Dave For President

Or maybe just some financial cabinet position. Check out Dave Ramsey's idea for the "Common Sense Fix" for our country's current financial problems. He suggests three things that we all can do:

1. Pray for your leaders. Pray for them to resist a spirit of FEAR and to embrace WISDOM. Even if you don't like them or agree with them, pray for them and tell them you are praying for them. There is a spirit over this problem that must be broken. Also, most of the media personalities are afraid as well and that is affecting their reporting. Pray for fear to be removed from them; they are making this worse.
2. Send the Common Sense Fix to your Representatives and Senators. (click here for a text version that you can copy and paste into their web contact forms)
3. Tell others. Send a link to this page to everyone in your address book and tell them to urgently follow these 3 steps TODAY.

I've been contacting my Senators and Representatives quite a bit in the past year. And today I also contacted Senators Obama, McCain, and Biden. If you hate phones (like I do), their web forms are usually pretty slick (except for Obama's, which suffered an error when I submitted it).

Upcoming Conferences

Here are a couple of upcoming conferences that look pretty interesting:

• The Purpose Driven Death Missions Conference
• Together for Adoption Conference

What Does It Mean to Deny Yourself?

Found this quoted by Michael Mckinley at the 9Marks Church Matters blog:

From John Stott's The Cross of Christ, regarding Jesus' statement in Mark 8:34:

To deny ourselves is to behave towards ourselves as Peter did towards Jesus when he denied him three times. The verb is the same (aparneomai). He disowned him, repudiated him, turned his back on him. Self-denial is not denying to ourselves luxuries such as chocolates, cakes, cigarettes and cocktails (although it might include this); it is actually denying or disowning ourselves, renouncing our supposed right to go our own way. ‘To deny oneself is… to turn from the idolatry of self-centeredness.’

Kauflin on Music

Here's some video from the recent Desiring God National Conference - "The Power of Words and the Wonder of God." Some good thoughts on music from Bob Kauflin:

It's Been Too Long...

I'm looking forward to this - a nice appetizer before the new season starts in January.

The Aim of Gospel Ministry

Here's a great quote, courtesy Of First Importance:

“To cut off the sinner from all reliance upon himself, his merits and his powers; and throw him, naked and helpless, into the hands of the Holy Spirit to lead him to Christ in faith; should be the one great aim of the ministry.”

- Ichabod S. Spencer

Emotional Hippies

Words don't do this justice:

Off the Palin Bandwagon

Talking abortion with ABC's Charles Gibson:


I'll look at three direct quotes from the clip:

1. "I think that states should be able to decide that issue."

I'm so sick of the "states' rights" card being played as if it were a strong stand on an issue. Really? "I believe abortion is murder, but I think states should decide if infanticide is okay." What sense does that make? Isn't this the same kind of logic that ultimately led to the Civil War? Are we one day going to fight another civil war or become two separate nations based on whether we think killing babies is okay?

2. "I do respect other people's opinion on this, also."

How do you respect another person's opinion when you think their opinion condones murder? Do I have to respect Peter Singer's opinion that "killing an infant is never equivalent to killing a person"?

3. "I know that we can all agree on the need for and the desire for fewer abortions in America."

Really? If you think abortion is okay, why would there be any need or desire to have fewer abortions?

I agree with many of Mrs. Palin's positions, but I wish she held them as stronger convictions. I'm disappointed that she's already playing politics and parroting the "my opinion is..." line that's become so common in our relativistic, post-modern society. Give me someone who stands for Truth.

The Onion

If you enjoy satire, then The Onion is the place for you. Check out this "story" from week 1 of the NFL season:

Palin Hypocrisy Watch

From Justin Taylor:

I recently linked to an article from Slate.com by physician Rahul K. Parikh, who wrote:

"Her to decision to have [her son, Trig,] is also a sign of her hypocrisy."

In other words, Sarah Palin is a hypocrite for not killing her child.

Now we have a post on the Washington Post religion blog by Wendy Doniger, Professor of the History of Religions at the University of Chicago’s Divinity School. Dr. Doniger apparently believes that Palin's hypocrisies are numberous--but she has identified Palin's Greatest Hypocrisy.

Ready?

"Her greatest hypocrisy is in her pretense that she is a woman."

Read the whole thing.

Voting Advice

If you don't want Congressmen telling you who to vote for (see previous clip), how about an actor?

That's the big question on my mind when I go to the polls: Do you think dinosaurs were here 4000 years ago?

You've got to admire Matt Damon as an actor, though. Here's some of my favorite work of his:

Despicable

Before you watch this clip, I feel the need to explain myself a bit. I know I've been particularly critical of Obama & Biden lately, and have been approving of Sarah Palin. For the record, I generally do not consider myself a Republican - I was registered as an independent until this year's caucus, and have yet to change my registration back to independent. Of the four presidential/VP candidates, I would/will not vote for Obama, Biden, or McCain. I would consider voting for Palin for president, but a VP is not enough to make me vote for a ticket. Anyway, on to the clip: this is Congressman Steve Cohen, a Democrat representing the ninth district of Tennessee, speaking on the floor of Congress:

This really is meaningless as to who a person should vote for (except for when Cohen's term is up), but just shows the idiocy of a politician.

V.P. Candidate or Fletch Wannabe?

This sounds like a scene from a Fletch movie. To set it up: Chuck Graham, whom Senator Biden addresses, is a Missouri state Senator. He's a paraplegic, and therefore confined to a wheelchair.

John Has Slain His Thousands

Douglas Wilson continues to think "out loud" about Sarah Palin:

"I am continuing all this in the spirit of thinking out loud. It should be obvious -- even though I still have not made up my mind finally -- that I really like Sarah Palin and believe that she might be uniquely positioned (in just a couple months) to really do something about Roe. Here are some of the reasons for thinking that to be a possibility."

Palin - Family & Politics

MSNBC online is carrying an article from Washington Post writers Karl Vick and James V. Grimaldi entitled "Palin's family always held a place in her politics" and subtitled "Role as wife, mother are central to her appeal but generate controversy." I found the article to provide some good insight into the family dynamics of the working mother.

Heartbreaking

I've been told before that "abortion and adoption don't belong together." (See here.) That's rubbish. It's beyond time for the Church to step up and meet the needs of these babies. And meet the needs of these women with, for whatever reason, unwanted pregnancies. Especially in the richest nation in the world, there's no reason that the Church shouldn't be full of adopted children. I've heard the criticism that pro-lifers only care about babies from conception to delivery. While I don't think that's generally a valid criticism, we need to step up and smash it to pieces.

Palin as VP?

In the past week I've been asking myself some questions about Sarah Palin being picked as the Republican VP candidate. I've been going back and forth and around in circles in my mind, trying to straighten things out as I prepare to vote. And most of the time as I've been asking myself these questions, I've known that there's almost no chance that the answers will actually affect my vote.

Anyway, I appreciated reading Douglas Wilson's post attempting to ask and answer (or at least try to think about biblically) three issues raised by evangelical Christians in response to Palin's nomination:

The first is the propriety of voting for a Republican. A large number of us (myself included) have been let down so many times by these people that anything, no matter how good it looks, feels to us like Lucy setting up the football for Charlie Brown one more time. Just one more time. Please?

The second issue is the propriety of voting for a woman to hold civil office, exercising authority over men in that realm. Some argue from the clear biblical teaching on male headship in the family and the equally clear biblical teaching on the requirement for male leadership in the Church, and say that we can extend this restriction into the civil realm. And I believe that we could do this, were it not for the clear scriptural counterexample.

And last, we have the concerns that revolve around the age of Sarah Palin's children. The idea is that there is no way for her to fulfill her obligations to her family, which are fixed by God, and also fulfill the obligations she would have as vice-president.

Read the entire post.

(HT: Between Two Worlds)

Illogical Logic

I love bad arguments. A friend recently told me that he was trying to recover property taxes he had paid on his neighbor's out-building, because his assessment was incorrect. When talking to his county assessor, he was told he wouldn't be able to get his money back, because, "It's like when you're driving 55 mph in a 45 mph zone, and don't get pulled over until you're in a 45 mph zone. You still have to pay the ticket." Rightly, my friend was disgusted with the awful attempt at analogy and reminded the assessor that he hadn't broken any law, but had in essence been stolen from. Anyway, that really has nothing to do with this post - just a good example of a bad argument.

This post is really about abortion, and the terrible arguments coming from the "pro-choice" camp. Over a year ago, I posted about an article entitled "Abortion: why it's the ultimate motherly act." and argued that killing your child probably isn't really very motherly. Back in October of 2006, I posted some "almost unbelievable" logic from a Des Moines Register article entitled "A statement of courage: 'We had abortions'." In July of 2006, I posted about a response from Albert Mohler to an article from Katha Pollitt in The Nation.

This morning I read another incredibly insightful (yes, that's sarcasm) article, about new Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin's choice not to abort her son Trig after he was diagnosed with Down Syndrome. Dr. Rahul K. Parikh writes that "A 2002 study found that about 90 percent of pregnancies in the United States where the fetus was diagnosed with Down syndrome were terminated." That's some nice clinical language. Nowhere does Dr. Parikh speak of the accuracy of these Down Syndrome tests (I've seen a 5% rate of false positives quoted by several websites).

Here's the gist of Dr. Parikh's criticism of Palin:

"...by having a blood test, Palin was given a choice about what to do."

"...Palin was given a choice whether to have that child, something, if she had her way as a lawmaker, she wouldn't give others."

"Her decision to make her own choice but not grant it to others is a sign of her hypocrisy."

(Read the full article here.)

Allow me to attempt to follow his logic in another area. Evidently I'm a hypocrite because divorce is legal, but I am not divorced, and I don't think anybody should get divorced.

You make the call - does this sound like hypocrisy or consistency?

The Gospel Coalition

If you have ever wondered what Christianity is ultimately all about, or what it is that Christians mean when they refer to "The Gospel" (literally, "The Good News"), you might be helped by these two videos, from the Gospel Coalition:

What Is The Gospel? (Mark Dever)
What Is The Gospel? (John Piper)

Steven Curtis Chapman on Good Morning America

Josh Hamilton

This isn't exactly timely, but I enjoyed reading Tim Ellsworth's account of Josh Hamilton's amazing performance in MLB's Home Run Derby over the All Star break, titled "Hamilton Not The True Hero":

By the time Josh Hamilton brought down the House That Ruth Built, my son Daniel was already in bed.

He and I had started watching the Home Run Derby a little earlier, and you could tell that Daniel was impressed. For 5-year-olds who are burgeoning baseball fans, home runs are a big deal.

So we watched as Dan Uggla, Grady Sizemore, Chase Utley and Evan Longoria took their turns. We counted the home runs they hit and the outs they made. I had to explain to Daniel more than once why they weren't running the bases.

Then it was bed time for him. After tucking him in, I returned to the living room intending to watch the rest of the show. That was before Hamilton, the Texas Rangers outfielder, stole it.

...

ESPN's Jayson Stark wrote that Hamilton had "an evening in Yankee Stadium that told a story that ought to restore our faith in mankind."

Fortunately, I recorded the entire thing. And tonight, I'll sit with Daniel and let him watch Hamilton's home run barrage for himself. He'll be impressed with the long home runs, and I fully expect to hear him exclaim, "Awesome!" multiple times.

As we watch, I'll undoubtedly tell him a little bit of Hamilton's story. And while I'll compliment Hamilton's ability, I'll tell Daniel that we should always remember from where his ability comes. For if we watch Hamilton play baseball, and marvel at him for how he has turned his life around, we miss the point entirely.

Hamilton is only a man – a man who has been incredibly gifted by God to play baseball, but a man nonetheless. As admirable as his successes are, he is not the real hero to the story. The real hero is the Lord, who is truly mighty to save. Hamilton is simply another piece of evidence that nobody is out of God's reach, and that no case is too desperate for God's saving grace.

Jayson Stark is wrong. Hamilton's accomplishment should do much more than "restore our faith in mankind." It ought to restore our faith in God.

If you're not familiar with Hamilton's story, I'd encourage you to read the whole thing. Or read Hamilton tell his story himself, from last July in ESPN the Magazine:

Addiction is a humbling experience. Getting it under control is even more humbling. I got better for one reason: I surrendered. Instead of asking to be bailed out, instead of making deals with God by saying, "If you get me out of this mess, I'll stop doing what I'm doing," I asked for help. I wouldn't do that before. I'd been the Devil Rays' No. 1 pick in the 1999 draft, supposedly a five-tool prospect. I was a big, strong man, and I was supposed to be able to handle my problems myself. That didn't work out so well.

...

This may sound crazy, but I wouldn't change a thing about my path to the big leagues. I wouldn't even change the 26 tattoos that cover so much of my body, even though they're the most obvious signs of my life temporarily leaving the tracks. You're probably thinking, Bad decisions and addiction almost cost him his life, and he wouldn't change anything? But if I hadn't gone through all the hard times, this whole story would be just about baseball. If I'd made the big leagues at 21 and made my first All-Star team at 23 and done all the things expected of me, I would be a big-time baseball player, and that's it.

Baseball is third in my life right now, behind my relationship with God and my family. Without the first two, baseball isn't even in the picture. Believe me, I know.

...

Within my first week of sobriety in October 2005 -- after I showed up at my grandmother's house in Raleigh in the middle of the night, coming off a crack binge -- I had the most haunting dream. I was fighting the devil, an awful-looking thing. I had a stick or a bat or something, and every time I hit the devil, he'd fall and get back up. Over and over I hit him, until I was exhausted and he was still standing.

I woke up in a sweat, as if I'd been truly fighting, and the terror that gripped me makes that dream feel real to this day. I'd been alone for so long, alone with the fears and emotions I worked so hard to kill. I'm not embarrassed to admit that after I woke up that night, I walked down the hall to my grandmother's room and crawled under the covers with her. The devil stayed out of my dreams for seven months after that. I stayed clean and worked hard and tried to put my marriage and my life back together. I got word in June 2006 that I'd been reinstated by Major League Baseball, and a few weeks afterward, the devil reappeared.

It was the same dream, with an important difference. I would hit him and he would bounce back up, the ugliest and most hideous creature you could imagine. This devil seemed unbeatable; I couldn't knock him out. But just when I felt like giving up, I felt a presence by my side. I turned my head and saw Jesus, battling alongside me. We kept fighting, and I was filled with strength. The devil didn't stand a chance.

You can doubt me, but I swear to you I dreamed it. When I woke up, I felt at peace. I wasn't scared. To me, the lesson was obvious: Alone, I couldn't win this battle. With Jesus, I couldn't lose.

...

But there is one story that sticks with me, so much so that I think of it every day. I was driving out of the players' parking lot at Great American Ball Park after a game in May, with Katie and our two girls. There's always a group of fans standing at the curb, hoping to get autographs, and I stop to sign as many as I can.

And on this particular night, a little boy of about 9 or 10, wearing a Reds cap, handed me a pen and something to sign. Nothing unusual there, but as I was writing the boy said, "Josh, you're my savior."

This stopped me. I looked at him and said, "Well, thank you. Do you know who my savior is?"

He thought for a minute. I could see the gears turning. Finally, he smiled and blurted out, "Jesus Christ." He said it like he'd just come up with the answer to a test. "That's exactly right," I said.

You see, I may not know how I got here from there, but every day I get a better understanding of why.

Bullwhip Guy

A couple of years ago I posted a link to Rob Bell's Bullhorn Guy Nooma video. At the time, I declined to comment on it. But I recently ran across this video, a satirical response to Bell's Bullhorn Guy video:

(HT: Vincit Omnia Veritas)

No, John Piper Hasn't Joined a Gang

From Josh Harris's blog:

My friend Kirk emailed this picture of one of one the girls from his church with John Piper at New Attitude. Evidently she asked him to do a "W" for the "word of God" since that was the theme of the conference. Kirk pointed out that of course Piper had no idea he was also flashing the "Westside" gang symbol. Represent!

I Love Hymns

Three of my favorite:

Politics As Usual?

Are there any honest or trustworthy politicians out there? Any with integrity?

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.