NFL Power Rankings

I've been trying to have some fun with politics recently, but even laughing at politics is depressing sometimes. So how about some good old fashioned sports fun, courtesy of ESPN's Sports Guy? Here are a couple of samplings from his latest NFL Rankings:

26. St. Louis Rams
A.J. in St. Louis sent me this: "Jim Thomas is our Rams beat writer. In his weekly chat, someone asked, 'After the year, what position(s) do the Rams need to address via the draft and free agency?' Jim responded, 'Everything but punter and place-kicker.' Ladies and gentlemen, your 2008 St. Louis Rams!"

25. Cleveland Browns
If you don't think this is the worst-coached half-decent team in the league, you didn't see the Browns blow a 10-point lead Thursday night to an atrocious defensive team that was down to a backup fullback as its only running back. (Actually, you probably didn't see it -- you could see the game only on the NFL Network. Great.) I remember this past Sunday when Fox's Rich Gannon said, "You can't second-guess Romeo Crennel here." I won't even tell you the context. Just know that, yes, at all times we are allowed to second-guess Romeo Crennel. Even if he's single-handedly disarming three gunmen during a bank robbery as I'm lying on the floor with my hands behind my head.

24. Houston Texans
I quit the Texans. Didn't think I could, but I did. They can't win on the road. Also, this quote from new starting QB Sage Rosenfels did me in: "I have been a backup for eight years. So if there's 32 teams in the league times eight years, that's 256 times that teams have said, 'This guy is not our starter.' So, yeah, I think there are some [naysayers] out there." I'd like to add myself to the list, Sage.

19. Chicago Bears
My West Coast fantasy team has something in common with the 2008 Bears: We both got finished off by Kyle Orton's ankle sprain. I ended up losing by three points last week because I started Orton over Donovan McNabb and got only one half out of him. Now, I'm 3-6 with four devastating losses: Brady going down eight minutes into Week 1; the DeSean Jackson premature espikeulation game; Kellen Clemens throwing a last-minute pick to San Diego's D to beat me; and last week, when I lost in the final minute of Monday night. At least I know I'm done, whereas Bears fans have to talk themselves into Rex Grossman for a few weeks.

My big epiphany: Really, the fantasy football season isn't fun. Winning is OK; losing is agonizing. You constantly feel awful about your choices and your bad luck; it's the only exercise that causes arguments with friends you normally never would argue with; and you spend roughly a kazillion hours managing your team for the 10 percent chance that you might win your league. There's just not a ton of upside. It's almost like smoking cigarettes -- it started out with good intentions, and it's something to do, and it can be fun in the right moments, but ultimately, there are an inordinate amount of moments when you find yourself leaning out a window in 20-degree weather to puff out a quick cig as your nose gets frostbitten, or bumming a cig from a group of horrible girls and then feeling obligated to talk to them, or waking up in the morning and coughing up your right lung. Really, it's more harm than fun. And yet, we continue to do it. And love it. This entire paragraph made me want to smoke.

(Side note: I had this epiphany after my first son was born. And I haven't looked back. Fantasy freedom feels pretty good to me.)

17. New Orleans Saints
Drew Brees is my runner-up for the 2008 Halfway MVP. Look at the Saints right now: They have below-average talent; they lost their two best skill-position guys for weeks at a time; they had to deal with the potential of another hurricane in Week 1; they lost a home game to play in London; they're in the toughest division in THE NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE; and somehow, they're 4-4 and favored on the road this Sunday against an underrated Falcons team. It has been Brees and Sean Payton, and that's really it. Speaking of halfway points, let's take a commercial break before the second half of the column.

Saaaaaaved byyyyyy zerrrrrr-ohhhhhhhhhh.

"Now, for a limited time only, you can get amazing zero APR financing on your favorite Toyota."

Saaaaaaved byyyyyy zerrrrrr-ohhhhhhhhhh.

"That's 0 percent financing on 11 different models! Featuring Toyota's legendary quality. No other car brand can make this offer. So hurry in now, and see how much zero can save you on a brand new Toyota."

Saved by zero! Saved by zero!

(By the way, I did that off the top of my head. We are reaching the point that I am two weeks away from stopping by my local Toyota dealership, buying a brand-new Toyota Tundra with zero APR financing, driving the car off the lot, doing a U-turn, then plowing it through the front window of the dealership at 60 mph while screaming, "SAVED BY ZERO," like the guys from "Red Dawn" screamed, "WOLVERINES!" Cut down on the ads, Toyota. We're not kidding. You know why you haven't see John Mellencamp in two years? He's trapped in the basement of some frustrated baseball fan who dressed him like the Gimp and keeps him in a trunk after hearing "Our Country" for the 700,000th time. Look, we're all ecstatic that the guys from the Fixx are getting royalties again. Just tone it down. We get it. Zero APR financing. Heard you loud and clear.)

(Another side note: Just to say I can't add anything to the Sports Guy's commentary on the most annoying currently running commercial.)

9. Washington Redskins
What a humiliation! Monday night, hours before the election, Steelers-Skins … and the place was packed with Steelers fans! How does that happen???? Redskins fans deserve a paragraph as short as their owner.

Myths About The Great Depression

Andrew Wilson shares "five interrelated and durable myths about the 1929-39 Depression":

1. Herbert Hoover, elected president in 1928, was a doctrinaire, laissez-faire, look-the-other way Republican who clung to the idea that markets were basically self-correcting.
2. The stock market crash in October 1929 precipitated the Great Depression.
3. Where the market had failed, the government stepped in to protect ordinary people.
4. Greed caused the stock market to overshoot and then crash.
5. Enlightened government pulled the nation out of the worst downturn in its history and came to the rescue of capitalism through rigorous regulation and government oversight.

In light of the recent problems in the economy, and the rhetoric of the Presidential and Congressional races, I'd encourage you to read the whole thing. If you'd like to read more about the Great Depression, I'd recommend The Forgotten Man, by Amity Schlaes. I have yet to read the book myself, but have heard much about it and much from Ms. Schlaes herself, that I do not hesitate recommending it.

Election Aftermath

I know - I'm late. As a blogger, I failed to live up to my contractual obligation to write about the election either Tuesday night or Wednesday. Since I've already failed, I'll just rip off others. First, the lighter side, from the Onion:


Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are

---

And now, for something completely different. Thabiti Anyabwile posted the following as a guest post at Between Two Worlds. I've reproduced it here in full because I couldn't leave any of it out:

Thabiti Anyabwile is Senior Pastor of First Baptist Church in Grand Cayman, Cayman Islands, and blogs at Pure Church. He is the author of three books: The Faithful Preacher, The Decline of African American Theology, and What Is a Healthy Church Member? He lives with his wife and three children in Grand Cayman.

I remember as a middle-schooler watching the film, “The Day After.” It was, at the time (the height of the Cold War), a rather alarming film about the prospect of nuclear war. We watched with rapt attention as mushroom clouds, frantic citizens, traffic jams, blinding light, and nuclear fallout destroyed “life as we knew it.”

It strikes me that many Christians have been watching this election like middle-schoolers fearfully paralyzed at their first look at nuclear realities. Our fear of nuclear destruction was warranted. The Christian anxiety about this election is not.

So it’s the day after the election, and your candidate didn’t win. Aside from the natural nauseating post-game let-down feeling, what are you to think and feel? Here are a few quick thoughts:

1. Remember that President Barack Obama is not just the first African-American president, he is also the 44th white President. There will no doubt be many associations made between his skin color, assumptions about his race, and a host of successes or failures during his presidency. But let us Christians avoid such errors. Let us avoid saddling this one man with the responsibility of representing a “race” of people, or saddling the people with this one man’s failures or achievements. Let us be good theologians and attribute all that President Obama is to either his fallen nature or to the work of grace in his life. We may all celebrate in his achievement, and we may all recognize in him things fundamental to human nature—not to “race.” His presidency is as much a testament to the progress of all Americans as it is a proud moment for African Americans.

2. Keep working on the issues you care most passionately about. There is no reason to think that President Barack Obama can overthrow the will and work of God in the world. So what if he is the most pro-choice/pro-abortion candidate in history? Isn’t God still the most pro-life God in all creation? The man in the presidency has changed; our Lord has not. So we keep laboring in the cause of justice knowing that the Sovereign Lord is just as likely (maybe more likely!) for His glory to do with a President Obama—who so clearly opposes his will in many areas—greater things on the abortion front than He might do with a professing Christian president. God may yet bring to Himself more glory in prevailing on the abortion issue by making the most sizeable and godward progress during the administration of one who is so decidedly against His will! That would be just like Him: raise the opposition to demonstrate more His glory. Put your hope in the living God!

3. Pray for those in authority over you. No really; pray for him. Consider that when Paul instructs the church to pray for those in authority he then directly connects such prayer with the ability of the church to “live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness” (1 Tim. 2:1-2). One wonders how much of the peace- and godliness- and holiness-destroying circumstances in our country stem from the absence of prayer for those in authority. Our prayer meetings are empty. Our pastoral and personal prayers are self-centered. We barely feel the urging emphasis of Paul when he assigns “first of all” importance to “requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving” on behalf of our leaders. Can there be any wonder that our leaders so often serve themselves and not the people? And can any man stand against the will and power of God when the Lord’s people really pray for them? No they cannot. Really; they cannot. Pray for President Obama with the full assurance of faith.

So, it’s the day after the election. Things have changed, in some obvious and more subtle ways. But Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever! God’s election of you, if you’re a Christian, has not changed. His purpose to conform you to Christ has not changed. You really have won all that matters for eternity. That’s not to downplay the importance of some issues discussed in this election. But really, if McCain had won, how would your day today be in reality any different than your day yesterday? The laws today would be the same laws yesterday. Your work would still be before you. You haven’t lost any ground yet. Perhaps you’ve been given greater incentive to pray, reminded of what matters eternally, and in those things shone a more fruitful path forward. The Lord omnipotent reigns. Rejoice in full assurance!

Rock Yo Mama!

Just a couple of videos to get in the mood for President Rock Yo Mama (at least that's how my nearly 2 year old son says it) and the United Socialist States of America:





The first video would be a lot funnier if it were a Saturday Night Live sketch instead of an actual United States Senator (Charlie Rangel of New York).

"Savior Sibling"

Ever heard the phrase "savior sibling?" If not, I'd encourage you to educate yourself. It's a concept pregnant with moral & ethical controversy. I was reminded of the idea by a story on ESPN.com about Utah Jazz forward Carlos Boozer and his family. Carlos and his wife CeCe have a son Carmani who was born with sickle cell anemia, and they were told that there was no known cure. The story has many things I could comment on, but I don't have the time right now. It's a heart wrenching story that I wouldn't wish upon anybody. But the following paragraphs stuck out to me:

Finally, at a clinic in Atlanta, she heard something new. Doctors there had been doing bone marrow transplants for years and recently had been eradicating sickle cell anemia, among other blood diseases, with the procedure. It was a revelation, a possible way out.

She went back to the library and the phones to study up on bone marrow transplants and learned an infant sibling who could donate cord blood (rather than bone marrow), rich in stem cells, from an umbilical cord would offer the best chance of a successful transplant and a cure.

But a second pregnancy for CeCe and Carlos would mean the risk of a second child born with sickle cell disease. And there would be no guarantee that a second child, or a third, or even a fourth, would necessarily be both free of the disease and a genetic match for Carmani. They couldn't risk it. They began talking about in vitro fertilization and genetic screening instead.

CeCe pulled together a team that included an in vitro specialist, Dr. Michael Jacobs in Miami, who would biopsy the Boozers' developing fertilized embryos and later perform an in vitro fertilization; a geneticist, Dr. Mark Hughes in Detroit, who would test those embryos in order to determine which of them were sickle-cell free as well as genetically compatible with Carmani's immune system; and a transplant expert, Dr. John Fort at Miami Children's Hospital, who would transplant the sibling's cord blood into Carmani's system, replacing his bad stem cells with healthy ones. Twenty-six eggs were fertilized and began to develop. Ten were genetically compatible. Two of those were disease-free, and both were implanted in CeCe's uterus in case one of them didn't develop.

Six weeks later, the Boozers learned they had twins on the way.

I'd encourage you to read the whole story and share your thoughts. I'll try to share mine when I have some more time.

Bar Stool Economics

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.

The fifth would pay $1.

The sixth would pay $3.

The seventh would pay $7.

The eighth would pay $12.

The ninth would pay $18.

The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers, he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:

The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).

The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).

The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).

The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).

The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).

The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

'I only got a dollar out of the $20', declared the sixth man.

He pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!'

'Yeah, that's right', exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!'

'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'

'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.

Professor of Economics, University of Georgia

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.

For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

(HT: Douglas Wilson)

Marxism

My brother's looking forward to Marxism. I'm looking forward to Obamanation. (Can someone ask John Hagee if Daniel 9:27 is supposed to read "... an Obamanation that causes desolation ..."?) We're just not sure what kind of Marxism we might be facing. Here's what my brother prefers:

Great Quote from John Stott

"Before we can begin to see the cross as something done for us (leading us to faith and worship), we have to see it as something done by us (leading us to repentance). Indeed, 'only the man who is prepared to own his share in the guilt of the cross', wrote Canon Peter Green, 'may claim his share in its grace.'"--John Stott, The Cross of Christ, page 60

(HT: Josh Harris)

Starving Saints

James MacDonald has a good post at Straight Up:

The legitimate mission of evangelism, the job of the ‘church dispersed,’ has replaced the worship of God by His people and the edification of the saints, the biblical objectives of the church ‘gathered.’ Truth is diluted or displaced by self generated ‘talks’ on perceived issues of importance. These inventions come from communicators who regard their own thoughts more highly than God’s Word, sadly somehow believing that they are assisting the work of the gospel by avoiding the words of the Lord Himself. Such arrogance; go figure. These same messages so lacking in biblical truth are aimed at an audience that too often has no concept of what they are missing. Starving and they don’t even know it. Junk food is all they have ever known, and they have no reference point to relieve their hunger or remedy the ache in their gut. The thing that is missing, the thing they are longing for, the only thing that will feed them is what God’s Spirit was sent into the world to bring . . .

Read the whole post here.

What Does He Know?

Warren Buffett wrote an interesting Op-Ed piece recently for the New York Times.

THE financial world is a mess, both in the United States and abroad. Its problems, moreover, have been leaking into the general economy, and the leaks are now turning into a gusher. In the near term, unemployment will rise, business activity will falter and headlines will continue to be scary.

So ... I’ve been buying American stocks. This is my personal account I’m talking about, in which I previously owned nothing but United States government bonds. (This description leaves aside my Berkshire Hathaway holdings, which are all committed to philanthropy.) If prices keep looking attractive, my non-Berkshire net worth will soon be 100 percent in United States equities.

Why?

A simple rule dictates my buying: Be fearful when others are greedy, and be greedy when others are fearful. And most certainly, fear is now widespread, gripping even seasoned investors. To be sure, investors are right to be wary of highly leveraged entities or businesses in weak competitive positions. But fears regarding the long-term prosperity of the nation’s many sound companies make no sense. These businesses will indeed suffer earnings hiccups, as they always have. But most major companies will be setting new profit records 5, 10 and 20 years from now.

I particularly enjoyed these two paragraphs, near the end of the piece:

Today people who hold cash equivalents feel comfortable. They shouldn’t. They have opted for a terrible long-term asset, one that pays virtually nothing and is certain to depreciate in value. Indeed, the policies that government will follow in its efforts to alleviate the current crisis will probably prove inflationary and therefore accelerate declines in the real value of cash accounts.

Equities will almost certainly outperform cash over the next decade, probably by a substantial degree. Those investors who cling now to cash are betting they can efficiently time their move away from it later. In waiting for the comfort of good news, they are ignoring Wayne Gretzky’s advice: “I skate to where the puck is going to be, not to where it has been.”

Weakside Linebacker?

When I first saw this play on ESPN, it looked fairly innocent - a ref getting caught in the middle of a play. However, check out this angle:

Campaign Video

I've posted a couple of these before, but here's a compilation of funny clips from the campaign trail, put together by Trevin Wax:

Ouch! Obama slips up and talks about his “Muslim Faith” instead of Christian faith in an interview on ABC.

John McCain promises to veto beer. Prohibition anyone?

At a campaign rally, Joe Biden tells wheelchair-bound Chuck Graham to stand up. I know people say Obama is a Messiah, but this might be a little too much!

McCain claims Putin is President of Germany.

Terry Moran on Nightline goofs up and says Barack Obama has two dads. Yes, that would definitely go down in the history books.

Obama has visited all 57 states of America.

McCain’s going after Osama to the gates of hell. I wonder if he’ll have that smile on his face once he gets there.

Barack Obama introduces Joe Biden as the next president of the United States.

McCain sings “Bomb Iran” and then tells reporters who question him to lighten up and “get a life.”

Obama gets lost without a teleprompter.

Economic Crisis

Tim Ellsworth has an interesting take on the economic crisis, suggesting that the crisis could be good for the nation. Here's his conclusion:

Could the threat - or even the existence - of an economic depression be enough of a reality check to return us to a point where selfishness is not the predominant characteristic of our nation? Would it refocus us and make us reconsider what's important in life? I can't say for sure. But am I willing to put up with an economic downturn - perhaps even a depression - if it means a brighter future for my children? If it means a future in which they feel more connected to their neighbors and communities? If it means a future in which they recognize the value of the eternal more than the temporal? If it means a greater emphasis on the wholesome and the upright, rather than the decadence and filth that mark so much of American society?

If a depression is what it takes to achieve that, then bring it on. It's a price I'm happy to pay.

Read the full piece in the Jackson Sun.

Socialism

Bret McAtee makes a great observation at The Backwater Report:

Presently, the bottom 40% of income earners pay zero income taxes. The top 20% pay 80% of all the federal income taxes. Therefore, it is not possible to give the bottom 40% a tax cut because they pay no money to the government. So this begs the question: How is Barack Obama proposing to give a tax cut to 95% of Americans?

The truth is that he is not going to give a tax cut to most Americans; it is not possible. Instead, he is going to give welfare subsidy to the bottom 40%. This subsidy Obama is calling a ‘tax cut,’ but in reality it is a tax increase in an attempt to redistribute wealth.

McCain doesn't escape unscathed, either. Here's the very next paragraph:

However, the problem is that the Republican candidate is likewise offering socialistic solutions in the time of a desperate economy. McCain’s proposal that the Federal Government buy up bad mortgages is disastrous. Home ownership is no more an American right then is health care and the government guaranteeing bad decisions on purchased homes penalizes those who didn’t make bad decisions on home purchases. In point of fact, McCain’s proposal on buying bad mortgages with a view to negotiating mortgages downwards is an incentive for all of those who are paying mortgages to suddenly discover they can’t afford their mortgages. McCain’s proposal is socialist insanity.

Read the full post, titled "Socialists Everywhere."

The Shack

Gerald Hiestand at Harvest Bible Fellowship's blog Straight Up has posted a review of William Young's The Shack. Here's his conclusion:

It’s obvious Young’s book has struck a chord with the culture at large, and the evangelical culture not least. It’s clear the people in our churches crave an immanent God—one who understands our needs, our weaknesses, and who is able to identify with us in our fragile human existence. And indeed the Word Incarnate is the Father’s way of whispering tenderly in our ear. In Christ, the transcendent God draws near to us in flesh and bone. He walks our paths and feels our pain. Young’s desire for a God of compassion and tenderness is legitimate, and we do well to ask why such a deficit might exist in our churches. Have we failed to communicate properly the deep love that God has for his children? Perhaps. But if we have, Young’s book is not the best corrective. Young, in an attempt to wipe the blood off of God’s hands, ends up diminishing the transcendence and power of God. The best way to correct an unbalanced view of God is not by introducing an opposing unbalanced view of God.

I have no doubt that The Shack is Young’s sincere attempt to sort out some rather troubling issues. The question of how a good God can allow suffering and evil is difficult, no matter how you slice it. But this is not a book I can recommend. For those who need a theodicy wrapped in a narrative, a work such as Lewis’ Till We Have Faces is the better, even if more difficult, way forward.

Read the whole review here.

Don't Buy Stuff You Can't Afford

Some good advice, from an SNL skit:

If only our government heeded this outrageous advice.

Visualizing the Bible

The folks at Culture Making Blog have put together (above) a beautiful diagram of biblical cross-references:

This diagram arose from a collaboration between a Carnegie-Mellon Ph.D student and a Lutheran pastor to create a grand map of Biblical cross-references: “We wanted something that honored and revealed the complexity of the data at every level –- as one leans in, smaller details should become visible. This ultimately led us to the multi-colored arc diagram… The bar graph that runs along the bottom represents all of the chapters in the Bible. Books alternate in color between white and light gray. The length of each bar denotes the number of verses in the chapter. Each of the 63,779 cross references found in the Bible is depicted by a single arc - the color corresponds to the distance between the two chapters, creating a rainbow-like effect.

(HT: Life Together)

Don't Desire Wealth

From John Piper, at the Desiring God Blog:

I can smell it. It’s like toast or steak or brownies. It doesn’t just draw our desire, it creates desire. Deep drops in the stock market make many people salivate. They know it will rebound. They are sitting on cash. By year’s end their pile could ride the recovery to riches.

For such people I have a word from God. The word is: Don’t desire to be rich. It will kill you. And in a world like ours many will probably perish with you. Paul’s language is more graphic than mine:

There is great gain in godliness with contentment, for we brought nothing into the world, and we cannot take anything out of the world. But if we have food and clothing, with these we will be content.

But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils.

It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs. (1Timothy 6:6-10)

Matthew 6:33

"But seek first the kingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things will be added to you." Matthew 6:33

Ray Ortlund:

In our anxious times, this verse stands out. Let's be clear about what the Lord is saying.

The Lord isn't saying, "If what you really want is 'all these things,' here's how you get it. Seek first God's kingdom and righteousness." He can't be saying that, because seeking God's kingdom and righteousness first means first. The word "first" makes the kingdom and righteousness, not the 'all these things,' our true goal. God is generous, but he will not be used as a stepping-stone to something higher.

The Lord is saying, "Make it THE goal of your life, even above necessities, to seek God's kingdom and righteousness. Use everything else in your life to make progress toward this goal and to help others make progress toward this goal. Don't use God, but use the things of this life toward God, and God promises he will back you up. He will give you all of 'all these things' that you need for a God-seeking-first, kingdom-advancing-first, righteousness-pursuing-first lifestyle."

Every one of us is either seeking God or using God, moment by moment. The word "first" reveals the difference. And God's promise belongs to all who seek him first. The only safe place in all the world.

(HT: Vitamin Z)

You Eat What?

Here's a list of politicians who will never get my vote for any future election for any office. Why? Because they all voted for H.R. 1424, affectionately known as the "$700 Billion Bailout." Earlier this week, House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, accurately called this bill a "crap sandwich."

Democrat Senators who voted Yes

Daniel Akaka Joseph Biden Sherrod Brown Thomas Carper Kent Conrad Dianne Feinstein John Kerry Frank Lautenberg Blanche Lincoln Barbara Mikulski Barack Obama Harry Reid Chuck Schumer

Max Baucus Jeff Bingaman Robert Byrd Bob Casey Christopher Dodd Tom Harkin Amy Klobuchar Patrick Leahy Claire McCaskill Patty Murray Mark Pryor Jay Rockefeller Jim Webb

Evan Bayh Barbara Boxer Ben Cardin Hillary Clinton Dick Durbin Daniel Inouye Herb Kohl Carl Levin Robert Menendez Ben Nelson Jack Reed Kenneth Salazar Sheldon Whitehouse

Independent Senators who voted Yes

Joseph Lieberman

Republican Senators who voted Yes

Lamar Alexander Richard Burr Norm Coleman John Cornyn John Ensign Judd Gregg Kay Bailey Hutchison Richard Lugar Mitch McConnell Olympia Snowe John Sununu John Warner

Robert Bennett Saxby Chambliss Susan Collins Larry Craig Lindsey Graham Chuck Hagel Johnny Isakson Mel Martinez Lisa Murkowski Arlen Specter John Thune

Kit Bond Tom Coburn Bob Corker Pete Domenici Charles Grassley Orrin Hatch Jon Kyl John McCain Gordon Smith Ted Stevens George Voinovich

Democrat Representatives who voted Yes

Neil Abercrombie Robert Andrews Brian Baird Shelley Berkley Timothy Bishop Leonard Boswell Robert Brady Lois Capps Russ Carnahan Emanuel Cleaver Jim Cooper Joseph Crowley Danny Davis Diana DeGette John Dingell Chet Edwards Brad Ellsworth Anna Eshoo Chaka Fattah Gabrielle Giffords Al Green Phil Hare Brian Higgins Chris Van Hollen Darlene Hooley Jesse Jackson Paul Kanjorski Carolyn Kilpatrick James Langevin Barbara Lee David Loebsack Tim Mahoney Jim Marshall Betty McCollum Michael McNulty Charles Melancon Harry Mitchell Dennis Moore Christopher Murphy Richard Neal John Olver Bill Pascrell Ed Perlmutter Nick Rahall Laura Richardson Bobby Rush Jan Schakowsky Allyson Schwartz Albio Sires Adam Smith Zachary Space Betty Sutton Mike Thompson Niki Tsongas Diane Watson Anthony Weiner Charles Wilson John Yarmuth

Gary Ackerman Michael Arcuri Tammy Baldwin Howard Berman Sanford Bishop Rick Boucher Bruce Braley Michael Capuano André Carson James Clyburn Jim Costa Henry Cuellar Susan Davis Rosa DeLauro Joe Donnelly Donna Edwards Rahm Emanuel Bob Etheridge Bill Foster Charles Gonzalez Luis Gutierrez Jane Harman Ruben Hinojosa Rush Holt Steny Hoyer Sheila Jackson-Lee Patrick Kennedy Ron Kind Rick Larsen Sander Levin Zoe Lofgren Carolyn Maloney Doris Matsui James McGovern Kendrick Meek George Miller Alan Mollohan James Moran John Murtha James Oberstar Solomon Ortiz Ed Pastor Earl Pomeroy Charles Rangel Mike Ross Tim Ryan Adam Schiff David Scott Ike Skelton Vic Snyder Jackie Speier John Tanner John Tierney Nydia Velazquez Melvin Watt Peter Welch Lynn Woolsey

Thomas Allen Joe Baca Melissa Bean Marion Berry Dan Boren Allen Boyd Corrine Brown Dennis Cardoza Yvette Clarke Steve Cohen Bud Cramer Elijah Cummings Artur Davis Norman Dicks Michael Doyle Keith Ellison Eliot Engel Sam Farr Barney Frank Bart Gordon John Hall Alcee Hastings Mazie Hirono Mike Honda Steve Israel Eddie Johnson Dale Kildee Ron Klein John Larson John Lewis Nita Lowey Edward Markey Carolyn McCarthy Jerry McNerney Gregory Meeks Brad Miller Gwen Moore Patrick Murphy Jerrold Nadler David Obey Frank Pallone Nancy Pelosi David Price Silvestre Reyes Dutch Ruppersberger John Sarbanes Debbie Wasserman Schultz Joe Sestak Louise Slaughter Hilda Solis John Spratt Ellen Tauscher Edolphus Towns Maxine Waters Henry Waxman Robert Wexler David Wu

Republican Representatives who voted Yes

Rodney Alexander Judith Biggert Jo Bonner Charles Boustany Vern Buchanan John Campbell Michael Castle Michael Conaway Tom Davis Vernon Ehlers Mary Fallin Rodney Frelinghuysen Kay Granger Peter Hoekstra Mark Kirk Randy Kuhl Jerry Lewis John McHugh Sue Myrick Jon Porter George Radanovich Thomas Reynolds Ileana Ros-Lehtinen Jean Schmidt Christopher Shays Lamar Smith Tom Tancredo Pat Tiberi James Walsh Jerry Weller Frank Wolf

Spencer Bachus Roy Blunt Mary Bono Kevin Brady Ken Calvert Chris Cannon Howard Coble Ander Crenshaw Charles Dent Jo Ann Emerson Mike Ferguson Jim Gerlach Wally Herger Bob Inglis John Kline Ray LaHood Daniel Lungren Buck McKeon John Peterson Deborah Pryce Jim Ramstad Hal Rogers Paul Ryan Pete Sessions Bill Shuster Mark Souder Lee Terry Fred Upton Zachary Wamp Joe Wilson

J. Gresham Barrett John Boehner John Boozman Henry Brown Dave Camp Eric Cantor Tom Cole Barbara Cubin David Dreier Terry Everett Vito Fossella Wayne Gilchrest David Hobson Peter King Joe Knollenberg Ron Lewis Jim McCrery Gary Miller Chip Pickering Adam Putnam Ralph Regula Mike Rogers Jim Saxton John Shadegg Michael Simpson John Sullivan Mac Thornberry Greg Walden Dave Weldon Heather Wilson

If you read that list carefully, you'll see a name I mentioned before the list - Republican Representative of Ohio, John Boehner. Evidently Representative Boehner developed a taste for fecal matter during the week. What a disgusting display of politics. At this point I'd normally go on a rant talking about how dumb it is to say that our economy is in trouble because people have been borrowing too much money, so we need to tax them more so that they can borrow more money. Or I'd rant about how this is a larger scale equivalent to me cashing out my savings, going to Vegas and blowing it all on craps, and then getting bailed out by the government, despite the fact that I took a really stupid risk. But I'm not going to go into any rants. I just have one question. If you eat a crap sandwich, will you poop whole food?

Never Too Early For A Little Madness

Only 165 days until Selection Sunday! UNC's loaded and Billy Packer's gone - what's not to like?

Blogging

From Despair.com:

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.