and careful instruction. For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry." - 2 Timothy 4:1-5 (NIV)

California Court Home School Decision

From Tim Ellsworth:

I’m glad to see that Albert Mohler has weighed in on the utter insanity coming from the California, where an appeals court ruled that parents must have teaching credentials to educate their children at home.

As part of the ruling, the court argued that “parents do not have a constitutional right to home school their children.”

So now the government is in the business of denying people rights that are not explicitly spelled out in the Constitution? I wonder when they’ll start cracking down on people eating Big Macs, because I don’t find that right in the Constitution, either.

As Mohler noted:

This is a controversy that demands the attention of all parents. After all, if parents have no constitutional right to educate their own children, what other aspects of the parent’s choices for their own children lack protection? This question reaches far beyond educational decisions.

UPDATE: The Home School Legal Defense Association has started a petition for the California Supreme Court to depublish the opinion handed down by the loonies on the appeals court. Please go and add your name to the list. This is serious business, my friends, and something that warrants your time — even if you do not home school your children.

I'm with Tim. I'm pretty sure the Constitution doesn't say it's okay to kill babies, so abortion should be outlawed. Can we get back to "government of the people, by the people, for the people," or was that Lincoln dude just an uninformed hatemonger? I'm tired of the courts and politicians thinking they are taking part in a monarchy, instead of serving the public.

If you care about family rights - whether it's homeschooling, or being able to take your kids to church, or being able to teach them right & wrong (or even that right & wrong actually exist), I'd encourage you to add your name to the petition.

One Issue Voter

I had a conversation with a friend at work today about being a "one-issue voter." He asked me how somebody could be pro-life, yet fall in line with "liberal" policies economically, militarily, etc., and allow those issues to "trump" their pro-life stance. "If you think killing unborn babies is morally reprehensible, could you vote for somebody who is pro-choice because of their tax policy?" Our discussion reminded me of an article written by John Piper in 1995, which I read during one of the past couple of election cycles:

No endorsement of any single issue qualifies a person to hold public office. Being pro-life does not make a person a good governor, mayor, or president. But there are numerous single issues that disqualify a person from public office. For example, any candidate who endorsed bribery as a form of government efficiency would be disqualified, no matter what his party or platform was. Or a person who endorsed corporate fraud (say under $50 million) would be disqualified no matter what else he endorsed. Or a person who said that no black people could hold office—on that single issue alone he would be unfit for office. Or a person who said that rape is only a misdemeanor—that single issue would end his political career. These examples could go on and on. Everybody knows a single issue that for them would disqualify a candidate for office.

It's the same with marriage. No one quality makes a good wife or husband, but some qualities would make a person unacceptable. For example, back when I was thinking about getting married, not liking cats would not have disqualified a woman as my wife, but not liking people would. Drinking coffee would not, but drinking whiskey would. Kissing dogs wouldn't, but kissing the mailman would. And so on. Being a single-issue fiancé does not mean that only one issue matters. It means that some issues may matter enough to break off the relationship.

So it is with politics. You have to decide what those issues are for you. What do you think disqualifies a person from holding public office? I believe that the endorsement of the right to kill unborn children disqualifies a person from any position of public office. It's simply the same as saying that the endorsement of racism, fraud, or bribery would disqualify him—except that child-killing is more serious than those.

...

These reflections have confirmed my conviction never to vote for a person who endorses such an evil—even if he could balance the budget tomorrow and end all taxation.

Can Democrats Win Christian Vote?

I recently listened to a clip from Steve Deace's radio show on Newsradio 1040 WHO. It's titled "Can Democrats Win Christian Vote?" Here's the blurb from the website:

The answer is yes according to Time Magazine's Amy Sullivan, who has written a book about Democrats closing what she calls "the God gap." This interview is a must-listen.

It's definitely entertaining & enlightening. Go here to download or podcast

Confession

C.J. Mahaney writes about confession of sin in response to the baseball steroid scandal in general and Andy Pettitte in particular:

When I have sinned against someone, a sincere confession is required. A confession that is sincere and pleasing to God will be specific and brief. I have learned to be suspicious of my confession if it’s general and lengthy. A sincere confession of sin should be specific (“I was arrogant and angry when I made that statement; will you please forgive me for sinning against you in this way?”) and brief (this shouldn’t take long). When I find myself adding an explanation to my confession, I’m not asking forgiveness but instead appealing for understanding.

If my so-called confession extends beyond a very specific (acknowledgement of sin) sentence or two, then I am most likely excusing my sin, and requesting understanding for my sin, rather than sincerely asking forgiveness because of my sin. So I have learned to be suspicious of any confession of sin that is lengthy. Genuine conviction of sin is evidenced by a sincere, specific, and brief confession of sin, without any reference to circumstances or the participation of anyone else. When I sin, I am responsible for my sin, and the cause of my sin is always within my heart and never lies outside my heart.

Often after I sin, and even after I confess my sin—most importantly to God to receive the forgiveness I need from him for my sin through the death of his Son for my many sins—I experience a conflict in my soul about the confessing, when necessary, to the appropriate individuals. And whenever there is this conflict in my soul about specifically confessing my sin, I am aware that pride is actively at work in my soul, opposing the confession and seeking to persuade me that it wouldn’t be wise or even necessary for me to confess. But I have learned to ignore this noise from my arrogant heart, and instead weaken this noise by specifically confessing my sin to the appropriate individual as quickly as possible.

When I do confess, first and foremost to God and then (where and when appropriate) to others, I want my confession to be sincere and specific. I want my confession to express genuine sorrow and gratefulness to God for the mercy I experience because of the substitutionary sacrifice of his Son for my sins on the cross.

And when I confess my sin to others and ask their forgiveness when I have sinned against them, I don’t want my confession to resemble the press conference of a high-profile athlete, characterized by evasive language and the refusal to be specific. Instead, I hope my confession of sin is the sincere and specific confession of one genuinely convicted of his sin, sorrowful about his sin, and amazed at the grace of God provided for the forgiveness of sin.

A Hypocrite's Guide to Preaching

Michael McKinley has a good post at the 9 Marks blog called "A Hypocrite's Guide to Preaching." Here's the 5-point guide:

1. We are all hypocrites to some degree or another. None of us have attained perfection in any of the things we must preach about. But there's a line that shouldn't be crossed... if the gap between your words and your life is too great, you shouldn't be preaching at all. We need people in our lives who can help us think through these things so that we're not at the mercy of an overly tender or calloused conscience.

2. Systematic expositional preaching of Scripture is well-suited to preachers who are also sinners. It serves as a check against our natural tendency to focus on things that we do well and avoid areas where we struggle.

3. Your weakness highlights the power of God's word. There are only four reasons that people would want to listen to anything you have to say:

a. You're brilliant and holy (or at least you've convinced them you are).
b. They don't want to but they are too lazy to go somewhere else.
c. They are forced to listen as a condition of their parole.
d. You are telling them what God says in His Word.

Let's face it, you're not (a) and you don't want to be (b). When you feed your people a diet of God's Word and they learn to trust you to teach it to them faithfully they will listen on His authority, not yours.

4. We should take opportunities to acknowledge our own failures and limitations before the congregation when appropriate. If all of your children are under 5 years old and you are preaching on Ephesians 6:4, you should be willing to acknowledge that your personal experience is still somewhat limited. Then you can remind the congregation that the authority comes from God's Word, not from your personal experience. This approach models humility for your people and will (ironically, perhaps) cause them to trust you more.

And finally,

5. Since you're a hypocrite, every sermon should begin with your own heart. You shouldn't preach it to others until you've preached it to yourself. You can assume that you need to hear God's Word just as badly as the people in your congregation. Beware allowing a bifurcation between what you feel passionately in the pulpit and what you live in your day-to-day walk.

Political Songs

While these videos aren't "official" campaign videos, Mike Huckabee's "HuckChuck Facts" has some competition for my favorite political video ever. If you have some time to waste, listen to the words of these songs:

C.J.'s Gone Podcast

There's a new Sovereign Grace Leadership Interview Series podcast. The first episode is "The Pastor and His Reading," which contains a lot of good discussion, and the following book recommendations scattered throughout:

Resources mentioned in the podcast:

• Together for the Gospel blog
• Neither Poverty nor Riches: A Biblical Theology of Possessions by Craig L. Blomberg
• The Great Exchange: My Sin for His Righteousness by Jerry Bridges and Bob Bevington
• Adopted into God's Family: Exploring a Pauline Metaphor by Trevor J. Burke
• Age of Opportunity: A Biblical Guide to Parenting Teens by Paul David Tripp
• He Who Gives Life: The Doctrine of the Holy Spirit by Graham A. Cole
• Engaging with the Holy Spirit: Real Questions, Practical Answers by Graham A. Cole
• The Cross of Christ by John R. W. Stott
• The Cross and Christian Ministry: Leadership Lessons from 1 Corinthians by D. A. Carson
• Overcoming Sin and Temptation by John Owen
• John Owen on the Christian Life by Sinclair B. Ferguson
• The Death of Death in the Death of Christ by John Owen and J. I. Packer
• Institutes of the Christian Religion (2 vols) by John Calvin
• The City of God by Augustine (Bettenson ed.)
• The Confessions by Augustine (Chadwick ed.)
• On the Incarnation by Saint Athanasius
• A Quest for Godliness: The Puritan Vision of the Christian Life by J. I. Packer
• Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. 1: Prolegomena by Herman Bavinck
• Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. 2: God and Creation by Herman Bavinck
• Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. 3: Sin and Salvation in Christ by Herman Bavinck
• Reformed Dogmatics, Vol. 4: Holy Spirit, Church, and New Creation by Herman Bavinck
• Person & Work of Christ by B. B. Warfield
• Inspiration and Authority of the Bible by B. B. Warfield
• Biblical Theology: Old and New Testaments by Geerhardus Vos
• Redemption Accomplished and Applied by John Murray
• How Long, O Lord? Reflections on Suffering and Evil by D. A. Carson
• Good to Great by Jim Collins

(HT: Sovereign Grace Blog)

It's All Yours, O Lord

I've been reading through 1 Chronicles lately, and finished the book tonight. Chapter 29, the final chapter, tells about king David and other offering gold, silver, bronze, iron, and precious stones for Solomon to build the temple. After the offerings are made, a prayer of David's is recorded, beginning this way:

Therefore David blessed the LORD in the presence of all the assembly. And David said: "Blessed are you, O LORD, the God of Israel our father, forever and ever. Yours, O LORD, is the greatness and the power and the glory and the victory and the majesty, for all that is in the heavens and in the earth is yours. Yours is the kingdom, O LORD, and you are exalted as head above all. Both riches and honor come from you, and you rule over all. In your hand are power and might, and in your hand it is to make great and to give strength to all. And now we thank you, our God, and praise your glorious name.
- 1 Chronicles 29:10-13 (ESV)

Wow. What an amazing God! Those words reminded me of a song on Steven Curtis Chapman's newest release, "This Moment." The song is entitled, simply, "Yours":

I walk the streets of London
And notice in the faces passing by
Something that makes me stop and listen
My heart grows heavy with the cry

Where is the hope for London?
You whisper and my heart begins to soar
As I'm reminded
That every street in London is Yours
Oh, yes it is

I walk the dirt roads of Uganda
I see the scars that war has left behind
Hope like the sun is fading
And they're waiting for a cure no one can find

And I hear children's voices singing
Of a God who heals and rescues and restores
And I'm reminded
That every child in Africa is Yours

And it's all Yours, God, Yours, God
Everything is Yours
From the stars in the sky
To the depths of the ocean floor
And it's all Yours, God, Yours, God
Everything is Yours
You're the Maker and Keeper, Father and Ruler of everything
It's all Yours

And I walk the sidewalks of Nashville
Like Singapore, Manila and Shanghai
I rush by the beggar's hand and the wealthy man
And everywhere I look I realize

That just like the streets of London
For every man and woman, boy and girl
All of creation
This is our Father's world

And it's all Yours, God, Yours, God
Everything is Yours
From the stars in the sky
To the depths of the ocean floor
And it's all Yours, God, Yours, God
Everything is Yours
You're the Maker and Keeper, Father and Ruler of everything

It's all Yours, God
It's all Yours, God
It's all Yours, God
It's all Yours, God

The glory is Yours, God
All the honor is Yours, God
The power is Yours, God
The glory is Yours, God

You're the King of Kings
And Lord of Lords

And it's all Yours, God, Yours, God
Everything is Yours
From the stars in the sky
To the depths of the ocean floor
And it's all Yours, God, Yours, God
Everything is Yours
All the greatness and power, the glory and splendor and majesty
Everything is Yours
Yeah, it's all Yours
We are Yours
The glory and honor is Yours, everything is Yours

It's all Yours, God
My life is Yours, my heart is Yours
My hands and my feet
Every song that I sing
It's all Yours, all is Yours
All belongs to You
Our gifts are Yours, God
All our dreams are Yours, God
All our plans are Yours, God
This whole earth is Yours, God
Everything is Yours

Atonement

I never thought I'd post anything from the TV show "ER," but I came across this clip of a dying man speaking to a hospital chaplain:


I wonder how many dying people - not from terminal cancer, but from terminal sin - we have in our churches who are looking for ultimate answers. Not practical day-to-day application; not "What Would Jesus Do?"; not religious pop-psychology; not "moralistic, therapeutic deism"; but where can I find forgiveness? What is going to happen to me when I die?

"For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord." - Romans 6:23 (NIV)

"Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain. For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures" - 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 (NIV)

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son." - John 3:16-18 (NIV)

For anybody reading this who shares this man's questions, know that Jesus Christ has come. The Son of God became man, lived the perfect life that we should have lived, died the death that we deserved for our sins, and rose again to conquer death, so that He may provide the righteousness that God requires to those who would believe in Him. He has died for your sins and offers you eternal life with Him. Trust in Christ, and receive His forgiveness for your sins, and be adopted into God's family, to live with Him in heaven forever.

"Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved." - Acts 4:12

(HT: Between Two Worlds)

I'll Proofread This When My Eyes Stop Bleeding

Who knows about TerraPass? I had heard of "carbon offsets" or "carbon credits" before, but had never encountered them before yesterday. That's when I came across the reality of this year and a half old announcement:

Big news, people: Expedia and TerraPass have partnered in a program to offer Flight TerraPasses to travelers when they buy plane tickets.

Although the travel industry has undertaken limited experiments with this kind of offering before, this is the first program of its size and scope to offer measured, verified greenhouse gas reductions to all travelers. Expedia will offer TerraPass to every U.S. traveler who buys a plane ticket through their web site.

This is an important development for the travel industry and for the fight against global warming. Air travel has exploded in popularity as the cost of plane tickets has dropped. But planes create a large and growing proportion of global warming pollution. For frequent flyers, plane travel creates more emissions than their cars.

Previously, there was not much travelers could do about their contribution to this problem. Now there is.

Whatever shall we do? Why, alleviate our guilt for destroying the earth by spending money, that's what. While purchasing tickets through Expedia, I saw that I could buy a "Flight TerraPass." Only $5.99 for 1,000 lbs of CO2! Or $29.99 for 5,000 lbs! And you get a "nifty co-branded decal" or "a magnificent co-branded luggage tag, made of durable, high-quality silicone." Basically, what you're doing (beyond buying a decal/luggage tag), is giving money to TerraPass to fund "carbon reduction projects."

Now I'm not one to want to destroy the earth at all costs. But I think a reality check is in order. If you want to contribute to "carbon reduction projects," including "clean energy," "farm power," and "landfill gas capture," go right ahead. But do you have to use a middle-man? I say use Google, find a local researcher/company doing something like this, contact them, and ask where you can send your check to help them out. The only benefit I see of buying a TerraPass is vanity, much like people who buy a Toyota Prius because "It makes a statement about me." The desire here isn't to help the environment, it's to be recognized as someone who helps the environment.

It's this kind of thinking that worries me about the upcoming presidential election. I worry that people will vote for Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton so that they can tell their children/grandchildren someday that they voted for America's first black/woman president. I don't care if our next president is a purple hermaphrodite, as long as they aren't going to flush our country down the toilet. But I hope people will pay more attention to actual issues & experience/records, rather than so-called "identity-politics."

For instance, the National Taxpayers Union Foundation recently released a study "which provides cost estimates -- based on hard data -- for more than 450 of the major candidates’ proposals that would affect the federal budget." Some of the numbers may shock you. (Some might not.) Take a look at the net effect on federal spending of some of the candidates' proposals (for new/increased programs as well as cuts):

• Barack Obama: $287 billion increase ($105 billion for "economy, transportation, and infrastructure")
• Hillary Clinton: $218.2 billion increase ($113.6 billion for health care)
• John McCain: $6.9 billion increase
• Mike Huckabee: $54.2 billion increase ($50.1 billion increase in military spending)
• Mitt Romney: $19.5 billion increase ($40 billion increase in military spending)
• Rudy Giuliani: $1.4 billion decrease
• Ron Paul: $150.1 billion decrease

Now putting aside Paul's number, since he basically wants to cut all government spending (which isn't all bad), I'd like to see Giuliani's proposals. He seems to get it more than the others. What people need to remember is that the government doesn't really have any money - we pay for their programs as taxpayers. Check out the data from the report here.

Accountability

Here are a couple of recent posts about accountability: the one from Philip R. Gons, Matthew C. Hoskinson, and Andrew David Naselli, and one from Stephen Altrogge. The post by Gons, Hoskinson, and Naselli includes lists of benefits and potential pitfalls of accountability:

Benefits of Accountability

1. Motivation
2. Safety
3. Consistency
4. Specificity
5. Thoroughness
6. Community
7. Intensity
8. Reminder

Potential Pitfalls of Accountability

1. Heartless participation
2. Impressing God
3. Impressing ourselves
4. Impressing each other
5. Impressing others
6. Comparing ourselves to each other
7. Lying
8. Appeasing ourselves
9. Rationalizing
10. Lack of transparency
11. Fearing man
12. Avoiding face-to-face conversations

The guys also write about a scriptural basis for accountability, drawing from commentaries of John MacArthur, Thomas Manton, and John Calvin.

Altrogge shares a list of suggestions for "awkward questions" to ask your friends (and have your friends ask you):

Have you been consistently pursuing the Lord through scripture reading and prayer?

Have you diligently pursued your wife/husband this week?

Have you seen any persistent patterns of sin in your life recently?

Last week you confessed struggling with [insert sin]. Have you taken steps to fight it this week?

When you gave into [insert sin], what were you believing about God in that moment? What were you believing about yourself?

What is the truth that you need to believe in this situation?

When you had the conflict with [insert person], what were you craving at that moment?

Re: Rob Bell/Nooma

I've posted in the past a bit about Rob Bell and his Nooma videos (here, here, here, and here). Well, C.J. Mahaney has a recent post entitled "Rob Bell, the Pastor’s Task of Discernment, and My Heart." In it, he offers four suggested biblical priorities for "the pastoral task of discernment":

Protect Your People

Prepare Your Heart

Preach Sound Doctrine

Pray for Rob Bell

Mahaney also links to Greg Gilbert's three-part review of Bell's Nooma series, which will be in the March/April 08 9Marks eJournal. Here are direct links to the three parts:

Part One: Overview and beginning of review, with the following headings:

• GIVING CREDIT WHERE IT'S DUE
• SUNDAY SCHOOL WITH A DOSE OF COOL
• PREACHING THE GOSPEL
• THE CROSS? THE RESURRECTION?
• HEY ROB, TRY THIS
• WHAT’S MISSING; WHAT’S NEEDED

Part Two: The meat of the review, with the following headings:

• NOOMA MISLEADS LOST PEOPLE
• NOOMA IS UNCLEAR ABOUT THE MEANING OF THE CROSS
• NOOMA TURNS CHRISTIANITY INTO A BANAL MORALISM
• CONCLUSION

Part Three: Comments on each of the first 18 Nooma videos

UPDATE: Vitamin Z has some good comments regarding Bell, Nooma, and Gilbert's reviews:

I hesitate to leave this up because I don't want you to be a 2nd hander. Make your own conclusions. Don't just trust Greg's assessment. If you haven't seen any of the NOOMA videos then I would encourage you to suspend judgment.

My friend John is a big fan of NOOMA and he was telling me that we need to keep in mind that Rob's video are not meant to encapsulate all of theology in 10min. Just because he might not outline his understand of the atonement in every video doesn't mean that he is heretical. If so, we would need to indict Jesus as being heretical for not communicating all of theology in each one of his parables. If Jesus told stories that were incomplete in an of themselves, why should we accuse Rob of doing the same? That is John's take.

I don't know. I am just passing along info here. Watch the NOOMA videos, read Greg's post and judge for yourself but do so with humility and gentleness.

Kicking It In The Womb

This story is amazing:

Like any thrilled mother to be, Michelle Stepney cherished the first kicks she could feel from her unborn babies.

But her lively twin girls were doing more than simply making their presence felt.

Each little kick was saving their mother's life.

Read the rest of the story here.

Amazing what a clump of cells, or "potential life" can do.

Super Bowl Mailbag

Dan from Chicago (no, not that Dan, the other one) has a great e-mail in the Sports Guy's Super Bowl Mailbag:

Here's what kills me most about the Giants winning ... not that we now live in a world where Eli Manning is a Super Bowl MVP, not that Plaxico Burress now looks like a pre-cog from "Minority Report," or not that we'll be constantly inundated with stories about whether or not all the off-field distractions played a role in the game. No, what kills me most is that the 1972 Miami Dolphins will still be a part of my life, and that's not a good thing. Why couldn't these guys have bowed out of the spotlight graciously years ago? What drives these guys to try and remain relevant 36 years later? I realize that it's a great accomplishment, but did you see Jerry Rice pop champagne when the season ended and no one broke his TD record? Did Dan Marino ever say, "Well, if Peyton Manning ever breaks my single-season TD record, we'll need to add an asterisk because he's played with an All-Pro wide receiver core for his career?" Seriously, I've never hated a group of athletes more than I hate the 1972 Miami Dolphins.

Here's another good one:

How does it make you feel that, in the last three years, Tom Brady has lost playoff games to Jake Plummer and BOTH Mannings?
-- Tim A.

I Am Exceptionally Smart And Independent...

... at least according to Glenn Beck, who says that conservative talk radio listeners "are exceptionally smart, independent people." Beck wrote a good commentary on the main stream media claiming that "Conservative talk radio is dead."

Here's how his piece starts ...

The rumors of my demise have been greatly exaggerated.

Well, actually, it's not just the rumors of my demise; it's me, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and every other conservative talk radio host.

Here's how the theory goes:

1. Rush Limbaugh is the most powerful and influential conservative talk radio host around.

2. Rush Limbaugh spoke out on the air against John McCain.

3. John McCain still did well in the primaries.

4. Rush Limbaugh must have no power or influence.

5. Conservative talk radio is dead.

But that cute little theory leaves out a few important facts.

First, no one -- from Rush, to Schwarzenegger, to Ted Kennedy, to Oprah -- has enough power to dictate an election. Nor should they. The founding fathers thought that might be a bad idea -- remember, they had already gotten their fill of the whole monarchy thing.

Secondly, I don't wake up every morning hoping to influence anyone to do anything. Unlike Air America (the liberal radio network that has consistently failed) I don't consider it my job to win elections for any one candidate, let alone an entire political party. My job is to entertain. Period. If people relate to what I say, and maybe find a little piece of themselves in the process, then great, I get to keep my job for another day.

... and ends:

The biggest irony in all of this is that most of the people who are claiming (or is it hoping?) that talk radio has no influence are the same people who are hoping for a Hillary/McCain match-up this November.

Why is that ironic? Because nothing -- absolutely nothing -- will drive more listeners to conservative talk radio than a liberal back in the White House.

The whole piece is a good read.

Surprised?

Interesting article in response to one I posted about just the other day (Adoption of Islamic Sharia law in Britain is 'unavoidable', says Archbishop of Canterbury):

Williams 'shocked' at Sharia row

The Archbishop of Canterbury is said to be overwhelmed by the "hostility of the response" after his call for parts of Sharia law to be recognised in the UK.

Friends of Dr Rowan Williams say he is in a state of shock and dismayed by the criticism from his own Church.

Are you kidding me? Dr. Williams, perhaps you're being criticized because you said you thought Sharia law would be a good thing, and you're not a Muslim. Or maybe that's just the twisted logic of my ignorant, American mind at work.

The article continues:

The BBC understands from sources who work on Christian-Muslim interfaith issues that Dr Williams has faced a barrage of criticism from within the Church and has been genuinely taken aback by how his words were received.

Islamic Sharia law is a legal and social code designed to help Muslims live their daily lives, but it has proved controversial in the West for the extreme nature of some of its punishments.

"Controversial"? "Extreme nature"? You really think imprisoning women for being in public with unrelated men, or for being raped and having the gall to speak up about it is "extreme" punishment? I don't understand how Sharia law is supposed to "help Muslims live their daily lives." No system of law helps anybody live their daily life, especially not Sharia law.

(HT: Riddleblog)

Higher Learning?

I love this. A student at Ohio State University shows the amazing education available in the institution's journalism department. Junior Frank Blechschmidt writes about Glenn Beck, and how his "slanderous antics pollute airwaves, TV":

On his radio show Wednesday, Beck went on about a 20-minute rant on how Hillary Clinton is a racist and anyone who supports her or her policies is probably one too.

His proof? First, he said her policy to remove troops from Iraq is racist and only benefits whites because the Army is 71 percent white and only 11 percent black. Next, he said her policy to raise taxes on the rich clearly hurts minorities and the "American Dream" because seven of the top 10 richest professional athletes are black and one is Hispanic.

He also had similar outrageous claims of racism in regard to health care reform. Finally, he even went as far as to contend Hillary's lack of support for oil and coal companies has some underlying racist sentiment as well (because oil and coal are black).

If the oil & coal companies part doesn't finally have you convinced that Glenn was not being serious, you're not alone. (I'm not even not going to not try to clean up the multiple negatives in that sentence. I'm not that unintelligent. Or am I?) Blechschmidt wasn't convinced, either:

In reality, Beck is just the latest in a long line of conservative spin doctors. These pundits will always be around and that is fine - it is a free country. I just hope anyone listening to his or similar shows during this election season will think critically before they start believing everything they hear. Most college students can easily find the flaws in these skewed arguments, but there are so many Americans who will believe anything.

I haven't read anything this unintentionally funny in quite some time. Thanks, Buckeyes!

UPDATE: If you want to, you can read the transcript of Glenn's original "racist" comments here.

UPDATE II: Check out some of the 300+ comments on Blechschmidt's article. Funny stuff.

More Mahaney On The Cross

If you aren't already, you should be checking C.J.'s Sovereign Grace Blog before coming here. Here's a bit from his post on Preaching and Sightings of Calvary:

Never assume the gospel

We must never assume the gospel. We must always assume that those we serve need to hear the gospel yet again. Any sermon we preach is incomplete and insufficient until we explicitly reference Christ and him crucified.

In the book A Quest for Godliness: The Puritan Vision of the Christian Life, J.I Packer writes,

The preachers’ commission is to declare the whole counsel of God; but the cross is the centre of that counsel, and the Puritans knew that the traveller through the Bible landscape misses his way as soon as he loses sight of the hill called Calvary.

Every sermon must have a sighting of the hill called Calvary, because each passage of Scripture points us to the cross. In Christ-Centered Preaching, Bryan Chapell writes,

In its context, every passage possesses one or more of four redemptive foci. Every text is predictive of the work of Christ, preparatory for the work of Christ, reflective of the work of Christ, and/or resultant of the work of Christ.

And because every text of Scripture points us to the cross, every topic should likewise point us to the cross. Thomas Jones says, “No doctrine of Scripture may faithfully be set before men unless it is displayed in its relationship to the cross.”

The message of the cross is central to the commission of the preacher, is to be on display in every sermon, is cultivated from every text of Scripture, and is embedded within every topic and doctrine intended to nourish the church.

Cross-eyed

Whether it’s a pastor’s personal reading of Scripture or the weekly preaching of Scripture, we must never lose sight of Calvary. In every sermon there must be some sighting of Calvary.

My prayer for Sovereign Grace pastors is that they build churches who gather together in anticipation of a Calvary sighting. I pray that even as Scripture is read before the sermon, our churches would await with anticipation that point in the sermon where Calvary will be made visible. And the more apparently obscure the passage, the more excited they would be that from this passage, at some point during the sermon, their spiritual sight will be pointed toward the hill called Calvary.

So never lose sight of Calvary, and never let those you serve lose sight of Calvary. In each sermon let there be a sighting of the hill of Calvary and what was accomplished there by our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

M-M-M-My Sharia!

Good news from the U.K. - "Adoption of Islamic Sharia law in Britain is 'unavoidable', says Archbishop of Canterbury:"

The Archbishop of Canterbury has today said that the adoption of Islamic Sharia law in the UK is "unavoidable" and that it would help maintain social cohesion.

Rowan Williams told BBC Radio 4's World At One that the UK has to "face up to the fact" that some of its citizens do not relate to the British legal system.

He says that Muslims could choose to have marital disputes or financial matters dealt with in a Sharia court. He added Muslims should not have to choose between "the stark alternatives of cultural loyalty or state loyalty".

Dr Williams said there was a place for finding a "constructive accommodation" in areas such as marriage - allowing Muslim women to avoid Western divorce proceedings.

Now, I'm not in favor of divorce, to say the least, but I'm really not in favor of a man being able to divorce his wife by repeating "I divorce you, I divorce you, I divorce you." I'm not sure how that makes it better for women. (I won't even get into things like the American businesswoman arrested for being in a Riyadh Starbucks with an unrelated man.)

But I'm sure that Dr. Williams is right in asserting that adopting Sharia law "would help maintain social cohesion." Just ask how well encouraging Muslims to not assimilate has worked in other European countries - like the Netherlands (see Theo Van Gogh) or France, where "youth riots" in recent years certainly had nothing to do with radical Islam. (See also my post from last April about Bruce Bawer's book, While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within.)

(HT: Riddleblog)

Election '08

I got a kick out of these t-shirts, available at the Glenn Beck Studio Store:

Humility & Bill Belichick

After watching the Super Bowl, and seeing Patriots coach Bill Belichick stomp off the field with one second left on the game clock, I had more ammo to tear him down for his arrogance and classless nature. I enjoyed listening to Jim Rome on Monday, ripping into "Hoodie" for his behavior. In reading a blog post by C.J. Mahaney, I read some of the same comments I had been thinking about Belichick. However, where my thoughts stopped, Mahaney continued:

But I must pay careful attention to my heart as I critique coach Belichick, because I am vulnerable to my own more serious expression of arrogance as I observe Bill Belichick. In critiquing coach Belichick and teaching my son biblical discernment and the importance of godly character, I must avoid a self-righteous attitude.

Bill Belichick is not the worst sinner I know. I am the worst sinner I know. For am I most familiar with the countless sins I have committed against God, the countless times I have responded in a similar way as Mr. Belichick when I have encountered the test of adversity. Though it doesn’t appear Bill Belichick is a humble man, I know I am not a humble man.

I am a proud man who is pursuing humility only by the grace of God. And it is only by the grace of God that I have been saved from the wrath of God against my sins. It is only by the death of the Lord Jesus Christ, on the cross, as my substitute for my sins, that I am forgiven of my many sins and have hope for the weakening of pride in my life. And therefore the appropriate response to what I observed in Mr. Belichick last night is to pray that he will become aware of his need for a Savior and turn from his sins and trust the Savior.

Read the whole post here.

Military Preparations

Look here to see how the military is preparing for another President Clinton.

C.J. on the Cross

More C.J. on the cross of Jesus Christ:

We awaken each day with a tendency to forget that which is most important: the gospel. All of us should assume this tendency and be aware of this tendency. Because of the Fall and due to the effects of remaining sin, we have a daily tendency and temptation to forget stuff in general and to forget that which is most important in particular.

Assuming this tendency, we must create practices that will enable us to remember what we must not forget—the cross. So each day I seek to spend time in a location where I am not distracted, unhurriedly reading and meditating on Scripture and finding my way in Scripture to a hill called Calvary to meditate each day on Christ and him crucified. Each day I need to remind myself of the gospel. I cannot live on yesterday’s recollection of the gospel. I need to review and rehearse the gospel each day or I will assume the gospel, forget the gospel, and prove vulnerable to all manner of temptation and sin.

C.J. goes on to answer the question he's most commonly asked: “What books on the cross of Christ have affected you the most?” It's great read, as he writes about four books and tells how they've affected him and why he recommends them.

McCain

I was thinking about posting a rant about John McCain and the Republican presidential nomination race. But the most constructive thing I could think of to write was something along the lines of "AAAAAAAAGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!"

So instead, I'll just ask you to do me a favor. If you consider yourself a conservative, and you support John McCain, please look into the following things related to McCain's record:
McCain-Feingold (has been said to have done more harm to free speech in American than the ACLU)
McCain-Kennedy (no, it's not "amnesty" because it never uses the word "amnesty")
McCain-Lieberman (would have cost the U.S. upwards of 1.3 trillion dollars a year to try to combat global warming)
And then there's the fact that he proudly voted against Bush's tax cuts:


Seriously, I really don't want the two main candidates for President to be a Socialist and a Liberal:

(photos courtesy of MichaelSavage.com)

C.J. Gives In!

C.J. Mahaney has started a blog at Sovereign Grace Ministries. In case you don't know much about him, here's why I love C.J. Mahaney and have learned a lot from him, taken from his first blog post:

I think you can anticipate a disproportionate number of posts on one topic, “Christ and him crucified” (1 Cor. 2:2), for that, by the grace of God, is what I am most passionate about. So here would be my hope for this blog, and for the handful of you that will join my family in reading it. If I can somehow draw your attention each week to the hill called Calvary and remind you of the Savior’s substitutionary sacrifice on the cross for our sins, if I can draw your attention away from yourself and direct your affections to him, then this blog will have served your soul and made some small difference for the glory of God. I pray it does.

Amen, C.J. Thank you for doing just that for me quite often over the past 8 years or so.

Parody

I enjoy good parody - I posted a little over a year ago about a Weird Al video. I got a good chuckle out of this parody of Carrie Underwood's "Jesus Take The Wheel":

Do's And Don'ts With Babies

You could maybe call this the idiot's guide to babies. I haven't laughed this hard in quite a while.

Basketball Highlights

Thought I'd put up a couple of nice highlights from my two favorite college basketball teams - the Iowa Hawkeyes and the North Carolina Tar Heels. Two teams at nearly opposite ends of the spectrum this season, with UNC undefeated and ranked #1 in the country and Iowa struggling at 8-9 (although they did just hand then #6 Michigan State their second loss of the season).

Anyway, the first highlight is of Justin Johnson trying to bring Iowa back single-handedly against then #12 Indiana (game played January 2):

Johnson scored 19 points in the final 1:56, 16 in the last 1:01, but Indiana held on to win, 79-76. The above clip is titled "Iowa's Justin Johnson Goes Reggie Miller vs. Indiana," but I think the performance was more like Isiah Thomas. In the 1984 playoffs, Isiah scored the Detroit Pistons' final 16 points in 1:34 to tie up their game against the New York Knicks, forcing overtime. The Knicks, led by Bernard King's 44, ended up winning.

The second highlight is from North Carolina's 93-81 win over North Carolina-Asheville:

The behemoth in the middle is Kenny George. The tale of the tape? 7'7" (barefoot, 7'9" with shoes on) and 360 pounds, wearing size 28 shoes. (For reference, Shaquille O'Neal wears size 23.) The young man providing the free facial is North Carolina's 6'9", 250 pound All-American Tyler Hansbrough (a.k.a. "Psycho-T").

The Most Pro-Abortion Candidate Ever?

According to this piece written by Terence Jeffrey, it's Barack Obama. Why?

He is so pro-abortion he refused as an Illinois state senator to support legislation to protect babies who survived late-term abortions because he did not want to concede -- as he explained in a cold-blooded speech on the Illinois Senate floor -- that these babies, fully outside their mothers' wombs, with their hearts beating and lungs heaving, were in fact "persons."

"Persons," of course, are guaranteed equal protection of the law under the 14th Amendment.

...

State and federal versions of this bill became an issue earlier this decade because of "induced labor abortion." This is usually performed on a baby with Down's Syndrome or another problem discovered on the cusp of viability. A doctor medicates the mother to cause premature labor. Babies surviving labor are left untreated to die.

...

"Number one," said Obama, explaining his reluctance to protect born infants, "whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by the Equal Protection Clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we're really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a -- a child, a 9-month old -- child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it -- it would essentially bar abortions, because the Equal Protection Clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an anti-abortion statute."

So evidently Obama would think that my son that was born three weeks early could have just been left to die, and that would have been perfectly OK? I love the "pre-viable" label. Sounds like it's straight out of Hitler's "Final Solution" (read my post from November 2006 about "Baby Knauer"). Are newborn babies supposed to be able to take care of themselves from day 1?

If you have a couple minutes, read to the end of the article, which covers two pages. You won't believe how much more liberal and pro-abortion Obama is than Democratic Senator Barbara Boxer.

The Centrality Of The Home

One of my friends sent me a link to a sermon from Voddie Baucham, entitled "The Centrality of the Home." In it, Baucham addresses the role of the home in discipling our children, while providing commentary on the common church model used today.

An Inconvenient Book

I recently started reading Glenn Beck's new book, "An Inconvenient Book." In it, he shares "real solutions to the world's biggest problems," ranging from dating, marriage, and parenting; to radical Islam, America's oil dependence, and the UN; to tipping, movie rentals, and how to remember names. If you're familiar with Beck, from his radio and/or tv shows, his book comes across in a similar, funny yet informed fashion - "the fusion of entertainment and enlightenment" to use a tag line from his radio show.

The first chapter is on global warming, and I was amazed by some of the quotes included from various global warming extremists advocates:

• "Climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world." - Christine Stewart, Canada's former environment minister
• "No matter if the science is all phony, there are still collateral benefits" to global warming policies. - Christine Stewart
• "To capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective, and being honest." - Stephen Schneider, lead 2007 UN IPCC (United Nations International Panel on Climate Control) report author, who made this statement in 1989. Schneider also wrote one of the reports that led to the global-cooling scare of the 1970s.
• "Phasing out the human race will solve every problem on earth, social and environmental." - Dave Forman, founder of Earth First!
• The Kyoto Protocol is "the first component of an authentic global governance." - Jacques Chirac, then president of France, 2000.
• "I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000." - Paul Ehrlich, current president of the Center for Conservation Biology at Standford. Ehrlich made this statement in 1969.
• "In ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead fish." - Paul Ehrlich, 1970.
• "Giving society cheap, abundant energy ... would be the equivalent of giving an idiot child a machine gun." - Paul Ehrlich, 1978.
• "If I were reincarnated, I would wish to be returned to Earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels." - Prince Phillip, World Wildlife Fund
• "Every time someone dies as a result of floods in Bangladesh, an airline executive should be dragged out of his office and drowned." - George Monbiot, environmental author, 2006.
• "Free enterprise really means rich people get richer. They have the freedom to exploit and psychologically rape their fellow human beings in the process. ... Capitalism is destroying the earth." - Helen Caldicott, Union of Concerned Scientists
• "Every time you turn on an electric light, you are making another brainless baby." - Helen Caldicott
• "The only hope for the world is to make sure there is not another United States: We can't let other countries have the same number of cars, the amount of industrialization, we have in the U.S. We have to stop these Third World countries right where they are." - Michael Oppenheimer, Environmental Defense Fund

Seriously, I'm all in favor of conserving energy and being good stewards of the Earth and our natural resources. But can we can the rhetoric already? I think you're going to find change much easier to make if you lead by example rather than by verbally attacking people and making senseless, outrageous claims.

In completely coincidental, unrelated stories:

• Low-energy bulbs 'could cause skin cancer'
• Energy-saving light bulbs blamed for migraines

And I saved this one for last:

Congress pulls the plug on incandescents:

The light-bulb design Thomas Edison created in 1879 has been relatively unchanged for more than a century, but its days are numbered.

The death sentence comes courtesy of the federal energy bill signed into law in December. A provision will make it unlawful for stores to sell incandescent light bulbs beginning in 2012.

Customers will instead be asked to purchase compact fluorescent lights, which are more expensive but are said to last more than 10 times longer while using only a fraction of the wattage.

Are you kidding me? "Unlawful" to sell incandescent light bulbs? Not only are compact fluorescent bulbs more expensive, they are environmentally dangerous. I'm pretty sure the EPA doesn't have instructions for disposing of broken incandescent light bulbs, but the do have instructions for disposing of broken compact fluorescent bulbs, which contain mercury.

First, the EPA's general warning:

Humans use mercury in a variety of manufacturing processes and products such as thermometers and fluorescent lamps. If you improperly dispose of products with mercury in them, they may break and release mercury vapors which are harmful to human and ecological health.

• Dispose of used mercury-containing items properly.
• Clean up mercury spills properly and report them to the proper authorities when necessary.

You might want to write this next part down, because you'll need to have it handy by 2012, at least:

What Never to Do with a Mercury Spill

• Never use a vacuum cleaner to clean up mercury (but see the "What to Do if a Fluorescent Light Bulb Breaks" section below for more specific instructions about vacuuming broken fluorescent light bulbs). The vacuum will put mercury into the air and increase exposure. The vacuum appliance will be contaminated and have to be thrown away.

• Never use a broom to clean up mercury. It will break the mercury into smaller droplets and spread them.

• Never pour mercury down a drain. It may lodge in the plumbing and cause future problems during plumbing repairs. If discharged, it can cause pollution of the septic tank or sewage treatment plant.

• Never wash mercury-contaminated items in a washing machine. Mercury may contaminate the machine and/or pollute sewage.

• Never walk around if your shoes might be contaminated with mercury. Contaminated clothing can also spread mercury around.

What to Do if a Fluorescent Light Bulb Breaks

(EPA is continually reviewing its clean-up and disposal recommendations for CFLs to ensure that the Agency presents the most up-to-date information for consumers and businesses.)

Fluorescent light bulbs contain a very small amount of mercury sealed within the glass tubing. EPA recommends the following clean-up and disposal guidelines:

1. Open a window and leave the room for 15 minutes or more.

2. Carefully scoop up the fragments and powder with stiff paper or cardboard and place them in a sealed plastic bag.

   1. Use disposable rubber gloves, if available (i.e., do not use bare hands). Wipe the area clean with damp paper towels or disposable wet wipes and place them in the plastic bag.

   2. Do not use a vacuum or broom to clean up the broken bulb on hard surfaces.

3. Place all cleanup materials in a second sealed plastic bag.

   1. Place the first bag in a second sealed plastic bag and put it in the outdoor trash container or in another outdoor protected area for the next normal trash disposal.
      Note: Some states prohibit such trash disposal and require that broken and unbroken lamps be taken to a local recycling center.

   2. Wash your hands after disposing of the bag.

4. If a fluorescent bulb breaks on a rug or carpet:

   1. First, remove all materials you can without using a vacuum cleaner, following the steps above. Sticky tape (such as duct tape) can be used to pick up small pieces and powder.

   2. If vacuuming is needed after all visible materials are removed, vacuum the area where the bulb was broken, remove the vacuum bag (or empty and wipe the canister) and put the bag or vacuum debris in two sealed plastic bags in the outdoor trash or protected outdoor location for normal disposal.

Ah, yes. The magic of two sealed plastic bags.

Here's a good question & answer from Energy Star's FAQ about compact fluorescent bulbs and mercury:

What precautions should I take when using CFLs in my home?
CFLs are made of glass and can break if dropped or roughly handled. Be careful when removing the bulb from its packaging, installing it, or replacing it. Always screw and unscrew the lamp by its base (not the glass), and never forcefully twist the CFL into a light socket. If a CFL breaks in your home, follow the clean-up recommendations below. Used CFLs should be disposed of properly (see below).

How do you unscrew a bulb by it's base?

Iowa Caucus

Michael Medved breaks down the numbers from the Iowa Caucus a little more than those in the media claiming that Huckabee won just because of a large "evangelical" voter turnout:

... According to the exit polls used by major news networks, a majority of voters who described themselves as “evangelical” or “born again” Christians actually voted against Huckabee –with 54% splitting their support among Romney, McCain, Thompson and Ron Paul. Yes, Huckabee’s 46% of Evangelicals was a strong showing, but it was directly comparable to his commanding 40% of women, or 40% of all voters under the age of 30, or 41% of those earning less than $30,000 a year. His powerful appeal to females, the young and the poor make him a different kind of Republican, who connects with voting blocs the GOP needs to win back. He’s hardly the one-dimensional religious candidate of media caricature.

It’s also idiotic and dishonest for observers to keep harping on anti-Mormon bigotry as the basis for Mitt Romney’s disappointing showing. Yeah, it's true that 81% of Evangelicals voted against Romney--- but 75% of ALL Iowa Republicans voted against him, so where is the big evidence of "anti-Mormon bigotry"? In other words, there’s only a 6% difference between his general rejection and his Evangelical rejection. There’s no evidence, in other words, that those who described themselves as “born again” or “evangelical” faced an especially tough time voting for a Mormon. Romney, after all, finished second among this group—as he finished second among the electorate in general. Among Evangelicals, Mormon Mitt beat John McCain, Fred Thompson and Ron Paul by a ratio of nearly two-to-one…a bigger, not smaller margin of victory over these other non-Mormon candidates than he managed to achieve in the electorate in general. The message ought to be obvious: the core issue was phoniness, not faith-- and the religious and non-religious alike react badly to phoniness.

Meanwhile, 87% of non-Evangelicals voted against Huckabee.... compared to only 66% of all Iowa Republicans.... in other words a 21% gap! Think about this.... THERE'S MORE EVIDENCE IN THE EXIT POLLS OF ANTI-EVANGELICAL PREJUDICE than there is of anti-Mormon prejudice. Huckabee did well across the board with all groups in the exit polls except one: the 40% who said "no" to the question, "Are you a 'born-again' or 'evangelical' Christian?" He finished fourth among this group, behind Romney, Thompson and McCain.

The evidence is pretty clear, isn't it? The preferences of Evangelicals mirrored those of Iowans in general. But the preferences of the "non Evangelical" group were distorted by their religious beliefs (or non-beliefs) and led them (as the same prejudices leads angry members of the conservative establishment) to blast, resent and dismiss the Huck.

Worship and Service

I've been getting hit from a couple of directions with teaching hovering around the following two verses:

"For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many." (Mark 10:45)

"Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks." (John 4:23)

From the White Horse Inn's recent broadcast, "Worship in Spirit and Truth" and from Desiring God Radio's recent broadcasts ("The Son of Man Came to Serve" Part 1 and Part 2 and "The Son of Man Came to Give His Life a Ransom for Many" Part 1). From these, I've been challenged to think of what a worship service is, and the differences between our service and God's service.

Michael Horton on the White Horse Inn argues that "spirit and truth" in John 4:23 refer to the Holy Spirit and Jesus Christ Himself as The Truth (see John 14:6). The guys share interesting insight into Cain & Abel's offerings (Genesis 4), and the Israelites and the golden calf (Exodus 32), and Aaron's sons, Nadab and Abihu, offering "strange fire" (Leviticus 10) and Isaiah's vision in Isaiah 6.

Horton comments on Isaiah's vision:

"This is the way worship is supposed to work... We come in thinking we're okay. We have a little glimpse of God's holiness and are completely undone. He stoops to forgive us; confirms that, ratifies that, with bread and wine, and then He sends us out into the world as witnesses and people who are loving and serving our neighbors in our vocations."

Horton on our "worship experience," tainted by the Fall:

"Ever since the very beginning, we want to offer what we have. We don't want to be served by God. We don't want Him to come down to us in judgment and justification. We want to rise up to Him to justify ourselves."

Kim Riddlebarger had this to say about Sunday morning services:

"This is an amazing event that's about to happen. The Creator and Sustainer of all; the Redeemer of my soul is going to come and visit me and my fellow sinners. He's going to speak to us. He's going to serve us this wonderful glorious feast. He's going to be present when we sing to Him."

From the end of John Piper's sermon, "The Son of Man Came to Serve" (originally delivered December 17, 1995):

"Our new daughter, Talitha Ruth, arrived in our home Friday night at 9 1/2 weeks old. She smiled. She cooed. She ate. And she fell asleep in her crib. And slept for seven hours. She did not serve us at all. She is totally dependent on being served by us. If she insists on serving us rather than our serving her, she will die. This is why Jesus said, 'Unless you turn and become like children, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven' (Matthew 18:3).

"It's almost Christmas. Open your heart to receive the best Christmas present imaginable: Jesus giving himself to die for you and serve you, all the rest of eternity. Receive this. Turn away from self-help and sin. Become like little children. Trust him. Trust him. Trust him with your life."

From Piper's opening prayer in "The Son of Man Came to Give His Life a Ransom for Many":

"We call this a worship service and I sometimes think we get it all wrong. It is Your service of us now. You are serving us with Your word. You are serving us by Your spirit. You are serving us a banquet of truth and of life-changing insight into your character and your glory. And I pray that You would humble us not to serve You now, but to receive Your service."

I highly encourage you to listen to these - they're tremendous.

Offended?

In reading through the gospel of Luke, I was struck by these words, spoken by Jesus:

"And blessed is the one who is not offended by me." (Luke 7:23, ESV)

An Illegal Alien Drug Dealer Also Lied?

Big news in the ongoing saga of imprisoned U.S. Border Patrol agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Compean. Yesterday, their appeal came before the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals:

From the Dallas Morning News:

Judge E. Grady Jolly, one of three judges from the 5th U.S. Circuit Court
of Appeals hearing the case of Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean, questioned
whether the two agents would have been charged if they had reported the
shooting.

"For some reason, this one got out of hand, it seems to me," he said of
the agents' prosecution.

And from the El Paso's Newspaper Tree:

U.S. officials also admitted that confessed drug dealer Osvaldo
Aldrete-Davila lied under oath.

"He told some lies on the stand," Attorney Mark Stelmach was quoted as
saying. Stelmach is representing U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, who prosecuted the
two agents, in front of the Appeals Court.

Wow. First off, to the comment in the Dallas Morning News about "if they had reported the shooting," I've shared before the fact that there were 7 agents and 2 supervisors at the scene of the shooting when the casings were being picked up, and that an oral report is all that was required - no written documentation. But then you get to the fact that the prosecution's star witness, the illegial alien drug dealer, committed purjury. And it's taken more than a year since Ramos and Compean were convicted for the prosecution to disclose that Aldrete-Davila lied under oath?

Glenn Beck spoke with a handful of people about this latest development on his radio show today:

• Tara Setmayer from Congressman Dana Rohrabacher's (CA) Office and Congressman Ted Poe (TX)
• David Botsford, appeals attorney for Ramos
• Sara Carter, Washington Times writer who has been following this story for quite some time