Photo by Frederick Meekins
Wednesday, May 04, 2016
Tuesday, May 03, 2016
Monday, May 02, 2016
Sunday, May 01, 2016
Saturday, April 30, 2016
Friday, April 29, 2016
Wednesday, April 27, 2016
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
Monday, April 25, 2016
Students Punished For Singing National Anthem At Ground Zero Prove Extent To Which Jihadists Have Conquered America
Sunday, April 24, 2016
Saturday, April 23, 2016
Friday, April 22, 2016
Thursday, April 21, 2016
Wednesday, April 20, 2016
Tuesday, April 19, 2016
Monday, April 18, 2016
It is being asked would it be appropriate for Melanie Trump to be First Lady despite her past of questionable photo spreads in which she appeared particularly immodest. While worthy of criticism, seems this is less offensive than the depravity alleged to take place at Bohemian Grove, John Kennedy defiling staff members in the White House pool, or Bill Clinton getting a blow job from underneath the desk in the Oval Office. Apparently these kinds of acts don't disqualify an individual from a position of high honor but whether or not polaroids commemorating such instances apparently do.
Hillary Clinton insists that, instead of building walls, the nation needs to tear down barriers. Should she be elected, will a priority of her administration be the elimination of the assorted barriers and traffic obstructions erected throughout Washington, DC in the name of the pervasive national security state?
The same filthy beatniks jacked out of shape over Donald Trump tweeting a Mussolini quotation probably regularly peruse Mao's Little Red Book while wearing their cruddy Che t-shirts.
If Donald Trump is expected to repudiate the endorsement of controversialist of David Duke, is Bernie Sanders expected to repudiate himself for being an avowed socialist? Did President Obama repudiate the endorsement he received from the Communist Party, USA?
In a podcast rant posted at SermonAudio, Jason Cooley insisted that Internet ministry does not count as a church. Given that his is a ministry that claims it holds to no position that cannot be backed up by the warrant of divine revelation, from what passage is this prohibition derives? If the Cooleyites want to contend that the only valid churches are those operating from the sanction of historically authorized churches to the extent that any good works done as a result of unauthorized Internet will be burned up on the Day of Judgment like hay and stubble, does Pastor Cooley intend to bring his church and ministry under the direct control of the Vatican?
In his condemnation of Internet ministries, Pastor Jason Cooley in a SermonAudio podcast (itself an Internet ministry) insisted that, if you as a mere pewfilling Christian have a question or a problem, you are obligated to seek the answers from sanctioned Christian authorities rather than dare to research the concern on your own over the Internet. Don't the acolytes of the Watchtower (the weirdos that just happen to know to knock on the door Saturday mornings when you are either sitting on the can or romping in the sack with your spouse) make nearly the same threat to those ensnared by that particular variety of spiritual deception? And who is one to turn to if the power structure of your particular church is what is giving you troubles or raising your doubts? Wouldn't that particular chain of command be insufficiently removed from the situation in order to render impartial counsel?
The podcast Standing For The Truth posted an episode pondering the role played by sports in the life of the believer. In Wisconsin from where the program originates, it was noted that, on the days of Green Bay Packer games, churches offering two services would have a higher attendance at the earlier. So long as folks showed up that week, does it really matter at what time they attended?
The Pentagon insists that parents and schools must cut junk food so that the armed services can muster a sufficient number of recruits. And what if parents refuse to comply? The American people don't breed children for the greater glory of the Fatherland.
Mitt Romney emphasized that Donald Trump did not build his own business but instead inherited his fortune. That's what we call an example of the dye job calling the toupee black.
House Speaker Paul Ryan forcefully condemned the supposed endorsement of Donald Trump by alleged White supremacists such as David Duke. Was the Speaker as emphatic in his repudiation of past remarks by Jeb Bush insisting that the wanton violation of America's borders was an act of love and that the racially mixed are superior to those whose parents procreated with those of their own breed.
A pastor remarked that accumulating facts about the Bible is not learning. He insisted that one can only learn by doing. Does that mean one cannot learn about what the Israelites endured to take the Holy Land from the indigenous pagans unless one goes out and kills a few?
The cover story of an issue of the Nation magazine boldly warns “Donald Trump Is Dangerous”. And Barack Obama was not in his threats to fundamentally transform America? At least Trump wants to make America great again and not essentially destroy everything that we know and love. Was this propaganda outlet as blunt and forthright in regards to the Occupy Movement and Black Lives Matter? As shocking as some of Donald Trumps outbursts are, I don't believe that there have been reports of Trump supporters defecating on the sides of police cruisers or (perhaps even more interesting) looting the same wig shop on multiple occasions.
A number of celebrities are threatening to leave if Donald Trump is elected. But isn't that an incentive to actually vote for the mouthy mogul?
Cogitating upon what might transpire if Trump is denied the Republican nomination at a brokered convention, Clinton flak Paul Begala fretted on CNN that violence might erupt. For unlike Democrats, these activists are supposedly armed. And what about in cities such as Baltimore, Oakland, or Ferguson that are Democratic strongholds were welfare leeches and their subversive handlers rampaged in the streets and laid waste to private property in the path of looting mobs?
Father Jonathan Morris in a Fox News interview remarked how he thinks churches are better off without armed security. Does this Roman Catholic intend to call upon the Pope to disband the Swiss Guard (often toting submachine guns) as a display of the Pontiff's reliance upon divine protection?
According to an article titled “Biobots, Roll Out” published in the April 2016 issue of Discover Magazine, scientists are attaching an assortment of wires and WiFi receptors to insects such as moths and roaches for the purposes of controlling these creatures for an assortment of surveillance and intelligence missions. Perhaps an even more important question to ask is what to prevent this from being done to human beings?
In his condemnation of Internet ministry, Pastor Jason Cooley insisted that such efforts are undertaken from the perspective of despising the local church. Maybe so in certain cases. But can't it also be done to protect the flock from those imposing their own idiosyncrasies on others as if such preferences were revealed doctrine?
In a SermonAudio podcast, Pastor Jason Cooley categorized the universal invisible church as a dangerous heresy. For apparently the believer is much more edified and protected by being conditioned to believe that the only acceptable Christians free from error in the eyes of God are a minuscule percentage of Baptists and that, no matter how bad a particular congregation one might find oneself trapped in in terms of belittlement or even abuse, one ought not want to escape for fear of being cast out into uttermost darkness.
In his condemnation of the concept of the universal invisible church, Pastor Jason Cooley insisted that the doctrine was Catholic and Protestant but not Baptist. As someone that positions himself in the camp of Sola Scriptura, shouldn't he instead concern himself as to whether or not a doctrine is instead Biblical or Christian? For the Baptist church is nowhere explicitly referenced by name in the pages of divine revelation just as in the case of that form of ecclesiology's Protestant or Catholic counterparts.
In expounding on the superiority of the physicalized church over the universal invisible church as manifested in the form of Internet ministries, Pastor Jason Cooley insisted that, unlike Internet ministries which are accountable to no one, in the context of a local church such as his own that he would be required to answer to the men of his church if he got out of line in terms of deed or doctrine. Maybe so in terms of theory. However, in a church such as his own, as characterized by his SermonAudio podcasts, where those that disagree with him on secondary matters of opinion are dealt with by shouting down and verbalized ridicule, would a man that was not in jackbooted lockstep with this pastor be granted a position of authority or even allowed to accrue any influence before being kicked out? For in these kinds of churches, most are usually manipulated into being afraid of the pastor.
On International WOMMMMENNNN's Day (said with political incorrect intonation and syllabic emphasis) wonder how many will have the guts to point out that the majority misery celebrated during this festive occasion is the fault of radical Islam.
Isn't insisting Donald Trump's own rhetoric is at fault for the near riot breaking out in Chicago akin to blaming a scantily clad woman that she got raped?
Too bad the leftist media is not as outraged by the "Knock Out Game" perpetuated by ghetto youth usually upon unsuspecting Whites as they are about the few punches thrown at Donald Trump events.
So I guess if Marco Rubio has his way not only should protesters be allowed to disrupt candidate events but they should be thanked by lavishing such human detritus with increased welfare handouts.
Apparently CHIPs is to be remade as an action/comedy. If the series was considered a serious police procedural in the 70s, shouldn't the source material be similarly respected today?
If Hillary is so against "bullies", wonder if she has anything to say about what her husband and Butch Reno did to the Branch Davidians.
Rubio says conservatism cannot be about anger and division. But aren't there things you are supposed to be angry about and not want to be a part of?
If you disrupt any candidate's rally beyond asking a question during the designated question and answer period, why shouldn't you expect the possibility of being whacked by a billy club?
On National Geographic's “The Boonies”, it was pointed out that only American Indians are allowed to fish with gill nets on Lake Michigan. If this is a concession to preserving an ancient culture, why is it allowed to take place from a motorized watercraft designed by the White man? Such technologies were not part of an alleged way of life stretching back centuries. Are Indians so dimwitted that they are not capable of learning how to fish with other techniques? So apparently color of skin ought to be taken into consideration when law is applied after all.
Sally Fields admits she did not like the film “The Amazing Spider-Man”. She should be assured that, regarding certain aspects, that feeling is mutual. Her depiction had to have been the worst casting and portrayal of Aunt May in the history of the character.
So why is Lindsay Graham's remarks regarding violence being done to Ted Cruz more acceptable to milksop Republicans than Donald Trump wanting to bop a protesting Beatnik?
If Jorge Ramos is so concerned about "hatred" on the part of Trump, does that propagandist ever condemn La Raza (an Hispanosupremacist hatre group)?
Donald Trump is blamed for the disturbances that erupt in response to his rallies. Applying similar logic, is Belgium at fault for the terrorist attack because authorities there arrested a jihadist in connection to the attack on Paris?
It is exclaimed that, without a brokered Republican convention, we would not have not had President Lincoln. You either think he was the greatest president of them all or the spawn of the Devil himself. However, one has to admit that that phase of American history wasn't exactly the most enjoyable that this nation has ever endured.
Hilary Clinton insisted that America needs a president to defend the country and not embarrass it. This from a woman whose husband got a blow job from an intern beneath the desk in the Oval Office. Some will respond that Hillary should be considered on her own merits. Fair enough. Are we to consider her drunken bar hopping in Columbia the pinnacle of American foreign policy?
Chumlee of History Channel's “Pawnstars” has been arrested in connection with a number of sexual assault, firearms, and controlled substance violations. As such, shouldn't the series he is a cast member of have been yanked from the programming rotation by now? After all, Dog the Bounty Hunter, Duck Dynasty, and Paula Deen were tossed off television for a period for mere verbal formulations that in no way violated any duly authorized statute. The Dukes Of Hazard was banished from television entirely with the majority of its cast either now dead or living in post-celebrity obscurity.
Bowing to threats by environmentalists and animal rights raconteurs, Sea World has announced an end to its killer whale breeding programs and ultimately theatrical performances involving these particular cetaceans. Given that for decades Sea World served as a front for the Aneheuser-Busch Corporation, does that mean that should the temperance lobby become sufficiently agitated, booze peddlers ought to cease the distribution of noxious beverages despite a desire for them by a larger percentage of the population. Moral libertines will likely retort that, unlike orcas in captivity, no one is harmed as a result of intoxicating libations. Battered spouses, neglected children, and those mangled in a variety of automobile accidents might argue otherwise.
If Panerra Bread is now emphasizing in an advertising campaign that their food is clean, the concerned consumer really needs to ask how many times have these victuals been dropped on the floor.
A commercial mentioned that there are something like 28 flavors of Poptarts. Yet when goes to a supermarket, there is usually only one or two kinds there on the shelf.
In a sermon, prosperity minster Chuck Pierce confessed that “Tomorrow booty is coming to my house.” Does he mean as in wealth or something else? Given the number of sex scandals that plague churches these days, it can never hurt to ask or clarification.
If WOMENNNNN (the term said with its politically correct intonations) are so dimwitted that they should not be held responsible for the decision to slaughter their unborn children, why should such WOMENNNNN be trusted with the right to vote?
If women that have had abortions should not be charged because the act was not criminal at the time the act was committed, neither should specific Germans be held accountable for what they did at the time of the Holocaust because those deeds were also legal under German law. Some might respond how there is a natural law transcending temporal statutory law. If you are unwilling to apply that in the case of the unborn and the mother, you still do not fully embrace the idea of the unborn being a fully alive human.
Albert Mohler, on an episode of his Daily Briefing, said that the guilty party in a abortion is the one actually taking the life of the unborn child and not the woman seeking it. Extrapolating from such logic, the best way for a man to get rid of a wife he no longer desires is to contract with an underworld hitman. That way, only the mercenary gangster would be guilty of murder.
If women that have had abortions shouldn't be punished, neither should men negligent in paying their child support. At least in the case of such fathers, the children are still alive and not shishcabobbed.
If preachers are going to raise a fuss about folks coming to worship service but not Sunday school, they shouldn't be surprised when these targets of their articulated ire eventually drop the worship service as well.
Geraldo is still tossing a hissy that Ted Cruz's remarks concerning New York values are a veiled form of anti-Semitism. So apparently it is not enough that we must allow establishmentarian elites to destroy the culture. We are also not allowed to say anything about it either. And are we to assume that those dwelling in New York City articulate nothing but positive support in regards to rural Christians?
During episodes of the drama Quantico, isn't it racist for the Indian gal to advertise “The Jungle Book”? If color doesn't matter and we aren't to notice it under threats of ostracism, why not yet the blond chick so pale that it looks like she's never seen the sun introduce the commercial?
The radicals jacked out of shape at Duck Dynasty's Phil Robertson for praying as he felt led by the Holy Spirit at the NASCAR race he sponsored out of his own pocket are the same ones all in favor of biological men urinating in the same restroom at the same time as your underage daughter.
By Frederick Meekins
Sunday, April 17, 2016
Saturday, April 16, 2016
Friday, April 15, 2016
Thursday, April 14, 2016
Wednesday, April 13, 2016
Monday, April 11, 2016
Friday, April 08, 2016
Thursday, April 07, 2016
Should Governments On The Verge Of Financial Ruination Give A Rodent’s Hind Quarter What Toys Children Prefer To Play With?
Wednesday, April 06, 2016
Tuesday, April 05, 2016
Dr. Horton positions himself as standing in the camp of rigorous Reformed theology.
Reformed theology promotes itself as approaching the world as it actually exists rather than how fallen humanity would like it to be.
As such, aren't there many things in a world permeated by sin that we need to protect ourselves from or (to put it in other words) be afraid of?
Furthermore, it could be argued that, apart from biological racialism since you can't change skin color (no matter how hard Michael Jackson might have tried), Reformed theology has got to be the ultimate form of Us vs. Them thinking.
For no matter how much effort one might put into the attempt to persuade someone to repent and turn to Christ, it is ultimately God alone who selects from eternity past those that will be with Him in Heaven and those that He will allow to slip into Hell.
By Frederick Meekins
Monday, April 04, 2016
Christianity Today Condemns Ted Cruz For Failing To Enunciate Sufficient Amounts Of White Guilt & Anti-Americanism
Should Humans Surrender To Comprehensive Physiological Alteration In The Name Of Cosmic Exploration?
Sunday, April 03, 2016
In regards to such an issue, Scripture is largely silent with individuals of regard and esteem living in a variety of ways in relation to their respective parents. It seems Isaac remained at home until his 40's. Some have speculated that the Virgin Mary might have been as young as 15 or 16 before having the Christ child and fully becoming the wife of Joseph
It might be that the demographic targeted by this intended smear might skew a little “too White” to be extended a number of the privileges other such categories.
When was the last time a major news weekly (if it hadn't already ceased print publication) published a cover story criticizing welfare recipients (especially minorities) for being “lazy and entitled narcissists”?
Yet many of those not only incessantly suckle off the public teat but also grumble indignantly nearly to the point of threatened uprising if what flows through the civic nipple grows increasingly sparse or diluted in their opinion.
Just what is being categorized as “entitled”?
Does this include things such as Obama phones and the cancellation of student loans after 20 years irrespective of whether or not those willingly assenting to such debt are anywhere near to fulfilling this financial obligation?
Is “entitled” apparently preferring to live in the comforts of the home they have known their entire lives rather than in cramped, roach-infested apartments filled interestingly with the kinds of “entitled” folks good liberals such as the editors of Time Magazine lack the spine to criticize?
Young adults born into American families (especially of a Caucasian phenotype) apparently deserve condemnation should they decide for whatever reason to stay with their parents beyond the time upheld as standard ironically by those the most insistent that standards do not exist.
Yet these very same radical relativists heaping condemnation upon typical American young adults living at home with their parents turn around saying how wonderfully family-oriented it is when nearly a dozen immigrants pack themselves into domiciles that begin to feel cramped with four people residing in them.
Granted, self-absorption can be taken to extremes. Lindsay Lohan, numerous members of the Kenendy clan, or the British royal family clearly attest to this truth.
However, given what is known about the kind of liberal mindset predominant at the highest echelons of American journalism as typified by Time Magazine, the discerning should probably read a little between the lines.
If an individual is residing with their parents, it can inoculate them to an extent against a number of social or mental pathologies that many liberals and secularists applaud as the “New Morality”, which isn't quite so new anymore. Such allegedly cutting edge ethical reflection is beginning to sag in many places like the aging hippies that thrust their decadence into the face of American popular culture and public awareness.
For example, sin can take root in any of our lives in the dark corners that we would least expect. However, the young adult living with parents that expect those living under their roof to abide by what would be considered a broadly traditional morality will probably have to work a lot harder at things such as boozing and generalized carousing if those are the deepest longings of one's heart beyond those brief temptations that plague us all in weak moments.
In the collectivist mindset serving as the foundation of contemporary liberalism, “narcissistic” does not necessarily mean a propensity to wallow in the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life as warned in Scripture. To many of those that would like to see American society revolutionized away from an ethos of responsible individualism and single family orientation to something more group oriented, narcissistic can mean nothing more than tending primarily to the concerns of one's own household, looking to one's own abilities and resources to make it through the struggles of life, and expecting that all but the extremely disabled or the aged that have paid into the system ought to do the same for themselves
This is evidenced in the numerous graduation exhortations delivered on the part of the Obamas. In these orations, the President and his consort admonish the students not to pursue private sector careers marked primarily by what they consider the material comforts that accrue as a result of success and achievement in that particular sector of human endeavor. Instead, those persuaded to embrace President Obama's vision of the good life will give themselves over to what is considered the public sector such as government and forms of the nonprofit activism fomenting revolutionary upheaval such as community organizing.
However, it is through the overwhelming majority of businesses that exchange a good or a service for financial profit that most needs and desires are met. As John Stossel pointed out in a documentary on the subject, though her motivation may have been nobler, corporations such as Walmart and Microsoft have actually done more to elevate the material status and quality of life of a greater number than Mother Terresa ever did.
To those of the Obamaist mindset, the ideal place for young adults is not laboring to establish the foundations of their future by either getting their own place or by residing with their parents and saving for the day when they will be on their own by purchasing their own home or inheriting one upon the passing of their parents. Rather, the totalist progressive would like nothing more than to see these organic sociologically processes disrupted by altering whatever trajectory the productive young adult might find their life headed by conscripting them into some form of involuntary servitude.
The minds of most are set to a default to conceptualize of that as some form of military service. As such, many are programmed to respond, “And what is so wrong with that?”
Nothing in a time of actual declared war where the very survival of the nation is on the line. However, contrary to the hypothesis put forth by luminaries such as historian Stephen Ambrose and, to an extent, even William F. Buckley, the military during peace time does not exist to ensure that everyone sings from the same songbook.
During such periods in American history, the nation is better served by a force of volunteers that have decided to pursue military service as a life's calling or only for a short season. That way the number is sufficient so that the country is protected but not so large that the interests of the military threaten the well being of civilian institutions.
However, when liberals such as President Obama extol the glories of compulsory voluntary service, those tasks within the narrowly defined parameters of the military are the last such orators are calling for the completion of. What these elites have in mind are more akin to the police state functions undertaken by the infamous totalitarian regimes of the early decades of the twentieth century.
For example, as he was laying the groundwork for his regime, Barack Obama announced his vision for a civilian security force as large as the military and capable of intruding into areas of your life where the traditional military would never dream of intruding. Michelle Obama reiterated that, under Barack, we would not be allowed to return to our lives as we had previously known them.
Though abandoning or altering a number of fundamental worldview assumptions regarding the nature of work and the relationship of the individual to the overall economy, communalist elites are able to manipulate the unsuspecting into viewing the most basic and innocent of activities as acts surpassing the most vile acts of debauchery in terms of overall subsversion.
By Frederick Meekins
Saturday, April 02, 2016
Friday, April 01, 2016
Thursday, March 31, 2016
Wednesday, March 30, 2016
Are Professional Religionists Concerned Christian Psychologists Getting Too Large A Slice Of The Offering Pie?
Tuesday, March 29, 2016
Monday, March 28, 2016
Is Air & Space Smithsonian Magazine Indoctrinating Readers In Preparation Of Pending Extraterrestrial Encounter?
Friday, March 25, 2016
Thursday, March 24, 2016
Wednesday, March 23, 2016
Tuesday, March 22, 2016
Monday, March 21, 2016
Will Tyler Perry’s “Passion” Rank Of Up There With The Star Wars Christmas Special In Terms Of Holiday Flops?
Though I have not yet seen the film nor read the series of novels as of earlier 2001, I have seen similar works such as "The Omega Code", "One Moment After" and the 70’s classics "Thief in the Night", "Image of the Beast", and "Prodigal Planet", as well as having noticed the proto-eschatological themes addressed in more mainstream science fiction such as "Babylon 5" and "Earth: Final Conflict". I believe I am safe in addressing John Whitehead’s criticism of this cinematic production.
John Whitehead levels considerable criticism at "Left Behind". Yet at one time he was one of the voices calling for greater Christian involvement with popular culture as evidenced in a profile of him published in the December 7, 1998 edition of Christianity Today. It is in response to this yearning that the producers of "Left Behind" hope their efforts will "lead to more family-friendly movies".
But of such efforts, John Whitehead says today, "Christian involvement in culture should be in a way that ultimately serves that end --- not merely to pour $17 million into a poorly adapted feature that does not contribute to leading viewers into a deeper relationship with their eternal Creator."
One must assume Mr. Whitehead thinks such edification can be found in "The Last Temptation of Christ" which he classified as "a sympathetic and reverent treatment of Christianity’s origins," according to the Christianity Today profile. It should be recalled that "The Last Tempation" was the movie that made Judas out to be the hero and cast Jesus as the villain.
Mr. Whitehead further admonishes contemporary Evangelicals in light of the "Left Behind" phenomena, "Instead of dedicating their lives to taking care of the poor and the needy, American followers of Christ too often ignore His example and instead look for cheap thrills in an increasingly superficial world."
Mr. Whitehead should be reminded of his own neglect of the downtrodden in his own pursuit of glitz and the limelight. According to Christianity Today, Mr. Whitehead’s civil rights organization the Rutherford Institute, at the expense of those facing more pressing and substantial First Amendment religious rights issues, came to the defense of Paula Jones --- the floozy who wouldn’t disrobe for then Governor Clinton but who apparently had no problem doing so for Playboy photographers.
To some Christians, it’s not legitimate missions activity unless it’s directed at some impoverished foreigner halfway around the globe. John Whitehead writes, "...instead of centering their hopes, prayers and financial resources behind the tragedy in India [a reference to the recent earthquake] ... much of the American Christian community was busy hyping a movie that one reviewer called ’unintentionally hilarious’."
Elsewhere on his gaudy and semi-tasteless looking magazine and website Gadfly, John Whitehead has explored the metaphysical background of the "X-Files".
How would he propose we reach out to those whom this particular genre speaks to? Somehow I don’t think vaccination clinics or soup kitchens will quite grab them where they are hurting most. An evangelistic film geared towards their interests in paranormal phenomena and government conspiracies likely would, however. And for others, such visualization would help make the obscure beasts, dragons, plagues and judgments of the Book of Revelation and other passages of Scripture relevant to their early twenty-first century lives.
John Whitehead dismisses "Left Behind" as a "B" film and comments, "Truly Christian films embody this aim by exploring the human dimensions of loving thy neighbor as thyself, portraying servants in a world where everyone seeks to be a master, and by encountering the Divine in unexpected places ..."
What more could Mr. Whitehead hope for than a movie set during the time of the Tribulation?
During that period in eschatological history, the very power of Satan will be allowed the seemingly unbridled power the Prince of Darkness has always longed for since the time of his fall, and during this future era simply being a Christian could get you executed. It is under such conditions to which Americans are currently not accustomed that the protagonists of "Left Behind" must stand for truth and righteousness during the heyday of the New World Order.
In all likelihood, "Left Behind" is not a perfect movie. However, much of the drivel and filth produced by Hollywood is not worth watching to begin with.
It must be remembered that Christians have not had much practice at producing cinematic masterpieces that are both theologically accurate and appeal to a broad audience. This is due in large part to the sanctimonious piousness like that displayed by those such as John Whitehead, who in at least this instance, refuse to realize the apologetic of certain literary genres and narrative techniques.
By Frederick Meekins
Saturday, March 19, 2016
Friday, March 18, 2016
Many assume this warns that those who violate this holy decree will have the judgment of God heaped upon them. But while God is not slack in fulfilling His promises, the forthcoming retribution might not necessarily flow directly from His fingers in the manner we might expect. Often we end up being punished by the consequences of our own actions without God intervening as a primary cause.
In an article appearing in the January 18, 2001 edition of the Prince George’s Sentinel extolling the merits of Wiccan variety witchcraft, one discovers that in calling evil good and good evil that the very epistemological categories required for rational thought and communication begin to break down. Foremost among these is the idea of truth and its basis in objective factual knowledge.
The article begins its symphony of misinformation from almost the very first note. Sentinel staff writer Matt Carr boldly declares early in the piece, "Christianity has dwelled in the hands of war and genocide. Missionaries sent forth to deliver the teachings of God ... led to the torture of the Chinese and Japanese."
From this, one would conclude that fanaticism is only a Christian shortcoming. But excuse me, has anyone checked out much of Islam’s record lately? In Sudan, Christian children are sold into slavery and their legs mutilated so they can’t run away. Upon reaching adulthood, many will be executed so they won’t present a threat to their masters.
And speaking of Japan, did you know that the Christian church there was nearly wiped out by persecution after the death of Francis Xavier, the pioneering Jesuit missionary to the Orient? And the Red Chinese harassment of the modern Church is so well documented that I don’t even need to provide additional information to justify my claim.
So much for the wonders of multiculturalism.
Elsewhere, the Sentinel article plays so loose with the facts that it is doubtful if the statements made are worthy of classification as such. The article says of a local Wiccan, "[he] celebrates a religion of nature, much in the same way those burned at Salem did."
In all likelihood, with the exception of the local slave, probably not one resident of Salem, Massachusetts was a practitioner of the occultic sciences. Rather the modern equivalent of those persecuted at Salem can be found among those falsely accused of sexual harassment simply because they’ve rubbed someone the wrong way, figuratively of course, and their accusers had more in common with Anita Hill than today’s average Christian.
Furthermore, technically there were no Wiccans in Massachusetts at the time because, quite frankly, Wicca hadn’t been invented yet. According to an article in the Atlantic Monthly reviewed on Crosswalk.com, Professor of Religion Phillip Davis of the University of Prince Edward Island and Historian Ronald Hutton of the University of Bristol concur in their assessments that Wicca was concocted in 1950 by amateur anthropologist Gerald B. Gardner who was influenced by German romantics and various occultic practices.
Even though Wicca does not posses a clearly delineable historical pedigree, that does not mean its ideas aren’t drawn from some kind of background. It’s just not the one filled with unicorns and flower children its adherents would like many to believe. It may have more in common with the Wicked Witch of the West depicted in the Wizard of Oz.
For example, in Wiccan lore, practitioners of this form of spirituality trace their lineage back to the Druids. Did you know that the Druids practiced human sacrifice?
Closely related to the Wiccans are those today professing themselves to be pagans. Their rights to bad mouth Christianity’s historical shortcomings are also suspect given their own atrocities.
Leviticus 18:21 says, "Do not give any of your children to be sacrificed to Molech [a pagan deity] (New International Version)." Later on in the book of II Kings chapter 23, King Josiah destroys the altars upon which children were sacrificed to pagan gods. One might like to note that Wiccan feminists play a prominent role in the abortion movement.
No wonder Wiccans are quick to heave objective history out the window.
From the Prince George’s Sentinel article, one gets the impression that witches are the only mistreated religious group. The warlock interviewed for the article said, "I’m intimidated to put my beliefs on applications."
Join the club. Many Christians feel the same way about the retaliation they will receive for expressing their convictions to leftwing supervisors and coworkers. Frankly, very few employment applications ask for one’s religious beliefs being that to do so violates the law.
Yet the ironic thing is that these very same ones peeved at those apprehensive about suffering a witch among them, to use the King James English, find John Ashcroft an unfit nominee for the office of Attorney General simply because of the Christian beliefs he happens to live by.
As a nation built upon the freedom of religion, the Constitution guarantees the right of citizens to live free in their beliefs without government harassment and without actual forms of physical violence from those with whom they disagree. However, a society that extols witchcraft as virtuous and shuns Christianity as a shameful thing is further down the yellow-brick road of losing its freedom as a judgment permitted under God than most realize.
By Frederick Meekins
Leftwing Jesuits Invoke Aquinas To Condemn Scalia For Failing To Impose Redistributive Jurisprudence
Thursday, March 17, 2016
Wednesday, March 16, 2016
Saturday, March 12, 2016
In a self-flagellating confession, the pastor admits he is guilty of this particular evil by taking showers everyday while the natives of an area of Africa to which he went on a short term missions expedition did not have the luxury of using water in such a carefree manner.
And how is that the pastor's fault?
Neither can the Africans probably afford airline travel halfway around the globe.
However, that apparently did not prevent the pastor from engaging in such extraneous travel.
More importantly, did this pastor ever stop and think that these Africans are probably being denied the benefits of modern utilities such as an advanced sewer system as a result of the environmentalist organizations that such self-aware hipsters usually support insisting that the bushmen are more adorable in a state of perpetual primitivism?
Furthermore, even if the White man was magnanimous enough to gift these savages with the latest water distribution technology, will these backward cultures be willing to maintain it or will they get too distracted by the overwhelming compulsion to slaughter the neighboring tribe?
By Frederick Meekins
Friday, March 11, 2016
Thursday, March 10, 2016
Wednesday, March 09, 2016
For example, Romney is supposedly a much more pleasant individual more concerned about unity and bringing people together.
Furthermore, it was clarified, even if his Mormon faith is in error, it is still sincerely held.
So would these pastors have as much problem if people utilized a similar criteria in deciding what church to attend or join?
For example, sure, Brother Osteen has his glaring doctrinal deficiencies.
But one cannot deny that he treats people a whole lot better than Touch Not The Unclean Thing Hyperseperationist Baptist Church where Pator Knowitall yells at the top of his lungs about women wearing pants rather than dungaree skirts so long that they herd dustbunnies as the garment scrapes the floor.
By Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, March 08, 2016
Monday, March 07, 2016
Sunday, March 06, 2016
As an example, this pastor did not offer any proof such as Trump enunciating an errant Christological profession or even the tycoon's shocking confession that he did not have any sins needing forgiveness.
Rather, the criteria referenced by Harris included no proof of regular church attendance, lack of a spirit of generosity, and lack of fidelity to a single woman.
How is charity being defined?
By the tossing of money at a particular cause or organization with no expectation of anything in return?
By that definition, the financial oblation many believers place in the collection plate each week doesn't count either.
For most are doing that for the purposes of curring favor with God or to workout some kind of arrangement between the taxman and/or the church leadership.
Secondly, it must be admitted that Trump's conjugal relationships are less than ideal.
However, unlike Bill Gothard, Josh Duggar, Jack Schaap, at least Trump seems to be attracted to woman over the age of consent or not beneath him on an organizational flowchart where the occupational statuses of the objects of his desire are not threatened if they spurn his advances.
By Frederick Meekins
Saturday, March 05, 2016
Friday, March 04, 2016
Thursday, March 03, 2016
Obama Administration Reluctant To Categorize Deliberate Systematize Extermination Of Christians Genocide
Wednesday, March 02, 2016
Tuesday, March 01, 2016
Monday, February 29, 2016
If Quantico Star Priyanka Chopra Didn’t Want Her Rump Photographed She Shouldn’t Have Worn A See-Through Dress
Saturday, February 27, 2016
In a SermonAudio oration on the myth of nonessential doctrine, Pastor Jason Cooley insisted that the Emergent Church movement is the child of Fundamentalism because of the Fundamentalist movement's propensity towards compromise. However, it is also the result a wing of Fundamentalism to clamp down on things where there is no clear mandate provided by Scripture other than individual conscience.
Often in their repeated emphasis about children being born inherently sinful and wicked, it would be helpful if these particularly rigorous Reformed theologians would clarify that such a soteriological observation is not being invoked to justify the mistreatment of such unsuspecting youngsters. For from the manner and in the contexts in which this reminder is proffered one almost takes away the impression that the ones making such verbalizations would enjoy nothing more than beating a small child senseless for the smallest infraction in the eyes of some aging prune neurotically obsessed with finding as many faults as possible.
An episode of Generations Radio addressed the topic of “Why Science Fiction Authors Tend To Be Atheists”. For one thing, Christian youth that might have skill in that genre are not often encouraged by their private school educators to pursue opportunities in such areas. About the only vocational guidance they are given regards the foreign mission field. That is fine and dandy that there is concern for the Pygmies and Hottentots. But what about outreach to Americans through their own cultural idiom for a change?
Shouldn't there be greater outrage at President Obama speaking at a mosque with ties to Islamic terrorism/extremism than presidential candidates that spoke at Bob Jones University in the days when the school forbade interracial dating?
What did Ben Carson think that other candidates and media pundits were going to speculate as he rushed back to Florida to do his laundry as the caucus process was reaching its crescendo? Makes you wonder how many times he pulled something similar in the operating room. More importantly, it also gives one pause to consider if he can handle the pressures of the Oval Office is a campaign where no lives are directly on the line causes near exhaustion or an emotional breakdown.
Regarding the schools that are requiring students to telework during snow days. Are the schools going to pick up the tab for Internet access or tech support?
Contrary to what was insinuated from a pulpit, there are dangers in the contemporary church other than a critical spirit. Isn't it an example of the critical spirit to be critical of the critical spirit? And perhaps most importantly, at times isn't what is viewed as a critical spirit actually discernment?
In a sermon illustration, a pastor poked fun at a hypothetical parishioner that spotted the alleged shortcomings of others at the worship service such as immodest dress and signs of inebriation. But isn't that Christian merely applying that they have been indoctrinated regarding for years by the kind of pastor now spoofing such exercise of judgment. There is rarely any winning at this sort of thing if you are a mere pewfiller.
On SermonAudio, a pastor remarked that a person ought to abide where God has placed us. In other words, one ought to simply obey and not question those invoking a higher status over and above you.
In a sermon, Gideon was mocked for hiding in a wine press. What is so wrong with hiding from an adversary tactically superior in number to you prior to your receiving direct revelation from God regarding what to do about the situation. There is no winning with these kinds of ministers. If Gideon had decided he had had enough and was going to slay any Mideonites coming in his direction, we would have been subjected to an endless number of homiletical expositions about vengeance being the Lord's and why Gideon was in error for failing to instead appeal for the intervention of the civil magistrate.
It was said in a SermonAudio podcast that most people like themselves too much in terms of self esteem. As proof of this out of control ego, the theologian presented the example that most people clothe and feed themselves. Are we supposed to sit passively and wait for the church consistory or deacon board to determine the privilege of what provisions with which we are to be bestowed?
In a discussion of the impact of talk radio upon the political process, home school activist Kevin Swanson suggested that the believer should be leery of the hosts such as Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, and Rush Limbaugh that are divorced. It was a wonder such a fanatic did lump in Laura Ingram or Monica Crowely for simply being female. There was no divine mandate from Heaven barring access to the airwaves or the First Amendment those than have been divorced. Mass communications is not an explicitly church office. And what about forgiveness? If these figures are to be banned from non-ecclesiastical occupations on the basis of divorce, should the radical Christian Reconstructionists or Dominionists ever seize power, what is to prevent them from implementing a religious caste system similar to that found in Hindu India that would ban all but the most doctrinally rigorous from certain professions?
In condemnation of talk radio that he categorized as secular, Kevin Swanson warned that hosts must be careful to obey the admonition of not mocking rulers or dignitaries. But America, the authority is actually the Constitution; not the occupant of a particular office or even the office itself. So just how debauched can the offices be that we are obligated to respect? Must Hugh Heffner and Larry Flint be respected as the dignitaries of their respective firms (that being their respective businesses and not the assorted carnality they peddle)? Does this deferential respect also apply to the Anti-Christ and False Prophet which are just as much offices as they are personalities?
In condemnation of radio talk shows that might be considered more secular in that the programs do not constantly beat you over the head with direct Scriptural quotations in regards to every issue addressed, homeschool activist Kevin Swanson criticized the medium for the failure to emphasize that it might be God's sovereignty to turn the reigns of government over to the tyrannically reprobate. So does that mean when the jackboots come to ravish and debase the daughters of homeschoolers that the truly godly such as Pastor Swanson would encourage surrender to and applaud such defilement?
Towards the end of the Dec. 23, 2015 issue of Christian Century, readers are urged to click through to Amazon.com from the publication's website. By surfing that particular route, the Christian Century will earn a percentage of anything purchased. But isn't that part of the capitalism that the religious left any other time denigrates as systematic oppression and undermining face to face COMMUNITY exchange?
In condemnation of Donald Trump, Cal Thomas during a Chicago radio morning show interview castigated the assembled at the candidate's rallies as mostly old and mostly White. But can you really get much older or Whiter than Cal Thomas? By the standard appealed to by Thomas, was the widespread destruction of property in Baltimore and Ferguson mitigated by the predominance of minority faces in the mob? Does Thomas now flagellate himself for the White privilege that has played a role in enabling him to become, as he bills himself, the nation's mostly widely syndicated columnist if such racial pandering has now become part of his stock and trade.
Instructive, Donald Trump confessed that he is capable of transforming into anything that he needs to.
In a campaign commercial, Hillary Clinton assures the child of illegal aliens during a loving embrace not to worry about the disposition of her parents and to leave that to Hillary. Will similar gestures of comfort be extended to the distressed offspring of members of the Bundy Militia or those whose parents have been financially ruined for failing to comply for reasons of conscience with gay marriage mandates? For is not violating immigration law as much a violation of the duly promulgated laws of the land as these politically incorrect causes?
In an examination of President Obama's 2015 National Prayer Breakfast remarks comparing recent Islamic violence with that committed by Christian's centuries ago, homeschool activist Kevin Swanson observed that both Islam and Roman Catholicism have both made the error of being faiths inordinately concerned with power and its accumulation. And Swanson's own theological persuasion of Calvinism has been immune from this particular temptation? Servetus might insist otherwise. Swanson, ministering with the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, would no doubt likely align himself with Christian Reconstructionism or a Postmillennialism that insist that a feckless Christ is not able to return until optimal sociopolitical conditions are achieved. So apart from power (the ability to make people do that which they would not otherwise often under threat of violence or actual violence), how does Swanson intend to implement his sect's particular peculiarities?
In his tremendous consumption of fossil fuels and the expansion of his carbon footprint, Pope Francis appeared on the border between Mexico and the United States as part of a staged pity party on behalf of the swarms of illegals violating the sovereignty of American territory. He went as far as to insinuate that Donald Trump was not even a Christian. Does this mean that the Pope will celebrate the conspicuous disrespect of Vatican property and decorum? Let's see if the Pontiff remains similarly broadminded if he is awakened in the middle of the night by raucous music and the uninvited wantonly urinating on the floor of St. Peter's Basilica.
“Pete's Dragon” is being remade. But from the trailer, it looks like this interpretation won't be a family musical. Instead, the narrative looks to be constructed as a serious fantasy. Just wait until “Mary Poppins” gets a similar treatment. No longer will the chimney sweeps be depicted as happy-go-lucky as they dance across the rooftops of London. Most likely these laborers will be depicted as oppressed proletarians suffering a variety of chronic health problems. And forget about the tunes “A Spoonful Of Sugar” or “Feed The Birds”. Child nutrition and animal welfare activists will probably put an end to these beloved classics.
Greta Van Sustern is celebrating her 3500th episode on Fox News. I remember back when her primary focus was serial killer of the week.
In a recitation of his sins at the National Prayer Breakfast, NASCAR personality Darrell Waltrip enumerated among these transgressions being aloof. Aloof is defined as being emotionally distant, reserved, or unwilling to take part in things. This might be an era where one of the primary modalities of Christian fellowship consists of regurgitating the contents of one's inner being for group condemnation on a level just below that of what would take place in a Marxist prisoner of war camp. However, so long as you politely nod to those greeting you as you saunter through the church narthex Sunday morning, I've yet to find a Scripture condemning those that primarily stay to themselves.
In reference to Donald Trump, Marco Rubio hypothesized that, if a candidate despised by nearly fifty percent of the party wins the nomination, the Republicans will implode as they turn on one another. So why are Trump supporters obligated to betray their convictions and fall in line dutifully behind Rubio? Why shouldn't the Marcoists be the ones to stifle their dissent and relent to Trumpian preferences?
By Frederick Meekins
Friday, February 26, 2016
Thursday, February 25, 2016
Brian McLaren Demilitarizes Church Hymns To Indoctrinate Christians To Embrace Conquest By Jihadists
However, it would seem that most of the things said about walls in divine revelation are overwhelmingly positive.
For example, Proverbs 25:28 counsels, “He that hath no rule over his own spirit is like a city that is broken down, and without walls.”
Some might dismiss that as rhetorical metaphor rather than as a literal example where actual people and lives are involved.
In terms of history, an entire book of the Bible is dedicated to an individual moved by God to take on as his life's work the rebuilding of the wall around the Jerusalem that he loved.
That was none other than Nehemiah.
And to those that dismiss that entire account as Old Testament, the New Testament speaks perhaps even more favorably of walls.
For example, in Revelation 21:14, Heaven or the New Jerusalem is described as having a wall made of jasper having twelve foundations (each named for one of Christ's twelve Apostles).
With this wall measuring 12,000 stadia in length, width and height, assorted Bible scholars estimate this wall to be 1400 miles long, 1400 miles wide, and 1400 miles tall.
Given that Heaven is where the concentrated presence of God dwells, it is safe to conjecture that God must really like walls.
As the institutionally professed Vicar of Christ, does the Pope now take it upon himself to claim that he apparently knows more about what God wants than God?
Lastly, what about the walls built by the Roman Catholic Church in terms of doctrine and dogma to control access to God?
For example, it is doubtful that one will be granted access to what those administering this form of Christianity believe to be the gateway by which to enter the Kingdom of God (namely Communion, the Lord's Supper, or the Eucharist) unless one consents to this denomination's particular peculiarities.
As such, why shouldn't the United States be allowed to determine for itself by what criteria outsiders will be granted permission to enter here as well?
By Frederick Meekins