Tuesday, July 29, 2014
Numerous sermons are preached on how the congregation is to obey the rulers over them in such a way as to make the task a joy. How come very few admonitions about the rulers leading in such a way as to make obeying them in THOSE LIMITED AREAS OVER WHICH THEY HOLD AUTHORITY a joy?
It was claimed in a sermon that there was a day when ministers were held in higher esteem. There might have also been a day when they were less likely to keep their hands out of the collection plate and off the underaged in the congregation as well. But then again, folks might have just been more brainwashed not to say anything about it as well.
By saying that when voting someone into ecclesiastical office one is obligated to set aside one’s opinions about an individual, aren’t you close to creating an atmosphere where one is saying you are obligated to potentially vote “yes” in regards to an individual that you have an inclination (perhaps even a longing in the spirit to put the matter in parlance the overtly pious will find it difficult to dismiss) is going to possible treat you life digestive effluent and possibly even ruin the lives of your family for years to come?
Pastor Corey Dykstra of Hope Reformed Church in Brampton Ontario in a sermon on the responsibilities of church office insisted that one is not called to preach until that is confirmed by an established ecclesiastical body. So what is to prevent you from engaging in the homiletical act anyway. Furthermore, on what grounds does he then hold to the likes of Calvin being a valid minister he the duly constituted organizational authorities of that day viewed the reformer as has having apostatized from his office?
So frankly, what one is really saying is that if one feels a call to a certain office, occupation, or work and one does not exhibit a sign of an objective disqualifying factor but an external authority refuses to confirm that call, thus prohibiting one from pursuing what it is one has a desire to do, is that God gets a kick out of yanking people’s chains.
One might have to be a member of THE CHURCH to enjoy salvation. However, that doesn’t mean one must belong to a particular organized church. Contrary to many, there is nothing in Scripture forbidding the Christian from going around to different churches. If preachers often claim that the Spirit is leading them elsewhere to different ministries every few years, why do many of these same preachers sermonize as if the average believer’s backside must be superglued to the pew.
Monday, July 28, 2014
The minister did a superb job in pointing out that not as many lost their lives in this tragedy as is commonly believed and the role played by Christians such as Cotton Mather in actually bringing this outrage to an end.
Somewhat disturbing was his contention that the civil magistrate should not allow those of that deviant creed to meet publicly as they do here in America.
It is correct that in the Old Testament that the theonomic covenant commanded that Israel was to drive practitioners of these beliefs from the land to the point of execution if need be.
However, we do not see that approach being taken in the New Testament.
For example, instead of physical force being used to repel these abominations, what we see transpiring in the more Gentile context in which the Apostles operated was apologetic confrontation where the errant beliefs were exposed and the alternative of the Gospel offered.
Furthermore, if the Christian magistrate suppresses conscience in this area deemed offensive, on what grounds do they protest when they find their beliefs being persecuted and oppressed?
by Frederick Meekins
Futurists have estimated that nearly 90% of the knowledge today has been discovered within the past decade. This is especially true of scientifically complex fields such as biology and medicine.
Ethics is the branch of philosophy concerned with determining what is right and wrong. Bioethics attempts to apply these principles to issues relating to matters of life, its quality, and preservation. As such, it is a relatively new field of inquiry coming to prominence since the 1980’s.
As a new discipline, overall bioethics is underdeveloped with Christian involvement scantier than it ought to be. With its frontier flavor however, bioethics is not confined solely to those with doctorates in esoteric subjects. Rather it is a field needing input from a wide variety of backgrounds and perspectives if mankind is to chart a balanced course into what was before now unexplored territory.
For example, many couples unable to have children on their own have turned to a number of fertilization techniques where egg and sperm are brought together outside the body for implantation inside the womb. While the practice has become quite commonplace, it is in fact fraught with a number of ethical dilemmas that need to be addressed by the church.
For starters, the reader will note that nowhere above is it spelled out that the sperm and the egg belong to the husband and the wife of the couple seeking to have a child. Sometimes these are donated --- often bought and sold like farm produce --- from total strangers, undermining the sanctity of the marriage covenant and no doubt unsettling the identity of the child should the offspring ever learn of his true parentage.
Yet of even greater concern in these procedures is when more eggs are fertilized than are needed. Since it can be concluded from Matthew 1:20 that fertilized eggs posses life, quite a dilemma develops over what to do with the leftover embryos.
If these individuals are disposed of, it becomes an act of murder. They can be placed into storage for up to seven years if the couple would like to have an additional baby in the future; but what happens if the couple divorces?
These conundrums and many others just like it are the result of the underlying worldview upon which much of contemporary culture rests. For since the days of the Renaissance, up through the Enlightenment and French Revolution and no doubt accelerated by Darwinism, no longer is God and His Word seen as the ultimate source of moral authority. Rather, the moral focus has switched to human autonomy in either the form of the individual or the state.
In the Book of Genesis, the student of Scripture learns that man is created in the image of God. As such, upholding this ideal preempts individual happiness when personal satisfaction comes into conflict with innocent human life.
Unfortunately, in this day the preservation of innocent human life often takes a backseat to “I want” and “me, me, me”. Such anxiety can drive the longing soul inward to concentrate on one’s own existential despair rather than outward towards those with even greater needs.
For example, a couple unable to have children on their own biologically wanting to have one --- often pressured into it by members of the congregation and clergy thinking they know more about the will of God for other people than the people themselves --- often turn to artificial fertilization these days rather than other ways to satisfy an otherwise humanitarian impulse such as adoption or other charitable pursuits.
Likewise, at the other end of the continuum of selfishness are those that, rather than coveting life so much that they would dishonor it by an illegitimate attempt to grasp at and possess it on their own terms rather than through God’s providence, that view life needing care beyond the ordinary in order to be maintained such as that at the beginning or end of temporal existence as an inconvenience to be done away with as soon as possible.
Those holding to the Biblical position of respecting the image of God within each individual irrespective of the physical frame’s condition would do what was within their power to defend the young under their responsibility and lend comfort to those passing out of this life on God’s timetable rather than according to some arbitrary definition of quality.
Furthermore, if those in their declining years were treated as human beings created in the image of God rather than as beasts of burden that have outlived their usefulness, senior saints might enjoy a better quality of life irrespective of their bodily circumstances.
By Frederick Meekins
Friday, July 25, 2014
How was this victim suppose to know if this wasn't a ploy to gain his sympathies and then turn around and do him in.
She apparently wasn't so incapacitated by her reproductive indiscretions as to prevent her from going a looting.
Click On The Headline
ESPN correspondent Dan Graziano insists “Dungy’s Comments Better Left Unsaid”. The headline is a reference to Dungy’s admission that he would not have drafted Michael Sam because of that player’s propensity to flaunt his sexuality to advance his career. So why aren’t Graziano’s comments regarding Dungy better off left unsaid? Why is it that tolerance and acceptance are to be bestowed only upon those that embrace the prevailing moral decline?
Sarcastically I joked that eventually Coast Guard or Naval transports would probably ferry the border violators across.
It now seems that the Obama Administration may go above and beyond that level of accommodative outrageousness.
According to the New York Times, a proposal is being considered to transport young Hondurans 21 years of age and younger directly into the United States.
This is so they can avoid the journey through Mexico.
Instead, their energies can be reserved for carousing, looting, and other generalized forms of criminality once they reach not only the shores of the United States but apparently now the innermost destinations of the country as well.
Given that most Americans graduate around 18 years of age and can enlist in the military or qualify for most forms of employment at that age as well, it seems a sizable percentage of these trespassers aren’t the tiny helpless children the American people have been duped to believe.
By Frederick Meekins
The cover story of the 7/25/2014 of the Baltimore Jewish Times is titled “Welcome The Stranger: Many in the Jewish Community along the Mexican border take a humanitarian stand”. And how long will that sentiment stand with a significant percentage of the new arrivals named “Jesus” and “Mary”?
Thursday, July 24, 2014
This is being proposed in the name of obesity prevention.
So what happens when the human beings disobey the robot?
If these robots are government owned and subsidized, what is to prevent the robot from cataloging for your intelligence agency file everything you say and do.
What if in in a fit of anger you say something uncouth about protected government minorities?
What if the little woman is aroused to carnal relations in a politically incorrect manner?
Click ON The Headline
Wednesday, July 23, 2014
In defense of a strident understanding of predestinarian soteriology, a meme has been posted on social media pointing out that a sheep cannot become a goat and a goat cannot become a sheep because they are born that way. If this holds true, what is the point of discussing religion whatsoever other than to preen about like a peacock strutting one’s theological erudition and ecclesiastical finery? For with the exception of the Transhumanists, no one goes around advocating why one ought to alter one’s inherent ontology. Of course, you will find those mesmerized by their own doctrinal navals that parrot that God predestinates the means as well as the ends. Those holding that one is bestowed a degree of choice in determining one eternal destiny are often accused of idolatry. However, if the Calvinist hegemony holds true, isn’t the retort against free will itself an even greater act of idolatry? For its basic assumption, if clerics holding to it are going to continue to berate their co-religionists on the grounds of insufficient evangelistic zeal, that God’s sovereign choice can somehow be thwarted by His minions failing or refusing to implement it.
Italian multinational corporation Beretta is being applauded for its principled defense of the Second Amendment by planning to move it operations from Maryland because of that state’s firearms restrictions. Do they also plan to withdraw from Italy as well in opposition to characteristically strict European gun control laws or are we obligated to ignore rank hypocrisy?
President Obama has confessed to not watching the news. Will this revelation be mocked as evidence as diminished intellectual capacity as it was in the case of President George W. Bush? Or will this revelation be celebrated as proof as to how enlightened and advanced Obama is beyond we mere mundane human beings?
Tuesday, July 22, 2014
Technically, if this is taking advantage of a loophole or provision of of the legal code, is it really un-American?
To many of this perspective, the issue is not so much about exhibiting a love of country as it is about statists wanting to bleed victims dry financially like a vampire with a tapeworm.
For example, golfer Phil Mickelson was about condemned for treason for hinting that he was considering a move from California to Florida in part for tax reasons.
And mind you, that geographic change would have been within the boundaries of the United States.
In a constitutional republic, it is not the business of the centralized authorities as to why an individual decides to move within the system to localities more in accord with that individual's philosophical vision.
Would these same leftwing centralizers have been outraged if Mickelson announced if he was moving from a jurisdiction opposed to gay marriage to one more accepting of that particular lifestyle arrangement?
Multiculturalists and tolerancemongers enjoy nothing more than to look down their noses and snap how out of sync what the United States is doing from that of the rest of the world.
Interesting how one seldom hears of the benefits that might result should America decide to lower tax rates on both individuals and corporations alike.
By Frederick Meekins
As a publicity stunt, Jorge Ramos of Univision swam across the Rio Grand. On the O'Reilly Factor, this propagandist remarked upon that body of water's contamination and dangerous currents. I guess we are obligated to now provide Coast Guard or Naval transports to ferry the border violators across.
Monday, July 21, 2014
Regarding pub crawl permits. I don't drink or bar hop. But how can a government impose permit requirements if one person invites 2 people to a bar, these people invite two more, etc etc until a swarm forms? So long as they are within their legal occupancy limits, are these establishments then suppose to turn away paying boozers?
Friday, July 18, 2014
Scripture says that greater love hath no man than to lay down his life for his brother or friend. So will the pro-gay crowd denouncing Biblical morality condemn Archie for not keeping his morality to himself in taking a bullet for a friend practicing that particular alternative lifestyle?
Thursday, July 17, 2014
The Pope has admonished that nations should be more welcoming of the immigrants flooding over their borders. So does that mean tourists should be allowed to storm the papal apartments and gorge themselves upon whatever treats might be in the private papal pantry? Can whoever wants to without prior approval take a leak in the Vatican bathroom with the nudie paintings on the wall?
In discussing how he would have ended the “Life With Archie” series in which the eponymous protagonist is murdered, home school activist Kevin Swanson announced he would have instead had Archie arrest the gay character and banish the reprobate from the town. So if this is the idealized jurisprudence of the Christian Reconstructionist, what is to prevent rumors of carnal transgression from being concocted in the attempt to seize the property of business rivals or from those that simply have a nicer place than yours?
It has been announced that Archie will lose his life in defense of a homosexual acquaintance. Not getting as nearly as much press is that the gay character is a senator campaigning for increased gun control. So if Archie had been allowed to retain and exercise his Second Amendment rights, this comic hero might have been able to foil the assassination attempt without having to sacrifice his own life. Hopefully, conservatives will make as much fuss over how such narratives paint as an ideal the willingly giving up our own lives for elites thinking that they know how to run our lives better than we do.
Wednesday, July 16, 2014
According to the 7/23/14 Christian Century review of the book “Slow Church: Cultivating Community In The Patient Way Of Jesus”, these authors contend that the individual should stay in only one church.
This is because, “Every time we move from one church to another, we lose a little bit of our patience for all things religious.”
But what if the church is so small that the less desirable regions of the Afterlife will cover over with glaciers before the average person will be able to participate through means of other emptying pockets into the collection plate?
But more importantly, this perspective could easily lead to the fostering of an atmosphere where the victims (oh, I mean members and attenders of the congregation) will put up with increasingly shocking forms of abuse and levels of generalized mistreatment for fear of endangering their immortal souls.
Even if that is not what the authors originally intended, that is most likely what will result in a world characterized by Jonestown, Waco, and the epidemic of sex scandals blackening the eyes of both the Roman Catholic and Protestant branches of Christendom.
According to the authors of a manifesto on the Slow Church Movement, one is to remain in the same church more or less no matter what.
The authors clearly look like Emergent Church beatniks.
One of them is even a Quaker.
That means he does not view doctrine formulated upon the foundation of His unchanging word as the primary way that God conveys His intentions to mankind.
Rather, we are to fumble about being leading by what is assumed to be the Holy Spirit.
But with that given a higher status than the Bible, we don’t really have any proof that the message we are receiving is from the indwelling presence of the Triune Godhead or rather from demonic entities kicked out of the gates of Heaven.
In the end, this Slow Church mindset will no doubt be used to denigrate the character of those that get up and walk out once the gay weddings or the wife swappings commence and be used to applaud as spiritually awakened those willing to go along with such abhorrent practices.
by Frederick Meekins
One of the principles of the Slow Church Movement holds that the individual should remain in the same church. So will ministry positions and opportunities go to the people that have remained at a church for ages? Or will this be more like the typical workplace where the gloryhounds swoop in when something opens up with the old timers overlooked because they aren’t the right demographic (meaning they are the wrong color or the plumbing hooked up incorrectly) with the excuse being that those at the bottom need to remain where they are (meaning there needs to be somebody to be stepped on).
Overly enthusiastic activists vandalized a Westminster MD Army Reserve Facility intending to detain illegal migrants by spray painting on the structure “No Illegals Here. No Undocumented Democrats”. Police are investigating the incident as a hate crime. But why should the perpetrators receive a harsher sentence than if someone had painted “Welcome conquerors!” Furthermore, why is this act a more profound transgression of the law than the border violation that sparks this response. Shouldn’t this expression be celebrated as protest art? These ne’er-do-wells have caused less property damage than the Occupy Movement.
Tuesday, July 15, 2014
Often, the pamphlet contains interesting information regarding the state's geography and natural resources.
Some of the content, however, is outright environmental propaganda.
For example, there is one activity consisting of a maze titled “Scoop The Poop”.
The text admonishes that, by scooping the poop of the 1.3 million dogs estimated to reside in the state, residents of the New Order are playing their role in removing harmful nutrients and bacteria from entering local waterways.
While picking up after Fido might make things more healthy and pleasant for human beings, such an activity can't possibly do as much to restore the Chesapeake as this dinky tractate leads one to believe..
A proverbial aphorism questions “Does a bear take a you-know-what in the woods?”
The title of a book boldly proclaims “Everybody Poops”.
Are these activists going to insist that the digestive effluent of these particular creatures is appreciably different than what is grunted out of the backside of the average household canine?
Unlike most dogs, fish living in the bay just let it rip right there in the bay.
Some of these animals, not unlike many a Redneck, probably consider roadkill fine dining.
One of the goals of bay restoration is to increase the number of animal species depleted by man (especially Whites aspiring to live a lifestyle above that of prancing through the woods 3/4's naked in a loin cloth procuring whatever nuts and berries one can happen to scrounge).
But if increasing the number of animals that live in, around, and above the Bay also increases the amount of #1 and #2 flowing into these sacred waters, then why doesn't it become our obligation to exterminate these creatures as quickly and as thoroughly as possible?
By Frederick Meekins
In a podcast condemning American Evangelicals reluctant to ship their progeny to the foreign mission fields, it was suggested that Westerners were guilty of greed while the noble savages (these days referred to as indigenous populations) were not guilty of such. I guess that’s why they’ll sell their kids for a pair of blue jeans and hack each others hands off in the attempt to gain control of diamond mines.
Interesting. Some of the same radical homeschoolers indoctrinating that young women should be denied the opportunity to attend college are now suggesting that your Christianity is second rate or less than acceptable if you don’t ship the youngins off to some Third World sewer pipe.
In addressing the theology of hunting in “Rise, Kill & Eat” by Doug Giles, too bad theologian and apologist Kevin Boling did not ask the author why it is necessary for Americans to travel to Africa to kill animals. If you are rich enough to travel to Africa, you have more than enough money to procure food and clothing from other sources.
Monday, July 14, 2014
Mind you, I am only wording that headline in a way that would be approved by both the Obama and future Bush administrations Click On The Headline
It is being claimed that 33% of the migrant children swarming over the border are being sexually assaulted. Given this tragedy occurs on the Mexican side of the border, why is that the responsibility of we Gringos? Doesn’t such a tragedy speak more to the flaws inherent to Third World cultures?
A Washington Post profile of a Honduran woman here illegally attempting to smuggle her offspring into the United States as well asks what’s so wrong with those coming here simply wanting a better life for themselves and their children. Given that he’s such a big fan of amnesty, according to this kind of logic why should squatters in one of Bill Gates’ many spare rooms be evicted?
Friday, July 11, 2014
On a Gay Pride Whooper advertisement, a child exclaims that we are all the same on the inside. If that is the case being uplifted as the most important truth, why are these preferences even being mentioned and everyone conditioned into accepting this particular lifestyle. You don’t see Dairy Queen going out of its way to market to men that like a little more bounce to the ounce in that department.
In a Dallas Theological Seminary podcast regarding the phenomena of Emerging Adulthood and Extended Adolescence, it was remarked that, in 1960, 70% of the population had achieved what are considered milestones of adulthood such as marriage and procreation by the age of 30. Today, however, only about 40% of the population achieved these by the age of 30. Given the epidemic of divorce, the unhappy marriages that lead to the dissolving of what ought to be a lifelong bond, and the resultant social upheaval that has transpired since 1960, that isn’t exactly a good track record of why it is advisable to push the young into situations they might be entering more out of social pressure and conformity rather than as something they actually sincerely desire.
It use to be that the name “Dallas Theological Seminary” was akin to a Good Housekeeping Seal Of Approval” in conservative Evangelical Protestant circles.
Upon hearing that name, it was pretty safe to assume that what you were subjecting yourself to was sound theological teaching.
However, as in the case of the Good Housekeeping Seal Of Approval, it seems this once great name in theological erudition and learning can also be bought for a price in an era of declining standards and quality.
One comment in a podcast about the phenomena of Emerging Adulthood produced by that particular institution ought to send chills down the spines of the discerning.
One of the speakers in the discussion remarked that parents ARE NOT to think of themselves as the primary disciplers of their children regarding the Christian faith.
Instead, that is an area over which the parents are to yield to the authority of the Church.
Frankly, I doubt that is a concession even the most sincerely devout of Roman Catholics are willing to make to Vatican hierarchs.
So just how much control over what is taught in the home in regards to doctrine and practice in regards to secondary issues are the parents suppose to surrender to the pastor and his underlings?
Ideally, the parents are to be the primary teachers of the faith to their offspring.
The church is there as a source a general teaching and consultation should the family face an issue over which they do not feel equipped to address.
This mindset where the parents are looked to as glorified innkeepers and hotel bellhops with the real task of character formation left to credential and positioned experts has worked out splendidly in terms of the public education system.
Why should we assume it will work out any better in the confines of the Church.
By Frederick Meekins
A Dallas Theological Seminary podcast tackled the issue of Emerging Adulthood.
That is the phenomena where many youth do not assume all of the responsibilities of adulthood all at once but rather over a span of time that can extend into the 30’s.
In reflecting, one of the seminarians remarked how in his own life as soon as graduating from Biola he set out straight to Texas to embark on his ministry.
Essential to his own success were regular checks from his church COMMUNITY.
Instead of simply offering a statement of gratitude, the seminarian went on to lament how this practice was no longer usually the case.
Why should it be?
Most people are struggling financially on their own to keep their heads above water.
On what grounds are those that are in jobs or occupations that they might not care for obligated to turn hard-earned money over to an Evangelical Christian equivalent of a shiftless beatnik meandering about trying to “find themselves” or are unwilling to lift a finger on their own until landing in their dream job?
Shouldn’t church money or money from church people instead go to those enduring ACTUAL hardships?
By Frederick Meekins
Thursday, July 10, 2014
Such humor is an attempt to ridicule the practice where pastors and evangelists encourage those under conviction to come forward so that they might invite Jesus into their hearts for forgiveness and salvation if they are not exactly how to commence this journey towards a beatific eternity.
Granted, such tactics might prompt an insincere or misunderstanding person to rush forward thinking the profundities being approached are formulaic.
However, what those spreading this missiological propaganda fail to reveal is that they don't really want you making a decision irrespective of the venue.
If they had their way and preached sermons consistent with their soteriology, you'd remain neutral with your fingers crossed (unless they make a fuss about that gesture also somehow being pagan in origin) with the mystery resolved of whether you'll awaken after death in Heaven or Hell only after you arrive in one of these two regions of the Afterlife.
It is claimed that this ritual urging the penitent to march forward to receive Christ is not in the Bible.
But neither are many other traditions that these hardline Biblicists of a Calvinistic persuasion insist upon retaining.
For example, it should be pointed out to those holding to this variety of predestinarianism from a Presbyterian or Anglican perspective that there is nothing about infant baptism providing salvatory protection for a baby.
It might be a beautiful symbol of welcoming a child into the covenant community.
But if you, dear Christian, are relying on that liturgical act to protect your precious little one from the fires of Hell throughout a lifetime and do nothing more to introduce that child to Christ as the Savior they must claim for themselves, spiritually you have doused your child in gasoline and edged them to the brink of those unquenchable flames.
Next, there is really not a thing in the Bible about formalized membership in one particular church organization.
At most, the Scripture speaks of one church in a particular town.
So if we are going to be such a stickler on detail, if your church is not the oldest congregation in town, are you guilty of being a schismatic?
Interestingly, those looking down their noses at those congregations that make use of altar calls as part of their order of service certainly don't mind going out of their way to whack me over the head about not “belonging” to a particular congregation even though I go to church most weeks out of the year, listen to sermons and conservative talk radio at least four hours per day, and nearly every day post conservative and/or Christian content to the Internet.
The Bible provides the basic rules by which the Creator expects us to abide if we are to please Him and for us to receive His blessing even if that reward is not granted this side of eternity.
However, one truth that each of us often struggles with is that the specifics in which those absolutes are implemented on the practical level might not be as clearly spelled out.
By Frederick Meekins
If these foreigners swarming here are so multilingual, how come at a local hospital there are signs in MULTIPLE languages (some of them in heathen chicken scratch) how it is a patient’s RIGHT to have access to health services in their own tongue. How about a right to doctor’s that don’t sound like they are working the drive in window PA system down at the fast food place?
Wednesday, July 09, 2014
Tuesday, July 08, 2014
Monday, July 07, 2014
In a Newsmax radio commercial listing a number of potential 2016 Republican presidential contenders, Ben Carson was addressed with the “doctor” title but Rand Paul, who is just as much a medical doctor as Carson, was not. Is the Kentucky Senator not Black enough to be fawned over in such a fashion?
Contrary to what these pastors harped, no one is going to be moved to see the Transformers movie because of the father/daughter relationship of the characters. Viewers are going to see Optimus Prime ride a Dinobot.
Click On The Headline
Thursday, July 03, 2014
Will Matt Lauer Still Refuse To Use The Term "Illegal" When These Migrants Crash The Wages Of Aging Has-Been Anchors?
So of if there is to be a gay pride Whopper that celebrates slipping the thick meat between the buns, will there be a heterosexual marketing campaign for those that like to wiggle their chicken tender around in the dipping sauce container?
Click On The Headline
Wednesday, July 02, 2014
Fascinating how these ministries that condemn education anywhere but in the home and the concept of youth groups altogether rather than just those administered in a liquefied kidney expellant impoverishment manner rank among the first to condemn and ridicule those not married by the time they are 22.
Referencing congressional Republicans outraged at the President’s threats to bypass the process of authorizing legislation, Obama flippantly responded “So sue me.” However, given his contempt and disregard for constitutional procedure and systematics, would the Chief Executive abide by a judicial ruling rendered against him in regards to these matters?
In addressing the issue of church leadership, homeschool activist Kevin Swanson rhetorically inquired in his 7/1/2004 podcast if female bloggers are running the church. Technically, unless the blogger is on the church payroll or holding a formalized position within the ministry, how can she be accused of leading the church? The only way that can occur is if the pastor is negligent somehow in the execution of his ministerial duties in terms of either being too lenient or in a growing number of instances perhaps even too strident. As someone in the congregation as either a member or frequent attender, anyone (either male or female) can use the technology available to them to speak out as to what is transpiring in the public ceremonies, liturgy, or doctrinal teaching taking place within the assembly. To say otherwise is to introduce a procedural gnosticism leading to the festering of a cultic atmosphere potentially leading to the harm of both soul and body. And if you are going to be that secretive, don’t go complaining about how the Mormons and the Masons run things so secretively.
Tuesday, July 01, 2014
In an appearance at Socrates In The City, Fox News personality Bob Beckel denounced the lack of opportunity in America’s cities because of corporations that head south where, in his words, Rednecks decide to work for $4.00 per hour. Would he rather these Rednecks become more like their ablebodied shiftless urban counterparts that surrender completely to lives of government dependence during what ought to be their productive years?
In an interview at Socrates In The City, pundit Bob Beckel snidely quipped that Newt Gingrich is likely the only person to have never had an unspoken thought. But at least those that the former Speaker of The House verbalizes on national television are usually coherent. That is more than can be said of those regularly spewing forth from Beckel.
Monday, June 30, 2014
In analyzing the gluten-free fad, homeschool activist Kevin Swanson poked fun at those that cut out gluten without even understanding what gluten is or conducting extensive research tests to determine whether or not they might have a biological sensitivity to the substance. Does he intend to make similar observations of what goes on in assorted churches across the varying swaths of Christendom? Don’t just as many sitting out in the pews simply go along with a particular theological application because they have been told to do so by someone in the pulpit without coming to these conclusions on their own through their individual process of ratiocination? In a podcast just the other day, this same minister attempted to work listeners into a panic not to let their children go to the library over a pro-homosexual book that might be on the shelves even though a good library offers works on a wide array of topics from a variety of perspectives. Wouldn’t the wiser, more responsible counsel have simply been to urge parents to exercise caution and discernment rather than to impose a blanket prohibition for those that want to be considered upstanding homeschool families?
Hillary Clinton remarked that, as laboratories of democracy, states should be able to decide the legalization of recreational drugs on their own. Does she intend to make a similar policy pronouncement regarding gay marriage and decry the federal judicial intervention jamming this unnatural cohabitational arrangement down the throats of jurisdictions not wanting to approve it?
On an episode of Issues Etc defending marriage, it was said that there is nothing wrong in getting married and not going to college or getting a big important job beforehand. Shouldn’t it have also been emphasized that, if that is the path you decide to take, be prepared to paddle it yourself and not expect everyone else to float your boat financially. Not my kids, not my financial duty no matter how allegedly large my apparently invisible pile of single person money.
In reaction to the President’s continued admission that under his regime that utility rates would necessarily skyrocket, a liberal pundit on Fox News declared to Neil Cavuto that Americans do not have a right to inexpensive electricity. Maybe not. Then why do they supposedly have a right to FREE contraceptives and same sex couples the benefits of marriage? In a technological world, access to power is a more basic need than those other luxuries.
Saturday, June 28, 2014
Friday, June 27, 2014
Radical homeschooler Kevin Swanson said that, because public libraries stock books sympathetic to the homosexual agenda, he likely will not allow his children to visit such facilities. So given the increasing number of pastors that can’t seem to keep their hands off minors below the age of consent, does that mean Christians should stop attending church?
Thursday, June 26, 2014
Click On The Headline
If you are going to bore someone a new one if they say they accepted Christ as Lord and Savior instead of expressing the verbal formulation in an approved predestinarian manner, don’t pitch a fit or staid there dumbfounded when hardly anyone comes back to your church.
Wednesday, June 25, 2014
A toddler exposed that the robbers of one Milwaukee home were not Black as originally told to police but rather White, leading to the eventual apprehension the babysitter and her boyfriend. In an attempt to curry favor with tolerancemongers, one social critic posted, “I doubt this story will be talked about on conservative talk radio.” Is there a reason why it should be? And I guess it is also George Bush’s fault that the residence was robbed to begin with. Is every other home invasion and robbery that takes place in the United States worthy of attention in areas beyond that in which the crime took place? This event will probably get more attention on Conservative talk radio than accurate accounts of the knockout game primarily as a phenomena where Trayvonite Blacks deliberately seek out White victims upon which to inflict significant cranial injury or stories of activist minorities fabricating attacks by Caucasian marauders will in the mainstream press. There, this might not be talk radio, but now it cannot be said that this story was not at least mentioned in conservative social media. But since it does not promote the “Whites are terrible; aren’t Blacks mistreated” mentality, I guess it does not count.
In a Youtube video on introductory Lutheranism, the viewer was assured that Martin Luther was no saint. Foremost among the flaws listed was nothing more than that he irritated people. But is that necessarily a flaw in itself without context or elaboration? Did not Christ, the sinless Lamb of God, so irritate people that He was crucified in part because of that character trait?
Tuesday, June 24, 2014
That famous catchphrase is itself non-scientific at best and pseudoscientific at worst.
Even if one grants that the universe is billions and billions of years old (to employ rhetoric of nearly that many parodies of Sagan), on what grounds can one state such an absolute conclusion from the basis of observational science?
For example, in the worldview espoused by Cosmos, it is held that the cosmos began at the moment of the Big Bang.
Thus, if one cannot peek back beyond that point, on what grounds apart from a faith as deeply held by the most adamant of theist does one conjecture that something else did not exist to bring the something into existence?
One can make the case of the cosmos being all there is all one wants.
But if the triumvirate of space, time and matter is all you are going to appeal to, on what grounds do you lodge a complaint should those not wanting such a gospel of nihilistic hopelessness to infect the minds of their children want to blow your brains out?
The last segment of Sagan's trademark mantra dogmatically asserted that the cosmos is all that will ever be.
If we are to exist in an epistemological framework where nothing is certain and there is no purposeful supreme intelligence superintending so that everything continues on a routine path, how do we know some manner of quantum cascade won't take place tonight where one subatomic particle is so knocked off course that all of reality disintegrates back into nothingness?
For did not even the great skeptics such as David Hume concede that, just because the sun rose from time immemorial, that was no guarantee that it would do so tomorrow?
Interestingly, the proponents of the Cosmos invocation might insist that they are providing viewers insight into whatever was or ever will be.
However, what these propagandists are conveniently leaving out are those aspects of the totality they happen to disagree with or cannot flippantly gloss over.
For example, in the premiere episode, an inordinate amount of time was spent badmouthing the adherents of a supposedly non-existent God in the case of Giodarno Bruno who was persecuted for believing that an infinite God could have created additional inhabited planets.
If nothing is to be concealed in the name of approaching a comprehension of the universe as it is rather than how we would like it to be, at any point in this documentary's presentation did Neil deGrasse Tyson --- himself an avowed atheistic humanist --- give an as lengthy presentation about the liberties infringed and abridged by assorted forms of atheism such as Communism in the attempt to maintain a stranglehold on power by preventing the dissemination of not only competing perspectives but as well as facts deemed inconvenient to adherents of that particular ideology?
Thus, if the hallmark of what distinguishes the modern era as supposedly superior to that of the medieval is that by the definition of these terms that we know better and are more enlightened, doesn't that make the atrocities of Communism far greater having been committed by the self-professed adherents of science?
In another episode, Tyson became emotionally discombobulated that if we as a species did not repent of our carbon combusting, global warming ways, we could very well cease to exist.
However, once again, if the only thing that exists is the material totality of the universe and there is no noncontingent intelligence or personality sustaining these complex systems, who is to say existence is superior to nonexistence?
Science writer George Johnson suggested that the tendency to view the universe as designed is an evolutionary holdover that humanity ought to progress beyond.
Then why not this desire for continued existence beyond that of our immediate selves?
For is this for the most part a trait and bias of the human plague infesting the planet?
Swarms of grass hoppers defoliating an area don't reflect if there will be enough to go around decades down the road.
One truism is that any resident of this realm will be subject to some kind of ultimate authority.
One can either settle for that of other flawed human beings that will in the end lead to disappointment and eventually destruction.
Or, one can look to God as the foundation and utilize a number of the tools that He provides such as His word foremostly followed by reason contemplating upon principles derived from that revelation and their operation through the handiwork of His creation.
By Frederick Meekins
If the statement is an accurate reflection of his beliefs, perhaps he would care to comment on and condemn photos of his sons where they are not only beardless but quaffed with blond highlights.
Seems that would be a greater indicator of effeminacy than men with appreciation for poodles and felines.
Click On The Headline
According to the British Telegraph, a Greenpeace honcho flies 250 miles during his commute to work. Yet this is an environmental wacko front group that has denounced the growth of aviation as a contributor to climate change. So, in other words, you are to set on your backside at home flagellating yourself over the privilege of using a flush toilet as commanded by these global elites enjoying lives of luxury.
Jack Bauer tossing that sandheathen-sympathizing terrorist crone out of the high rise window had to be one of the greatest moments in TV history. I must have cracked up for two minutes. None of those idiotic platitudes about it never be acceptable to lay hands on a woman coming from him.
It seems the incident of a disfigured toddler asked to leave a Kentucky Fried Chicken may be fraudulent. Will as many be a quick to posture and grandstand on Facebook against this deception as they were to applaud themselves regarding their own over-inflated sense of tolerance, acceptance, and inclusion?
Monday, June 23, 2014
So if he was mangled by an improvised explosive device filled with shrapnel or his children vaporized in the World Trade Center Attack, would he still be strumming such a blame the victim tune?
Click On The Headline
In rebuking lack of attendance at prayer meeting as evidence of an individual not dedicating satisfactory time to prayer, isn't that saying that the appearance of prayer is more important than the substance? Unlike Sunday morning service, there is no indication that attendance at a midweek service is a Scriptural mandate.
And what about those that feel closer to God in the Cathedral of Nature than in a setting not that appreciably different than a police interrogation where those in attendance are expected to spill their guts in such a sordid and scandalous manner that the men and women need to be cordoned off from one another during the ritual?
Friday, June 20, 2014
As a police officer, Bruce Abramksi was allowed a discount on a firearm that his uncle is reported to have wanted.
As upstanding citizens, Bruce and his uncle facilitated the transaction through a licensed firearms dealer.
All of the involved parties were legally permitted to handle the weapon in question.
Enemies of the Second Amendment herald this ruling where it is illegal to acquire a firearm without disclosing the intent to resell the defensive implement in question as some manner of criminal fraud.
It is argued that this measure will save lives and keep guns out of the hands of criminals.
But, as in the case of many other firearms regulations, this law and now judicial precedent won't save a single person.
For if Abramski's intentions were nefarious, would he have bothered to get a licensed firearms dealer involved?
Abramski's great sin was in thinking that the system could be used in such a way as to benefit the individual rather than to crush the person's spirit under the bureaucracy's ever-tightening grip.
The government is probably more concerned and outraged that Abramski might have ended up with $400 in his pocket without the Beast being rendered its sacrificial oblation.
If the government has concocted yet another excuse to interfere in the otherwise legal transactions of those residing within its borders who do not disclose an ancillary economic intent, could one someday end up going to jail should someone employed at a retailer purchase an item on behalf of a family member through an employee discount program?
Today this mentality elevates profit and trade to the status of a moral evil considered in certain ways worse than outright violence.
What is to prevent these out of control agencies from demanding similar revelations regarding internal motivations regarding porcelain dolls and vintage knickknacks purchased at estate sales for resale on Ebay?
By Frederick Meekins