Friday, January 30, 2015
Don't you just hate those multi-roll toilet paper dispensers in public restrooms? There is really no way of seeing how low the current roll is. You can be left there mid-business having to grind on the contraption that barely moves in order to get the next roll to drop into place. But I guess if you say anything about this, employing the logic that if you complain about jury duty you must support the abolition of the entire judicial system, it means you must, in terms of hygiene, practice “left hand Arab style” or prefer a communal rag hanging on the wall.
It was suggested that public schools ought to close and education ultimately be put back in the hands of parents. That sounds wonderful on paper. But what is to be done with those that the fangs of organized religion have not sufficiently sunk into or when the skills of the parents are mismatched with the aptitudes of the child? The religious schools are controlling enough with the public alternative looming down their necks. How much worse would they be if they became the prevailing monopoly?
Seattle residents caught filling their trashcans with more than 10% of food will be publicly shamed with a red lid. The program is not intended to stop the waste of consumables per say. Rather the purpose is to prevent food items from being sent to the landfill. But what's the big deal about food items in the landfill. Aren't they by definition biodegradable?
Thursday, January 29, 2015
In the account, a number left their previous occupations.
Given that Christ does not explicitly appear before us, it does not follow that we cannot follow Christ in the occupational status that we find ourselves in unless it is something inherently evil such as organized crime.
As an existential application of this passage, the exegete revealed that, if he had listened to his father, he might not have become a minister and certainly not have gone to the mission field.
So why is it deemed more righteous in certain Evangelical circles to leave your elderly family members behind to go minister to other elderly people thousands of miles from where God has already placed you?
Technically, can't it be a greater sacrifice to actually care for one's family because you can't very well gadabout from church to church patting yourself on the back over what a spiritual person you are for driving your parents to the doctors or send out a direct mail fund raising letter insinuating those refusing to send you a check for such spiritual labors are of dubious soteriological standing.
I especially fail to see how those refusing to dump attachments to family in favor of the mission field equate with those in Romans 1 described as allowing homosexuality to gain a foothold in society.
by Frederick Meekins
The show was an excellent concept the first two seasons.
Even the third season was not without creativity as it focused on South American prison culture.
However, by the fourth season where the characters had become a government covert operations team the concept seemed strained beyond credibility.
Tuesday, January 27, 2015
Monday, January 26, 2015
Friday, January 23, 2015
However, in a sense, isn't it better to blow off steam online rather than physically slapping the taste out of the mouths of those that they are ticked off about?
As an example, he referenced those that post about getting shoddy service at Starbucks.
But as expensive as those beverages are, shouldn't you be able to vocalize your dissatisfaction somewhere?
But without complaining, wouldn't a pastor be a bit like a firefighter without a hydrant or something akin to a one armed boxer?
Complaining about things is the bread and butter of the ministry.
A pastor remarked that a status update is nothing more than an attempt to be a star for a moment.
So how is that in essence much different than what a pastor does whenever they ascend the pulpit and do anything other than a rote recitation of the Scriptural text?
A pastor admonished that Facebook friendship does not constitute real friendship.
But still isn't it better than nothing at all for those that do not derive much satisfaction through traditional human interaction or happen to be someone most don't really desire to interact with?
Most of the same information can be conveyed through a variety of posts that would otherwise be collected through means that would be categorized as “human intelligence”.
The pastor attempted to solidify his argument by insisting that Facebook friendships are not Biblical friendships.
But frankly, doesn't any relationship where you do not fornicate with, steal from, or murder the involved party pretty much pass Biblical muster?
By Frederick Meekins
The cover of the winter 2015 edition of the UTNE Reader was about women around the world that do not possess what would be considered equal rights. Pictured on the cover was a man and women adorned in what looked like 1950's apparel with the man having a disco ball for a head. Granted, people were not as happy back then as the portrait of idealized domesticity that they were expected to project to the public. However, to be more accurate regarding the threats posed to women outside of America, shouldn't someone have been depicted in Islamist dress or chained in an East Asian sweatshop?
Thursday, January 22, 2015
The Obama Administration is outraged that the Speaker of the House invited without prior approval the Israeli Prime Minister to address Congress. It is claimed that the action constitutes a violation of diplomatic protocol. But a breach of protocol is not necessarily a violation of law. It is not only protocol but a matter of constitutional provision that the actions of the Executive Branch be authorized by statutes enacted by the Legislative Branch rather than by fiat executive order. However, Obama certainly isn't that concerned with procedural precedent any other time.
ISIS is targeting educated women. To be consistent with the standard that they enunciated in reaction to the Charlie Hebbdo massacre, are Pope Francis and William Donahue of the Catholic League going to insinuate that these individuals will also be getting what they deserve for blatantly offending the Islamists?
An instructive study as to how times have changed. The first time an American was displayed as a human prop in the observational gallery during a State of The Union Address occurred during the Reagan Administration. That particular individual jumped into an icy river to rescue the victims of a jetliner crash. Under Obama, those exhibited are dragged out to illicit guiltrips for increased government spending.
Wednesday, January 21, 2015
The Catholic News Service has the Pope on record as saying “It's true, one cannot react violently... But...one cannot insult other people's faith, one cannot make fun of faith.”
Such a standard would seem perfectly reasonable in a culture steeped in Christian values.
However, in a profoundly decayed postmodern era, the Pope's recommendation raises more conundrums than his attempt at sage advice actually resolves.
For example, how is insult or making fun of being defined?
Some of depictions of Muhammad (as well as of Christ) published in the French satire magazine no doubt crossed the boundaries of good taste.
However, in this age obsessed with sensitivity to the point where certain agitators can't seem to shake off the sting of an insult after a few hours, the bar as to what constitutes being offended has been shockingly lowered.
For example, there are those that insist it is improper for adherents of one expression of the Christian faith to criticize what are believed to be the doctrinal shortcomings of another.
At the same time, those uplifting such a spirit of ecumenicity in the next breath let loose with a litany of rants against the brand of Christianity adhered to by the person being badgered into acquiescence and silence.
Likewise, what if the legitimate beliefs of a religion compel that religion to act in ways or profess beliefs that are perceived as offensive or insulting to others?
Muslims aren't too keen on the doctrine of the Trinity; is the Pope willing to renounce this foremost Christian fundamental in order to comply with the spirit of the age?
There are some that believe that it is not the place of church functionaries to bar an individual from the elements of Communion or the Lord's Supper.
So what if someone feels slighted by the Roman Catholic Church assiduously monopolizing what adherents of this understanding of Christianity believer are essential ingredients in the liturgical pursuit of salvation?
Likewise, to what extent is the remark “...one cannot insult other people's faith, one cannot make fun of faith” to be adhered to?
To some, an insult to faith can be little more than to insist that your doctrine is right and someone else's is wrong.
It must be remembered that when an American hears these sorts of principles, they are more like rules of etiquette in that they are good ideas to aspire to but not all that much will be done to you if you decide to ignore them.
However, when nearly anyone else around the world says these sorts of things, they mean these notions should be imposed as a matter of statutory law with punishments such as fines or incarceration.
It, therefore, must be asked does the Pope stand with those wanting liberty to prevail throughout the world or does he side with those wanting to plunge civilization into an interminable tyranny?
By Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, January 20, 2015
At the State of The Union, among those scheduled to be exploited like livestock on display is a 13 year old alleged to have written a letter to Santa claiming that all the child wanted was safety. What 13 year old, unless they are “developmentally delayed”, still believes in Santa Claus as an actual being?
According to this concept, when the higher level civil authority imposes a policy, ruling, or law that undermines freedom and liberty, it is the duty of the lower level magistrate to oppose such a constitutional infringement.
On the surface, such a theory sounds like a practical check and balance against unbridled state power.
But who will protect the citizens when local authorities rise to the level of a tyrant?
One theologian in particular promoting this viewpoint through his opus “The Doctrine Of The Lesser Magistrate: A Proper Resistance To Tyranny & A Repudiation Of Unlimited Obedience To Civil Government” is Pastor Matthew Trewhella of the Mercy Seat Christian Church in Wisconsin.
In my column titled “Pastor Suggests The Suppression Of Witches”, I referenced a sermon by Rev. Trewhella where he analyzed the Salem With Trials.
The pastor's criticisms were not so much that the Salem Witch Trials went too far but rather that these judicial proceedings probably did not go far enough.
From Trewhella's homily, the listener takes away the impression that practitioners of deviant forms of spirituality and belief such as witchcraft are to be denied permission to meet and congregate under he First Amendment in an America sufficiently Christianized to his liking.
So just how far do these proposed deprivations of liberty extend?
What about Jews?
How about Catholics?
Will any penalties be imposed upon fellow Protestants that adhere to differing interpretations of soteriology or eschatology?
Now that a number of Christian radio programs such as Standing For The Truth hosted by Mike Lemay have more than sufficiently applauded Pastor Matthew Trewhella on the point of his sociopolitical theology that is correct, how about an examination of those aspects where he might be in profoundly dangerous error?
After all, these ministries certainly don't mind tossing aside any of the good accomplished by the likes of Joel Osteen or even a few of the Emergent Church pastors because of where these religious figures have deviated from sound doctrine.
By Frederick Meekins
Friday, January 16, 2015
“The final frontier” --- since the mid 1960’s these words have characterized Star Trek’s perception of the adventure and the discoveries to be found in the distant reaches of outer space. Yet can this vast interstellar ether really be said to be the final frontier in terms of providing an ultimate foundation or purpose? For despite all its wonder, at its core the cosmos is not that much different than ourselves in that its external composition is simply another manifestation or component of the physical universe.
Thus, no matter how far man might one day voyage beyond the confines of the earth, he will still require belief and value systems through which to process and understand the role of the mysteries he is likely to encounter both within the human mind and those external to himself with which he has had little prior experience. Often the fields of science fiction and future studies are used as tools by which to forecast scientific and technological developments. However, in Religion 2101 A.D., Hiley H. Ward shows these speculative methods can be used to gauge the form religion might take in the distant future.
According to Ward, the astounding breakthroughs of the future will force humanity to rethink the most basic of concepts as these will be stretched beyond traditional understandings in light of extraordinary circumstances and conditions. For example, Ward points out that the very concept of what it means to be human might be altered beyond current recognition. With the advent of artificial organs and the possibility of growing replacements in a laboratory, there could come a day when death might be delayed indefinitely.
Many would no doubt embrace existence as a cyborg (an organism half biological and half mechanical in its physiology) if the interchangeability of parts presented the likelihood of staving off the grim reaper as long as possible. Eventually, man might no longer have to endure the inherent limitations of an organic body as range, perception and locomotion could be enhanced by directly interfacing the brain with a computer controlling an array of exploratory robotic sensors (28). In essence, some could live out their lives as a stationary central processing unit while their secondary android bodies simultaneously explored both the depths of the ocean and the peaks of Mars all at the same time.
Ward predicts that these kinds of innovations will spark profound renovations in man’s religious consciousness. Faced with the overwhelming enormity of the universe, man may feel forced to cope with the daunting fruits of this exploration by downplaying his individuality by fully embracing his place as an insignificant cog in a machine. In biological and sociological sciences, this theory is known as “macro life”, the propensity to view the individual in society as analogous to a single cell in an organism (30).
Such a framework places worth and value instead on the overall group as a whole. Ward foresees this prospect taking more concrete expression in the form of a hypothetical spaceship whose command decisions are arrived at by electronically tapping into the thoughts of the crew and melding these divergent consciousnesses into a single imperative authority greater than the sum of the component perspectives. Even though Religion In 2101 AD was published in 1975, this suggestion foreshadowed its fullest development in science fiction in the form of the collective consciousness of the Borg, the cybernetic aliens from Star Trek that perceive themselves as a single entity and who value the individual members of their society as little more than drones. This concept of all taken as a singular mind bears a striking similarity to pantheism in the realm of religious studies.
The diminution of individuality will not necessarily be heralded as a bad thing by those clamoring for its demise if it can be marketed as an elevation in consciousness as an ontological unification with the universal totality. There are few greater ego boosters, after all, than considering oneself God (or at least as some tiny part of the divine intelligence).
Regarding this perception, Ward provides insightful comments from some of science fiction’s most prominent names. Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry says, “Man will come to see himself properly as part of God. God is the sum of everything, all intelligence, all order in the universe...It is not inconceivable that as intelligent beings we are part of and ultimately become God, and ultimately create ourselves (Ward 136).” Harlan Ellison, author of I Have No Mouth And I Must Scream, adds to this perspective: “I guess I worship man. Each has the seed of God in himself (Ward, 136).”
While the religious philosophy of the future will strive to approach the majesty and wonder of outer realities by turning inward, many adherents of the coming cosmic confession will still feel the traditional need of experiencing the divine through a relationship with or by receiving guidance from what they perceive to be an intelligence or symbol objectively transcendent from themselves. Seldom can man pull himself up by his own metaphysical bootstraps.
But whereas the so-called God of old is seen as standing distinct from His creation but actively sustaining it by His loving hand and revealing His message through angels and prophets and later revealing Himself in the form of His Son Jesus Christ, the God of Tomorrowland will employ different couriers and manifest Himself in ways actually less personable. Erich Von Daniken in Chariots Of The Gods hypothesizes that UFO’s and extraterrestrials may serve as an explanation for the supernatural phenomena occurring in ancient times when these harbingers of universal wisdom appeared bearing enlightenment. Von Daniken does not believe in the traditional conception of a transcendent God. Rather he believes in a God composed of the sum of all knowledge in the universe, of which each individual is an autonomous piece of information akin to a bit within a computer to be reunified into the singular totality once the evolution to a state of pure energy has taken place (Ward, 129).
And speaking of computers, eschatologists might take note of the role of these devices in future religious thought as considered in dramatic speculative literature. One cannot dismiss such claims on the part of the likes of Hal Lindsay or Jack Van Impe as outright exaggeration. In David Gerrold’s When Harlie Was One, the Graphic Omniscient Device (G.O.D.) is a supercomputer capable of solving all problems and answering all questions. In the novel The Fall Of Colossus, Colossus is a computer designed to administer functions on earth and is ultimately deified as part of a new religion. Twilight Zone creator Rod Serling observed, “...with increased dependence of technology, we will find ourselves worshipping at the altar of machines (Ward, 133).”
Ward does an impressive job culling through the religious insights found across an impressive array of objective analytical forecasts and fictional literary accounts. Yet it is in the final chapter where Ward synthesizes the observations found in the preceding study into his own narrative vignette that the reader gets the best feel for where these cultural trends might take humanity in the year 2101 AD. It is at this point the reader becomes most engrossed in the issues under consideration.
In the year 2101, humanity’s major religion is the Church of the Celebration of the Holy World Cosmos whose members are called “Celebrators”. Celebrators strive to embrace all the latest fads in religious thought and philosophy such as panantheism, extraterrestrial wisdom, theories of multiple Christs and avatars, and claim to value harmony and expansive tolerance above all else (Ward, 217).
The Celebrators are opposed by religious traditionalists derisively referred to as “Pewsitters” because of their insistence upon utilizing pews and other ancient religious traditions such as monotheism. The reader would initially suspect the Celebrators to be the heroes of the story since they are depicted as the vanguards of progressivism and enlightenment. However, the church to which they belong is as conniving as the most reactionary of ecclesiastical authorities.
Through an agreement worked out with the government, Celebrators are forbidden from traveling, must be free of political ambitions, and have their minds telepathically scanned to prevent disharmonious thoughts. Pewsitters forced to attend Celebrator services face possible disintegration by a laser beam if they disrupt the proceedings. Despite the facade of technology and innovation surrounding the philosophy of religion underlying much of the science fiction addressing these kinds of questions, man cannot seem to escape his most basic requirements and desires --- no matter how much he might try to suppress them --- regarding his need for a personal God. In Isaac Asimov’s Foundation Trilogy, God or the “First Speaker” is depicted as a kindly, elderly gentleman who travels the universe helping where he is needed (Ward, 115).
Ward puts his own spin on this concept in his fictional vignette postulating a God dwelling anonymously among humanity as an inconspicuous New York cabbie. Fortunately, the Bible teaches that not only did a loving God come to dwell with men upon the earth in the form of His Son Jesus Christ but that He also provided for the forgiveness of sins and eternal life while He was here through His sacrificial death upon the cross and His resurrection from the dead. If that is not good enough for either the literati of speculative narrative or the mundane realist alike, that is their choice and they must live with the consequences.
When contemplating literary undertakings addressing the philosophy of religion, science fiction with its accompanying connotations of laser guns, rocketships, and creepy aliens does not initially come to mind. However, as Hiley Ward points out in Religion 2101 AD, this particular genre known for stretching the limits of perception can serve as an excellent conceptual mechanism through which to explore intimidating themes of belief we might otherwise be reluctant to approach.
By Frederick Meekins
Thursday, January 15, 2015
Wednesday, January 14, 2015
How do I put this without ticking people off or sounding like an apostate. Frankly, sometimes I feel like less of a skeptic after I’ve heard a rank unbeliever rant on about a topic than when I am beaten over the head with all the requirements one is expected to abide by and adhere to if one wants to be considered “sufficiently” Christian.
CNN propagandists insist that the network will not broadcast images of the prophet Muhammad for concern of offending Muslims. Wouldn’t it be more honorable to just go ahead and admit that the management does not want to deal with death threats or terrorist assaults against personnel and property?
Tuesday, January 13, 2015
The email making the suggestion begins, “Advent is a time when sentimentality and spiritualization reigns. But in more ancient forms of Christianity, Advent was more a season of penitence, not unlike Lent. Today, that call for repentance includes a call for justice.”
Interesting enough. Given the ongoing moral decline these days, at times culture could use a dose of a little more guilt and shame. However, individual repentance as understood by the classical Christian or Evangelical is not exactly what the subversives at TransFORM have in mind.
A beloved Yuletide ballad intones “I'm dreaming of a white Christmas.” The types at TransFORM are such outright leftists that, upon hearing such lyrics, they'd probably rend their garments and flagellate themselves while putting on sackcloth and ashes. For you see, despite likely ranking among the palest of the pale as a result of anemia linked no doubt to their vegan diets, they probably don't like being White very much.
The second paragraph of TransFORM's cheery Christmas greeting reads, “This Advent will unfold against the ongoing protests in Ferguson, the results of the ...grand jury report, the ongoing oppression and ending of life by the triple evils of poverty, militarism, and the ceaseless lynching of Christ through black and brown bodies.”
Thus instead of reflecting upon Christ Himself this Christmas season, He is to be replaced by a new messiah. And unlike the original that offered His forgiveness to all who would ask for it irrespective of color, skin pigmentation is about the only thing those speaking on behalf of this racialist godhead care anything about.
Before presenting yourself or someone else as a new Christ, you had best compare yourself to the original and contemplate how what you are offering measures up or falls short.
For example, Jesus was not walking down the middle of the Appian Way when a Roman charioteer simply heralded Him to admonish Him as to the error of His way. Nor did the Messiah reach inside the chariot to pilfer the broadsword and then proceed to bum rush the centurion.
Those attempting to justify the destruction of property as a form of social protest might attempt to respond by comparing such actions to Christ's passionate expulsion of the moneychangers from the Temple. After all, did He not turn over tables and chase the scoundrels with a knotted chord according to John 2:15?
The Temple was the house of God, a representation of where His Spirit dwelt among the people of Israel. As God incarnate in the form of the only Begotten of the Father, the Temple was Christ's to throw out of the structure whomever it was that displeased Him.
In comparison, those committing acts of vandalism and violent sabotage across the nation possess no such legitimate claim to the property which they have so blatantly destroyed. Those were other people's windows smashed and businesses set ablaze.
In the accounts of the Biblical text, Christ condemned those that had turned His house into a house of merchandise. He did not abscond with a bandit's share of loot under the guise of some grandiose pronouncement regarding social justice with some shiny bling and a pair of Air Jordans.
The direct email appeal reads, “...we are inspired by the intersectional justice displayed by Ferguson October and welcome a variety of visions of justice as part of the conversation.”
Worldview thinking postulates that Christian thought as expounded in the pages of the Bible posits a comprehensive understanding that touches upon all facets of existence. If one tugs at one string, all of the others are affected to the point where the entire system could potentially unravel or collapse. This sounds similar to the concept of intersectional justice.
One of the foremost teachings of the Christian faith is that each individual is responsible for his own actions. Outside influences might prod or tempt the person in a particular direction. However, this does not ultimately excuse the actions that an individual might decide to take.
As such, on what Christian grounds does an individual justify destroying the property of someone not even involved in the particular dispute at hand? These beatniks fancying themselves as intellectual revolutionaries will probably drone on about free market economics deploying police power to impose its hegemony and what not upon the backs of the proletariat. But to be considered working class, wouldn't those rampaging in the streets first actually have to work or at least be willing to hoe their own path in life?
Societies are composed ultimately of individuals. It is these that Christ came into the world to shed His blood for, die, and rise from the dead so that each that would call on His name might receive forgiveness for their sins so that they might enjoy eternal life with Him in Heaven.
It is only by addressing the sin in each of our lives --- irrespective of whether we are White, Black, man woman, police officer or civilian --- that there is any hope of ameliorating the problems of a world marred so horribly by the effects of the Fall. Any group that attempts to hijack these festive yet profound celebrations that commemorate this cosmic saga are more than likely in league with the Father of Lies than the Prince of Peace and the Lord of Lords.
By Frederick Meekins
It was remarked in a podcast that “real church” includes fellowship with man as well as God. Criticized especially were those that dart out of their pew once the services is completed. So how long are you required to linger if you don’t really have anything to say and it is quite obvious that no one really has anything to say to you?
Does Pope Francis Equate Those Opposing His Environmental & Immigration Agendas With Homicidal Terrorists?
Monday, January 12, 2015
Friday, January 09, 2015
Maybe he’d rather they just stop attending altogether.
It will be years before a newcomer will be allowed to do anything other than fill a pew anyway (unless they drop a conspicuously large contribution into the collection plate anyway).
So what’s the big deal?
Even if such people are traveling around to a variety of doctrinally acceptable congregations, aren’t they still learning about God?
Or are these preachers so wrapped up in themselves that the only people they believe that these things can be learned through are themselves?
If so, aren’t they taking the first steps to becoming a cult?
By Frederick Meekins
Fascinating. An anti-dating Primitive Baptist upheld as ideal the path Esther pursued to marriage. So apparently there is nothing wrong with a Christian girl concealing her background in order to marry a pagan polygamist drunkard who dumped his primary wife because refused to be paraded on display like a go-go dancer. Mind you, these are the same ultrafundamentalist types that would refuse to let enter the pastorate an elderly widower that married an elderly widow that divorced a drunkard of a husband two spouses back that had since already died.
Thursday, January 08, 2015
All sins bring judgment.
However, if Christians are guilty of the criticism of which they have been charged, isn't that tendency in part the result of the way the Biblical narrative presents itself?
For example, because of the sin of rampant homosexuality, Sodom and Gomorrah were obliterated from the face of the Earth as result of direct divine intervention in the form of fire raining down from Heaven.
Neither can one find any Biblical figure held in esteem that went through a struggle in which they succumbed to this particular form of temptation.
The same is not necessarily true with those falling into heterosexual adultery.
Take for example King David.
Granted, his family went to pieces following his romp with Bethsheba.
However, these were more the result of the consequences of his own actions rather than direct retribution.
Furthermore, the Scripture at no point invalidates or repeals the appellation of him being a man after God's own heart and the patriarch of the royal lineage through which God's kingdom will have no end.
By Frederick Meekins
Wednesday, January 07, 2015
Many conjectures and assertions made in sermons don't really have all that much to do with what is plainly written in the pages of Scripture but rather are about displaying the alleged piety of the pulpit expositor.
It was contended in a sermon that a dour Christian is one that is guilty of idol worship.
Could not the same thing be said about the individual that exudes a pretense of happiness at all times?
From this kind of flippant response to human suffering and emotion, one wonders if such a position stems more from simply not wanting to deal with those grappling with these kinds of struggles.
This observational conjecture is supported by the common exegetical insistence that the Christian can't ask why even when initially confronted with a seemingly overwhelming event or reality as a way to come to grips with what one is enduring.
As evidence, the pastor in the course of this sermon insisted that since Jesus did not lose His joy upon the cross, so neither should we.
But was that not the moment and place from which Christ vocalized, “My God, My God, WHY hast thou forsaken me?”
This preacher, that obviously hasn't been sick a day in his life, remarked that God has extended us the privilege of suffering.
Therefore to desire otherwise as expressed through the articulation of “Why”, the pastor continued, would be a form of idolatry by wanting something that God did not for us.
So by that definition, does that mean it is a sin to shift position when your foot falls asleep or to pass gas when one feels gastronomically bloated?
But if responding to these kinds of symptoms is the body's way of maximizing physical health, perhaps asking questions is more the soul's attempt in a similar fashion to process facts and data that often on the surface until profounder reflection seem to contradict many of the things that we have been told or taught about God often by those claiming to rank among His foremost spokesman.
By Frederick Meekins
Questioning Authority A Mental Disorder But An Overwhelming Attraction To The Genitals To The Members Of The Same Sex Is Not
It will be years before a newcomer will be allowed to do anything other than fill a pew anyway (unless they drop a conspicuously large contribution into the collection plate anyway).
So what’s the big deal?
Even if such people are travelling around to a variety of doctrinally acceptable congregations, aren’t they still learning about God?
Or are these preachers so wrapped up in themselves that the only people they believe that these things can be learned through are themselves? If so, aren’t they taking the first steps to becoming a cult?
By Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, January 06, 2015
Monday, January 05, 2015
It is more that it could have been better.
The narrative did succeed in creating dramatic interpersonal tension between Moses and Pharaoh by emphasizing the intertwined family relationships of the two characters.
While the film strives to acknowledge in its own way the broad strokes of the Biblical saga, the producers could have done a better job of honoring and adhering to the specifics of the text.
For example, though Aaron is given a supporting role in the story, he tends to look on as Moses haggles with God.
The audience is left to wonder if deity is actually communicating with the prophet or merely a delusion initially induced by a cranial trauma.
Given that the director was Ridley Scott, for all we know the entity manifesting itself in the form of a young boy claiming to be God could have been related to the creatures from the Alien films and alluded to in Prometheus.
With special affects advanced as they are as evidenced in the scenes depicting the assorted plagues, it was a disappointment that there was not a scene depicting the encounter where Aaron's rod consumed the rods of the Egyptian magicians that turned into serpents.
But I guess it was more important to focus on extra-Biblical details like raids on Hittite encampments and characterizing Moses as some kind of guerrilla in the tradition of Che Guevara or Emilio Aguinaldo.
by Frederick Meekins
Sunday, December 28, 2014
In a Facebook update, Sword Of The Lord editor Shelton Smith suggested that upon seeing a police officer, firefighter, or member of the military in a dietary establishment, one ought to purchase such civil servants a complimentary meal.
Would that include law enforcement such as those that drafted guidelines that would categorize constitutionalists and the religiously devout as potential terrorists or those that raid Amish dairies?
The two officers didn't deserve to be murdered on the streets of New York City.
However, from that presupposition, it does not follow that the officer that ended a life over an untaxed cigarette should be relieved of the burden of handling his own restaurant tab.
Aren't these functionaries provided a salary or stipend with which to acquire necessities and simple pleasures?
These are not voluntary positions.
No one is forced to pursue this line of work.
Apart from the solider perhaps, the police officer and professional firefighter are paid at a rate not that far below that of others in the working or middle classes.
Granted, these individuals provide an essential service.
But so do a lot of other people.
So since he grew the food that the restaurant prepared, does that mean that the farmer or the field hand that harvested the nutritional consumables shouldn't have to pay for their own meals either?
A number of historians conjecture that the flush toilet may have done more to expand the human lifespan than nearly every other medical advancement.
Therefore applying the principle that public safety personnel are for some reason entitled to complimentary meals, does that mean plumbers and sewage treatment workers should be lavished with free healthcare?
by Frederick Meekins
Wednesday, December 24, 2014
Tuesday, December 23, 2014
As a result of his participation in the lawsuit filed by Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio regarding attempts by the Obama Administration to prevent the deportation of millions of illegals, WMAL categorized Larry Klayman as a “gadfly attorney”. Would the broadcast outlet dare say something similar regarding Gloria Allred (whose primary motivation of jurisprudence is penis envy) or former Senator and infamous whoremonger John Edwards?
The pastor hypothesizes this is because Christ is our master.
The presupposition is correct but the conclusion the pastor deduces from that principle is at best only partially correct if at all.
It must be point out that, because Christ is our master, no man or government can ever be in the ultimate meaning of that concept.
Pulpit expositors must be exceedingly cautious when making claims such as the thesis around which the sermon under consideration is based.
For what if there is some kind of calamity and ISIS-like insurgents establish something akin to Sharia law somewhere in the United States?
If this doctrinal pronouncement is taken to its logical conclusion, when these savages threaten to kill you and rape your wife, as a Christian brainwashed by such urine deficient sermonizing would you just stand there and do nothing with the glazed over smile of an Oral Roberts back up singer plastered across your face?
And what about in a case not so extreme and out of the realm of the possibility in the dark days in which we live?
For if we really have no rights and are to endure everything that is as what Christ deems us worthy of enduring, on what grounds do you defend yourself or family members against a pastor with “wandering hands”?
Or by enunciating this very concern, have I stumbled upon the reason why this particular theory of jurisprudence is shockingly pervasive among certain extremist elements?
By Frederick Meekins
In a sermon titled “The Church: A Called Out Separate Assembly”, Pastor Jason Cooley suggested that people that start screaming and crying when you attempt to take away their Baal bush (presumably he means a Christmas tree) because such people are not acclimated to strong doctrinal preaching. Might the same thing be said regarding this minister as well? For does he not tend to toss a tantrum when a fellow believer might come to a different conclusion regarding such secondary matters?
In a prayer, a pastor insinuated that it is wrong to read the Bible in search of a blessing. That attitude might be wrong if one is doing so to obtain a material blessing. But why bother reading the text if not to get something --- either spiritual or intellectual --- out of such a mental exercise?
Regarding the extremeists that post anti-Christmas sermons on SermonAudio.com. Given that the site allows pastors that support the celebration of Christmas to upload content to the site, aren't those opposed to Christmas that remain on the site violating the very Scriptural injunction about separation that they invoke as justification for heaping condemnation upon those that celebrate Christmas? Or have I once again brought up one of those questions no one is supposed to ask?
Monday, December 22, 2014
Sunday, December 21, 2014
Ligonier Ministries has posted a meme disturbed that a majority do not believe their pastor's sermons to be authoritative over their lives.
It is God's Word that is authoritative over your life.
The pastor is simply one voice among many to assist in coming to an understanding of that particular text.
The minister's expositions are only authoritative or binding in those areas where the Scriptures speak definitively.
The pastor should be respected and listened to while in the pulpit if you decide to remain in the congregation where he is preaching in terms of refraining from audible disturbances being enunciated upon hearing something over which you have disagreement.
However, in regards to those issues where they can be a variety of opinion among Christians of similar piety and doctrinal propriety, you are the one that has the final say as to what goes on in your own home and life beyond the church meeting house.
By Frederick Meekins
Thursday, December 18, 2014
During her “incognito” trip to Target a few years ago, a mere peasant requested that the First Lady assist her to retrieve an item from a shelf.
But was that because she was confused with ranking among the servile classes as she insists transpired or because she is built like a Sasquatch?
So the next time you find yourself in a retail setting and you see individuals of a particular demographic that become human bobbleheads whenever they go to open their mouths, you will probably get less grief if you hold to the assumption that they are probably too lazy to work to begin with.
Wednesday, December 17, 2014
As a counterexample, the illustration was provided of a pastor that, upon hearing of the unexpected tragic death of family members questioned, why and where was God.
However, apart from an admonition not to let one's faith waiver like that of this grief-stricken minister, those listening in the congregation weren't provided with much homiletical resolution otherwise as the sermon was hastily brought to a conclusion.
Did this pastor in the illustration renounce his belief in God altogether, as that would have been wrong.
Or, was he upset with God for a season yet still retaining his underlying faith and love of God?
After all, who among us has not been profoundly upset with a family member while still continuing to love them deeply?
Is God so wrapped up in Himself that He does not realize this?
On what grounds does a minister require an expectation that the Bible does not seem to impose?
For example, Job did not curse God.
However, at one point he did verbalize his frustrations with the divinely allowed unfolding of events that this suffering servant did not comprehend.
There are Psalms of lamentation that seem to indicate that David experienced a similar frame of mind where, despite being profoundly troubled, he still retained his deep faith.
In the Book of Ecclesiastes, his son Solomon would counsel that there is a time for mourning.
And one of the most profound Biblical references of all is also the shortest.
The passage succinctly conveys “Jesus wept.”
So if God's own Son did not make it through life without the intense emotional disturbance that is often required to bring a man to public tears, is it really proper to demand an emotional response bordering on a cognitive dissonance more concerned with how a response will be perceived rather than with what the traumatized person is actually experiencing?
By Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, December 16, 2014
Monday, December 15, 2014
Would correspondents expressing shock and contempt upon learning exactly what it is that their colleague Rachel Maddow does in pursuit of carnal pleasure still be employed by that network?
As warped as they might be, at least there is still the possibility for those at the fury convention to pair off with members of the opposite sex.
Traynonite Terrorists Advocating Genocide Of The White Race Block Ambulance Transporting Mangled Subway Victim
Saturday, December 13, 2014
A survey concludes that nearly 50% of Americans would not want their sons to play football.
It is up to the parents to decide what recreational pursuits that they will allow their children to pursue.
There is nothing in Scripture demanding participation in organized athletics whatsoever.
Should these youngsters be catastrophically injured during a game, are those elevating participation on the gridiron nearly to the status of an obligation going to pick up the expenses for hospitalization or longterm care?
by Frederick Meekins
Thursday, December 11, 2014
In other words, the production follows in the classic Hollywood tradition trail-blazed by the likes of Ellen Degeneres who stretched her talents as a thespian by coming out on her sitcom as a lesbian (which most could already tell she was by simply looking at her) and this seasons acclaimed comedy “Black-ish” that is so obsessed with race that the producers gave it a title that would result in riots (these days quite literally) if nearly the same program aired with an ethnically corresponding ensemble titled “White-ish”.
But wouldn't that make the one squeezing them out (often the pastor) the anus?
That part of the anatomy remains attached as a permanent fixture and remains caked with lingering stench and filth no matter how well intentioned its regular cleaning.
Unless one is on the payroll or holds some kind of position of responsibility in a particular congregation, there is nothing in Scripture saying you have to articulate any specific reason why you might decide to leave and go elsewhere.
By Frederick Meekins
North Dakota has gained headline attention for proposing that, in order to graduate, students ought to be required to pass a citizenship test of the variety administered to arrivals seeking that particular legal status. Before looking down one's nose in disgust at contemporary youths unable to intellectually grasp the basics of being an American, shouldn't it be asked if the school system is itself teaching these basics?
What those hearing this ought to do is either leave that church altogether or, if they don't itemize their contributions for tax purposes, not give the remainder of their 2014 offering until sometime in 2015 just for the Sheol of it.
Click On The Headline
Wednesday, December 10, 2014
However, should a sermon be formulated in such a way to rhetorically insinuate that everyone else had done something profoundly wrong if God concealed this event from all but a few?
Why are certain hardline Evangelicals this insistent about finding sin in nearly everything?
Isn't the point of these accounts that, in announcing the birth of the Messiah to people as disparate as agricultural laborers and imperial advisors, the Gospel message is for everyone?
It might sound exceedingly pious, but you can't accuse a population of being too preoccupied with their own affairs in terms of complying the Roman census to be concerned about a young woman about to give birth to the most important baby in all history, as this pastor explicates in his homily, if the population is not told exactly who this blessed virgin happens to be?
They didn't exactly have Twitter or post Amber Alerts in those days.
by Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, December 09, 2014
And what is the point?
Is the truth of an artistic or didactic work to be determined by critics out to advance their own philosophical or religious agendas?
Applying Rosebrough's reasoning to other institutional venues, should a church not be judged by its willingness to stand up for the Gospel but rather by the size of the crowd drawn in Sunday morning?
There was no doubt a time when the influential of Europe condescendingly looked down their noses at the pastor and theologian Rev. Rosebrough identifies with in terms of denominational affiliation.
Should the bold Reformer have quietly taken his seat as well, leaving the issues of his day to be addressed and resolved by more celebrated thinkers and prestigious minds?
There seems to be little way of winning those of Chris Rosebrough's perspective.
He is correct in much of his analysis that a spirit of entertainment has penetrated the operational procedures of how many churches function.
But Cameron is not necessarily plying his craft solely in a the formalized ecclesiastical setting in which Lutherans of Rosebrough's variety insist the form and order of service cannot veer from its highly ordered and regulated nature.
Kirk Cameron will likely never be an historical figure on par with Martin Luther ushering humanity into whole new epochs of understanding where the very relationships between the individual, church, and God are reevaluated in light of reconsidered Scriptural evidence.
However, shouldn't these Christian leaders that bemoan the lack of a Christian influence throughout the arts be a bit more supportive when a fellow believer attempts to burst the epistemological shackles that were often put in place by fellow ministers imposing a misdirected brand of piety to begin with?
By Frederick Meekins
But DC has done the better job of transitioning their properties to the small screen where the characters can be developed better than in big screen movies.
The art form was perfected with Smallville.
There is now Arrow, Gotham , and the Flash.
Saw posted today that Teen Titans is in development.
It sounds like Syfy Channel has picked up the Krypton series and a Supergirl series is set to take off soon on CBS.
I’ve yet to see Constantine.
Horror has it’s place.
It's just not my favorite.
With ondemand available over cable, it is a challenge to keep tabs on everything.
Monday, December 08, 2014
At the end of each broadcast, Bill O'Reily concludes with what the correspondent considers common sense advice.
On the 12/1/14 episode, he suggested that viewers not wish their non-Christian friends a “Merry Christmas” but instead a more non-sectarian platitude.
If such people are to remain so prickly despite knowing your particular preferences in terms of religious and holiday matters that they can't humor you, are such people really your friends?
It's not like the greeting is enunciated as some kind of religious identity test the way that ISIS conducts impromptu Koranic quizzes for the purposes of singling victims out for execution.
What's so wrong with wishing non-Christians a “Merry Christmas”?
Do those belonging to another faith think they'd fair better off should Jesus had never come?
Secular scholars always make a fuss how much tolerance and leeway Rome gave to populations subjugated willingly.
But that world power was particularly brutal to those that did not, particularly those insistent that their loyalty to God outweighed any that might be owed to earthly authorities.
A pastor opposed to Christmas insisted that Christians ought not to have anything to do with the day because of the widespread carnality that often takes place at that time despite many of the participants feeling holier overall because of the religious meaning attached to the festival.
But isn't that more the fault of the individual that decides to celebrate the occasion in that manner?
The pastor continued that he also opposed Christmas because the holiday does not deliver the joy and happiness that it promises.
But isn't the same true regarding nearly everything else in life?
Applying these same reasons, wouldn't it also follow that organized religion, and especially services conducted on weekends, should be avoided as well?
For do not many that attend these also think that by doing so that they have kindled special favor with God for having done so and, though few will admit it, they really did not have as good of a time as they claim they did in order to retain good standing with the group?
By Frederick Meekins
Tyler Perry productions are often marketed as quality (even family friendly) entertainment. In a preview for some film featuring Perry's transvestite character Medea, comedian Larry the Cable Guy remarks something like did you hear the one about the two Black dudes and the rabbi. Medea remarks to Larry The Cable Guy did you hear about the Redneck shot for telling the one about the two Black dudes and the rabbi. Would a White producer be heralded and acclaimed like Tyler Perry if the punchline of a skit was a White character threatening to shoot a Black one over something that the White character considered to be off color?
Just days before, this Afrosupremacist demagogue delivered a tirade insinuating threats of racial violence and terrorism.
This is a testament to the extent to which DC political elites despise White people.
Mind you, these are some of the same people that would in other circumstances insist that Paula Deen should be financially ruined for what was said in the privacy of her own home following a traumatic experience and that the name of the Washington Redskins must be changed to comply with politically correct sensitivities.
Thursday, December 04, 2014
In remarks before the House of Representatives, a number of congressional members enunciated in reference to the Ferguson grand jury verdict and following upheaval the mantra “No justice, no peace”. Would these elected officials be as sympathetic to violence and destruction if such mayhem was instead carried out in the halls of the Capitol by thieving hordes rather than inflicted upon the property owners of Midwestern hamlet in question?
At the National Christmas Tree lighting, Obama failed to name “the child” that we celebrate this time of year.
Is he deluded into thinking that the story refers to himself?
At events commemorating Islamic occasions, does Obama also stumble over himself linguistically in the attempt to avoid mentioning the name of that world religion and its founder as he did at the National Christmas Tree Lighting?
Obama pointed out that young WOMENNNN used their coding skills to program the digitized Christmas trees on the Ellipse in Washington.
Is there a reason why possessing a penis excluded youngsters from participating in this opportunity?
by Frederick Meekins
But is that entirely accurate?
For did not voters in these states initially enact prohibitions against this practice?
Therefore, on what grounds is the average American responsible when leaders at the highest levels of government overturn the electorally expressed will of the people?
There is only so much that the average person can do.
Chuck Crismier is both an attorney and a theologian.
However, others might have different areas in which they are expected to minister.
For example, is it not perhaps even more important for parents to model loving marriages and family behavior in the lives of their children rather than to neglect these relationships through an all-encompassing activism?
Getting these priorities out of order will do more to spread this form of social decay faster than an out of control judiciary ever could.
By Frederick Meekins
Liberals create a situation where the selling of unlicensed cigarettes is an offense worthy of fatal police intervention and the statists applaud the continual expansion of government power.
These related perspectives then apparently blame certain varieties of conservatism when it is caught on tape how the totalist state actually plays itself out on the streets and in people's lives.
Obama can't chicken excrement his way out of this one.
Obese cigarette vendors are exactly the ones that have no place in the President's version of utopia.
One shouldn't resist arrest.
However, these bureaucrats are often clearly intoxicated on their own sense of self importance these days.
You are about accused of causing a disturbance at the DMV if you raise your voice for the purposes of being heard over the background roar of this anteroom of Ghenna to get your point across to the witless functionaries attempting not to apply the procedures as they are actually written and who can barely speak audible English.
Wednesday, December 03, 2014
One might think such a concern expressed would be about military resources diverted to what essentially amounts to frivolous entertainment or the result of upon additional reflection realizing that, if the military industrial complex is willing to go along with such a low-grade deception, what other things might the American people be being told less than the truth about.
However, a leftwing front group known as the Campaign For A Commercial Free Childhood denounced the violence and militarism promoted on a NORAD Santa-themed website depicting Old St. Nick's sleigh piloted by eight tiny reindeer being escorted by two fighter jets.
This response is wrong on a number of levels.
First is the name of the racket raising the ruckus.
Why should a Commercial Free Childhood be construed as a positive thing?
In many respects, commercialism and commercializing has been beneficial for all parties involved . Such transactions should not be looked at as necessarily bad.
Through commercialism, the manufacturer is able to produce a product that is needed or (in the case of most Christmas presents) desired in exchange for profit. Parents, in turn, are able to bring a degree of happiness and joy into the lives of their children on Christmas morning.
Granted, there are times that commercial transactions can get out of hand and begin to encroach upon or crowd out other considerations. But does that mean we abolish the free market or capitalist system as a result?
Such a question must be raised especially in light of the alternatives. It is interesting how radical activists aren't quite as eager to denounce the shortcomings of economic systems other than unbridled commerce.
Does an outfit like the Campaign For A Commercial Free Childhood honestly think it could exist in a milieu other than the technologically advanced West?
If the Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood prefers a statist command economy where resource allocation is not made by an incomprehensible number of uncoerced choices but rather by a panel of credentialed experts thinking that they know more about the wants and needs of the individuals that make up the masses that such technocrats claim to be acting on behalf of, they need to realize that troublemakers such as themselves questioning the underlying assumptions of the regime in such an outright manner are either not allocated their ration for failing to comply with the objectives of the COMMUNITY or outright eliminated for undermining the authority of the hegemon.
The other alternative to both the advanced commercialist or command economy models would be one based more on simple barter or self sufficiency. To those that have never been forced to live in such a world, that particular way of life might seem idealized or even romantic.
However, such an existence is hardly the picture postcard it is easy to construe it to be from a distance. In such a setting, many of the luxuries and even many of the now easily-obtainable necessities that we enjoy would not be available or so scarce that access to them would be restricted to all but those with a level of wealth and power far beyond that of the ordinary.
Often, the sensitive can be troubled by the emphasis upon the material or physical that seems to characterize societies and civilizations that have advanced to at least an industrial level. It is only within a context where the basic biological needs of a high percentage of the population are met in an expedient or efficient manner that a sufficient number are allowed the luxury to reflect upon whether or not childhood (a period of life which itself wasn't given much consideration before the expansion of the mass society activists in these kinds of groups have made it their mission to denigrate and undermine) has become overly commercialized.
In a simple barter or self-sufficiency economy, the crank employed by the Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood, in the best circumstances, wouldn't have the time necessary to contemplate abstractions such as militarism. Nearly all of one's attention and working hours would be devoted to cultivating and crafting on one's own the bare necessities of life if these are even available.
More than likely, those drawn to these kinds of non-profit associations that don't really do anything useful (or little of anything beyond pining for a world that would result in widespread destitution and ruination if it existed anywhere other than in the imaginations of the deluded) wouldn't survive for very long.
If the beatniks at the Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood are clueless regarding the operation of a viable economy, they are downright dangerous when it comes to defense policy.
The specific complaint of the organization was that the animated sequence of Santa escorted by fighter jets promotes violence and militarism. Mind you, it wasn't like Santa was blown to smithereens for violating North American airspace.
Even more disturbing and unsettling was the extent to which the military went to placate the peaceniks in regards to this outreach effort.
The NORAD spokesman answering the press inquiry went out of his way to point out that the jet fighters depicted in the video weren't only unarmed but that they were Canadian rather than American. Nothing shouts surrender monkey this side of France louder than an unarmed Canadian.
A nation's future is determined in part by the values it instills in its youth regarding certain essential social institutions such as family, work, and the military. In terrorist nations of the Middle East, a Mickey Mouse knock-off indoctrinates toddlers regarding the need to exterminate Jews and Christians while extolling the glories of dieing a mangled death on behalf of the tribal deity. We, on the other hand, become unhinged now should a child merely see the image of an armed airplane.
By Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, December 02, 2014
Monday, December 01, 2014
In a prayer, an admonishing petition exhorted that the hearers would not accumulate Biblical facts but rather be spoken to by the Holy Spirit.
Isn't it just as important to pray that a stark dichotomy not be drawn between these states of cognitive awareness?
Within a set of hermeneutical parameters where the Scriptures are ultimately the only trustworthy venue through which God speaks to mankind, without a collection of Biblical facts and observations deduced from revelation, how else will the believer hear from God?
Saturday, November 29, 2014
Actor turned evangelist Kirk Cameron may be becoming personally acquainted with that classic truism.
Merging these divergent vocations, Cameron has produced a documentary examining the Christian origins or at least basis of Christmas.
Surprisingly, some of the harshest criticisms are not coming from the militant secularists or even outright atheists but rather from Cameron's fellow believers.
Cameron is coming under condemnation for including in his film a segment on Santa Claus being inspired by Bishop Nicholas of Myra.
It is from this figure that the legend of St. Nicholas is derived.
But instead of commending Cameron for highlighting little known facts of church history, according to ChristianNews.net, Mike Gerndon of Proclaiming the Gospel Ministries is peeved that Cameron kept his presentation on an ecumenical level and did not go all Jack Chick in exposing the jolly red elf's Roman Catholicism.
The evangelist is quoted as saying in an article posted 11/12/14. “The fact that the Roman Catholic Church made Nicholas a saint should be a red flag to anyone who knows only God can convert sinners to saints by the sovereign work of His Spirit.”
Does it really matter if Nicholas was Roman Catholic or not?
It's not like there were many other churches to pick from in his time if one wanted to express one's religious faith in terms of an orthodox Biblical theology.
However, for Gerndon, even getting his rear this high up on his shoulders is not enough.
His joy this time of year seems to be derived apparently by attempting to ruin every one else's holiday season.
Gerndon continued, “Born again Christians should not be joining Roman Catholics in any spiritual...activity. Paul called on us to remain separate from the unbeliever. When people say 'Merry Christmas'....They are mixing the holy name of Christ with a pagan holiday and a blasphemous representation of Christ on an altar.”
Like many other conceptual formulations, Christmas is imbued with the meaning that we put into it.
By saying “Thursday” or “Saturday”, are fundamental Evangelicals rendering homage to the pagan deities for which those particular days are named?
Scripture urges to call upon the name of the Lord and be saved.
At no time is salvation dependent upon how vehemently one opposes those historic points and personalities where this particular understanding of the faith intersects with another with which it is at times at distinctive variance.
By Frederick Meekins
Friday, November 28, 2014
Couldn't the Macy's Parade start with classier lyrics than something with "Hell Of A..." in it with so many children no doubt watching?
The Thomas The Tank Engine balloon looks like it is plunging over the proverbial cliff.
The Chinese float. A nod to America's landlords.
After the parade, will Kiss be wheelchaired back to the nursing home for their meal of creamed corn and turkey mash?
Wednesday, November 26, 2014
Tuesday, November 25, 2014
Southern Baptist Functionary Condemns As Neo-Confederates Those Failing To Embrace Trayvonite-Obamaism
Monday, November 24, 2014
Sunday, November 23, 2014
In compliance with the state mandate to curb storm water run off, the Prince George's County Department of the Environment is considering a proposal that would waive the unpopular impervious surface property tax assessment for their properties if churches agree to preach environmentally friendly sermons or engage in other forms of mental conditioning.
What's the big deal, some will ask.
After all, does the Bible not teach us to be good stewards of God's creation?
God's word also instructs the believer to be on guard against wolves in sheep's clothing.
If governments grant tax code favors to religious organizations for ideological compliance in regards to one issue, what is to prevent them from doing so in regards to more controversial matters?
In the name tolerance and diversity, what if governments granted tax and regulatory relief to congregations supporting gay marriage?
What if a government wanted to promote pluralism and inclusion by lavishing all manner of benefits upon a church that agreed not to lift the name of Jesus above all names but instead only reference a nondescript generic God or no God at all but rather just the Ultimate Concern as formulated by Paul Tillich?
How about putting the shoe on the other foot for a moment?
What if to bolster declining birthrates a government lavished tax favors upon churches promising to preach prolife messages?
It is said that the power to tax is the power to destroy.
Advocates insist that that the program is strictly voluntary.
However, government programs that start off voluntary can easily end up becoming mandatory.
Anybody remember the assurances of if you like your healthcare plan you can keep your healthcare plan?
From one perspective, the program is completely voluntary with no government shocktroops raiding churches failing to put in the environmental upgrades or enunciating church dogma in such a way to win the approval of the state (at least not yet anyway).
Yet from another perspective, aren't churches that refuse to have their very thoughts policed in this manner punished by having to pay the tax?
Courts have forbidden graduation prayers for being less of a mental intrusion.
By Frederick Meekins
In a series of sermons against C.S. Lewis posted at SermonAudio.com, Pastor Jason Cooley creates the impression that it is wrong to read that particular author's works because of areas in which the famed scholar's theology was deficient by the standard of Biblical orthodoxy.
So why is it not wrong for the pastor to have either read these works or to have familiarized himself with this material?
At one point in the sermon, Pastor Cooley shouts like a lunatic asking if anyone in the congregation still wants to read the disputed books or watch movies inspired by these particular texts. And what if someone responded back “YES!”
In this series of sermons, Pastor Cooley insisted that the title alone of “The Lion, The Witch & The Wardrobe” ought to be enough to get the believing Christian to avoid the book.
So if witches are evil, what is wrong with casting one in the role of the villain?
Maybe that role should instead, as in the case of many of Stephen King's works of speculative literature, be reserved for ultralegalistic ministers attempting to assert too much control over their congregations and parishioners.
From the sermons, it becomes increasingly apparent that, while Pastor Cooley has a commendable grasp of these areas where caution regarding Lewis would be prudent, the minister does not have much appreciation for the techniques of the literary arts.
This is particularly evident in regards to the scenes Cooley analyzes of Lucy's encounter with the fawn Mr.Tumnus.
For example, Rev. Cooley insists that, since fawns are noted in mythology for their seductive powers, that what Lewis is advocating are indecent carnal relations between underage minors and demoniac spirit beings.
Instead, the greater truth Lewis could be attempting to convey might be for the need to be cautious of that which we might initially find appealing if we consider the literary motif associated with the fawn and how the narrative plays itself out with Mr. Tumnus wanting to capitalize on his initial encounter with Lucy by handing her over to the White Witch.
Sometimes these unsettling realities that we are reluctant to face can be easier to grapple with or stick in the brain in the form of an engaging story rather than be constantly hollered at alone.
However, apparently Pastor Cooley is not much of a proponent of the old adage about a spoonful of sugar getting the medicine to go down.
In his tirades against C.S. Lewis, Pastor Cooley remarked that science fiction is nothing but witchcraft.
As justification for such a claim, Pastor Cooley posits that witchcraft consists of any power that does not come from God.
Once again, what Pastor Cooley possesses in terms of a desire to preserve sound doctrine he sadly lacks in literary understanding.
Admittedly, magic is often an intrinsic component of many forms of fantasy.
However, though science fiction can contain certain mystical elements such as the Force in Star Wars, over all, the genre attempts to provide a technological basis for the impressive wonders described in these works of imagination.
As such, though science fiction can be utilized to promote questionable philosophies, science fiction is morally neutral like most other forms of technology.
As such, does Pastor Cooley condemn the use of electricity or the internal combustion engine?
For though these are based upon natural forces set into motion by God's sustaining power, as in the case of literary speculation in conjecture like science fiction, these are the result of the human mind reflecting upon a fact or a concept and extrapolating from these to configure them in such a way as to result in an until then unrealized application or insight.
Interestingly, developers of these technologies expressed affinities towards ideas and affiliations perhaps even more questionable than those to which C.S. Lewis was drawn.
Henry Ford disseminated “The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion” to promote his particular brand of anti-Semiticism.
Thomas Edison wasn't just at one time a member of Theosophical Society; his research into electricity was intermingled with speculation regarding spiritualist phenomena and communication.
Therefore, does that mean that to remain consistent with Pastor Cooley's call for a radical degree of separation, that Pastor Cooley must repent of his electronic ministries and instead must in faith rely only on those methods utilized by the Apostles in the early days of the Church?
By Frederick Meekins
Comedians everywhere mourn the loss of such a rich source of material, from his classic outburst “The bitch set me up” to the time he was caught having oral sex behind bars.
Not every DC mayor is infamous enough to be mentioned on The Simpsons.
Was quite amusing the time some welfare leech inquired when was he going to do more for those in her economic condition and he replied by asking when was she going to stop having babies.
Thursday, November 20, 2014
Bill Cosby probably is a sex pervert. But how is one going to prove allegations made regarding carnal liaisons transpiring over thirty years ago? For all we know, these woman might have liked the attention at the time and merely are now outraged that the famed comedian did not share more of his pudding pops with them. Given Janice Dickinson's history of chemical dependency, how do we know that what she's recalling isn't a bad LSD trip?
Wednesday, November 19, 2014
Holder Insinuates That Flippantly Flirting With A White Woman As Evil As Snatching A Police Officer’s Gun
Tuesday, November 18, 2014
Of the Muslim prayers allowed in the structure on 11/11/14, the National Cathedral posted on its Facebook page that the service was open only to attendees and interfaith guests.
So apparently the National Cathedral doesn't have a problem with religious exclusion when doing so promotes that institution's anti-Christian and anti-American agendas.
Would a radical Christian sect that opposed homosexuality be allowed to promote their particular theological viewpoint within that particular edifice with the vestry's blessing, especially if the sponsors or participants advocated the use of violence or extend moral approval to those utilizing such to achieve their socioreligious objectives?
Then why is this privilege being extended to Muslims having participated in such outrages?
Monday, November 17, 2014
In particular, one such condemnation intoned that from this alteration in commercial operational policy that America is an evil nation worthy of God's judgment.
So because Walmart was either open on Thanksgiving or opened their doors later that evening, nuclear destruction and annihilation or something comparable should rain down across the nation. That is, of course, what is usually meant by the euphemism of “God's judgment”.
To justify this hardline response to opening stores on Thanksgiving beyond simply frowning upon the decision to actively wanting to see lives ruined because of it, Biblical prohibitions regarding the Sabbath are often invoked.
The intentions might possess a nobility in that these sentiments attempt to construe all of reality through the light of God's word and theology derived from it. However, in terms of religious jurisprudence, the position falls a bit short in terms of serving as a platform upon which one can stand to look righteous in calling for blatant ruination and upheaval.
God no doubt delights when His children offer up gratitude for what He has provided and is angered when this appreciation is not evident. However, it does not follow that one cannot express gratitude in a scheduled ritualized manner prior to engaging in orderly commerce later that same day.
One might even claim that God does not really care one way or another to a great degree about the statutory observance of Thanksgiving Day. It may come as a surprise, but there is nothing found within the pages of the canon of Scripture demanding the observance be commemorated a particular Thursday in November.
It must also be asked to what extent do those enforcing Thanksgiving Day under the Mosaic regulations upholding the Sabbath want these punishments and prohibitions enforced? From Exodus 20:9-11, it is learned that the Sabbath is the seventh day of the week. Jehovah is quite explicit about this.
In our system of chronometric tabulation, Saturday is the Sabbath. What the vast majority of Christians celebrate each Sunday (especially in the morning) is technically not the Sabbath but rather the Lord's Day to commemorate the bodily Resurrection of Jesus Christ.
These have been conflated in the minds of many, especially those under the sway of a strict legalism. However, these days are not the same.
So are those demanding compulsory observance of the Sabbath willing to turn themselves over for execution should they find themselves violating the extensive prohibitions regulating the day? For according to Exodus 31:14, that is the stipulated punishment for those failing to observe the Sabbath of the seventh day if such a regulation still applies beyond Deuteronomical Israel.
When those attending compulsory Sabbath observations return home, do they intend to walk rather than operate a vehicle? For that is the extent to which the most observant Orthodox Jews adhere to the exactness of that divine decree. Senator Joseph Lieberman would not even place his own subway fair card into the electronic ticket-taker.
Furthermore, do those deliberating to make such a chore of relaxation intend to only eat leftovers from the night before or unheated prepackaged foods? Because if the true believing Christian must abide by every Biblical decree in excruciating detail for fear of befalling God's indignation, the preparation of consumables is forbidden as well.
Those more interested in ruining everyone else's celebration rather than simply maximizing their own will respond that simply pointing out what is said plainly in certain passages of Scripture downplayed as a result of those advocating them not wanting a greater majority of Christians to grapple with what is being said actually obscures the greater truth of the principle that is being conveyed. Fair enough.
If not for the principles conveyed by God to the Hebrew forefathers of the need for rest and reflection, mankind might have never comprehended the need for a work environment beneficial for all sides of the economic transaction. Before this revelation, for the most part laborers were little more than fodder to be worked until they dropped and quickly discarded.
However, are those insisting up a slavish adherence to the letter of the law really getting that point across when their homiletical formulations cause the listeners to stop and wonder if what really gets the motors of these scriptural exegetes running is rather body counts, the destruction of property, and overall social upheaval. For are not these in some form or another what is meant by the phrase “God's judgment”?
In these times of widespread debauchery and systematic subversion of Western culture, one usually tries to distance oneself from feminist critiques and condemnation of traditional religion. However, if one desires to be an honest observer of the human condition, one is forced to admit that only a man sitting back with his feet propped up would construe Thanksgiving Day as a Sabbath free from labor.
On the classic sitcom “Home Improvement” starring Tim Allen, one of the wittiest lines ever uttered on the series was verbalized when his sidekick Al Borlin quipped that dinner does not make itself. The remark was very similar to an observation made by my own mother.
If a man fails to realize that Thanksgiving is not some magical occasion where one of the most delicious dinners of the year just sprouts fully formed on the table in a manner akin to manna from Heaven, it is most likely that a woman in either the form of a wife, mother or even unwed concubine has spent much of the day laboring away in preparation.
Interestingly, those often complaining the loudest about the growing irreverence with which the day is treated are not absent from the kitchen because they are given over to the higher spiritual pursuits such as prayer, Bible study, or theological contemplation. Instead, they are plopped in an easy chair or on the sofa watching the most typical of entertainments. And I am not talking about the Westminster Kennel Club but rather NFL football.
The conspicuously religious claim that they are opposed to retailers being opened on Thanksgiving because their delicate consciences are disturbed by something so crass and base as mere commerce being transacted on such a solemn occasion. Then why do they have their peepers glued to the boob tube?
It is quite instructive that this contempt for free market exchange is limited to when it is engaged in by the laboring and servile classes. For the last time I checked, it is doubtful that the players, assorted team personnel, or the media conglomerates were putting on a complimentary exhibition game.
No doubt, millions upon millions of dollars exchange hands to orchestrate whatever number of games take place on this particular day. I am not really aware of the exact number. I usually watch the dog show while eating canned pasta just so I can say I had spaghetti for Thanksgiving.
So why are those deciding to go shopping on Thanksgiving more worthy of having death and misery inflicted upon them more so than those instead either attending the football game or even watching the event on television? Confronted so boldly about what it is that they are advocating, those previously enunciating a desire to see God's wrath dispensed over something as commonplace as going to the mall might attempt to linguistically backpedal by claiming that, in their call for judgment, they did not mean to wish misery or death upon those participating in a disputed activity or behavior.
I've pretty much been in or around Christian circles my entire life even if I don't feel welcomed within them entirely. The phrase “God's judgment” rarely has connotation other than that of sorrow and lamentation unless in rare instances where one is referencing the rewards that will be bestowed upon the believer for the good deeds they did honoring to Christ.
Furthermore, in the vast majority of instances, it's not like those participating one way or the other were prevented from enjoying the primary festivities of the Thanksgiving celebration or were not duly compensated in some manner.
For example, though likely not a universal beneficence bestowed on all employees, most laboring to make the sales happen were probably paid some kind of overtime. If not, such personnel were probably not compelled to work beyond their normal allotment of hours for that particular week. As such, they were payed with their scheduled adjusted to be off at another time.
Of even less moral concern ought to be the ones deciding to participate in these sales events on the consumer side of the transaction. For example, many of these sales were designated to commence well after the customary dinner hour.
As such, by that point in the evening, most would have already cogitated upon whatever thoughts of gratitude would have otherwise fired within their respective synapses. Most are in a turkey-induced catatonia, bloated and passing intestinal gas as they glare in a stupor into the television.
Interestingly, if we are raising the opposition to the opening of retailers on Thanksgiving to the level of Biblical law worthy of incurring divine retribution for violating, it must be pointed out that the commencement of these sales technically aren't even occurring on Thanksgiving. In the context of Hebrew culture and religious jurisprudence, the rendering of the day is not determined from midnight to midnight as occurs in the contemporary system. The day is instead rendered from sundown to sundown.
If one wants to be a stickler to Biblical detail, it must be noted that many of these Thanksgiving sales often commence well after dark. Therefore, under Sabbath prohibitions, it is no more immoral to shop from the disputed 8 to 11:59 PM than it would be during the 8 to 11:59 AM period Black Friday morning.
Those wanting to impose the Old Testament as binding civil legislation insist such must be done because God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. So if Americans deserve nuclear annihilation, plague, or whatever manifestation of the Apocalypse tickles your particular eschatological fancy for simply going to the store on Thanksgiving, should our nation also be destroyed for altering the method of rendering the days in compliance with the interpretative principle just enunciated?
It can indeed be upsetting to see what one perceives as our culture moving away from Godly foundations. However, enunciating a desire to see lives ruined and destroyed for such is probably a greater violation of explicit Biblical imperatives (such as the careful invocation of judgment) than the modification of a practice that (though commendable and worthy of continuation) is more of an interpretive application of the divine imperatives to begin with.
By Frederick Meekins
Thursday, November 13, 2014
Isn’t that akin to saying that if you don’t possess a physician’s or nurse’s level of knowledge of anatomy that you don’t appreciate the body as the temple of the Holy Spirit?
Everybody’s got different things they are interested in.
It is commendable to have a knowledge of church history.
But I don't see the point of laying on a guilt trip on those that really aren't into the topic as an avocation or hobby.
Should the bookworms not that great at math beyond balancing a checkbook be condemned for not being skilled in what is often described as the language in which God wrote the universe into existence?
It is commendable to have an understanding and appreciation for church history.
However, if one becomes to absorbed in the discipline, isn't there a danger of keeping stoked to too intense a degree ancient disputes of long ago?
Just how worked up should the believer still be over the Defenestration of Prague?
by Frederick Meekins
Wednesday, November 12, 2014
That might provide a degree of comfort if one's biological family is urging one to engage in blatantly anti-Biblical behavior.
However, such a grandiose sentiment itself needs to be circumscribed by carefully delineated boundaries.
You will always have a higher priority to those through whom you came into the world.
There is something downright shameful regarding some of these missionaries that will willingly die on behalf of the Pygmies in the African bush but hardly give a second thought to their aging parents here in America.
In classical Christian thought, this is the idea of subsidiarity, that your most profound obligations are to those closest to you.
Secondly, by insisting that a more profound loyalty is owed to one's church family than one's biological family can expose the gullible to a shocking litany of potential abuse on the part of church leaders.
For Jim Jones will live in infamy for conditioning numerous followers to place obedience to church structure over the well being of spouses and children, with the coercion and manipulation he subjected them to in the isolation of the jungle ending with hundreds dead.
It is a shame that a sermon purporting to admonish the need for the Christian to heed the lessons of history failed to take into account one of the twentieth century's most profound.
By Frederick Meekins
It is commendable to have an understanding and appreciation for church history. However, if one becomes to absorbed in the discipline, isn't there a danger of keeping stoked to too intense a degree ancient disputes of long ago? Just how ticked off should the believer still be over the Defenestration of Prague?
It is commendable to have a knowledge of church history. I don't see the point of laying on a guilt trip on those that really aren't into the topic as an avocation or hobby. Should the bookworms not that great at math beyond balancing a checkbook be condemned for not being skilled in what is often described as the language in which God wrote the universe into existence?
In terms of the civilian sector, a veteran is no more entitled to a particular occupational position than any other qualified applicant. An associate knows of a veteran in the corporation where both are employed that is quite lackluster in terms of the execution of the assigned tasks and another that is an academy graduate that is appallingly indecisive in terms of management style.
Yes, these are Islamists.
If just interested in quietly practicing their Islamic faith, they'd simply find somewhere else to prayer.
Will women be allowed to participate?
The National Cathedral has embraced the libertine sexual agenda so wholeheartedly that the bells were rung following a Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage like a war had ended or a new monarch crowned.
How many mosques or Islamic centers are open to distinctively Christian prayers?
Click On The Headline
Obama Extends Massive Carbon Footprint To Assure Chinese Overlords Americans Will Be Brutalized Under Environmentalist Dictatorship
Tuesday, November 11, 2014
But what if a youngster, particularly as they move into the adolescent and teenage years, is able to discern spiritual truth from deception for themselves?
If that aptitude is irrelevant to the discussion, what about these ministers and teachers that go beyond the message that witchcraft is to be avoided but can themselves go into exacting detail regarding the plot twists of the Harry Potter saga that it is obvious that they have either read the books or seen the movies?
That is akin to simply not warning of the dangers of pornography but being able to critique how convincingly particular actors in that debauched genre are able to pull off roles as pizza delivery lads or coeds needing the dormitory plumbing snaked.
Should they be called upon to repent as well?
What gives this occupational class an exemption to research this material first hand but not the remainder of us?
If we are to be forbidden from investigating these things on our own, how do we know that the line they are pedaling us is really true?
By Frederick Meekins