Sunday, December 04, 2016
Saturday, December 03, 2016
Friday, December 02, 2016
Thursday, December 01, 2016
Wednesday, November 30, 2016
Tuesday, November 29, 2016
Monday, November 28, 2016
Insisting The Foretelling Of John The Baptist Is About The Elderly Attending Church Misses The Homiletical Mark
Isn't it a bit of a stretch to invoke the passage regarding the conception of John the Baptist to condemn the ailing elderly that aren't able to get to church as often as they used to?
The text implies that God intervened in regards to the withered reproductive tracts of Zacharias and Elizabeth. So unless God intervenes similarly in regards to dimmed eyesight and crippled legs, isn't He the one to be held responsible regarding this attendance issue?
The pastor insisted that, if an elderly individual can make it to the doctors or the supermarket, they can make it to church.
One is reminded of the line from the movie “Dodgeball”, “If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball.”
But doesn't such a imperative analogy postulate a weak God bordering on the heretical?
The decrepit of advanced chronology are forced to go to the doctor's or the grocery store because such services are often physicalized in a singular location.
But doesn't the God of the Christian go out of His way to make it known that He is not confined by a structure built by the hands of man no matter how ornate or well intended such dedicated edifices might happen to be?
By Frederick Meekins
Friday, November 25, 2016
Thursday, November 24, 2016
Wednesday, November 23, 2016
Tuesday, November 22, 2016
Because of Trump's questionable remarks, Billy Bush was suspended from The Today Show. What did he say so out of line? It couldn't have been much more offensive than Kathy Lee Gifford's borderline alcoholism. And how is NBC suspending Billy Bush for enthusiastically discussing his preferred modality of sexuality any different than the Christian bakers refusing to bake cakes for gay weddings? If someone is articulating morally questionable remarks, you do not necessarily have an obligation to stop them. What someone needs to do now is to modify the meme featuring that Bahai actor from “The Office” admitting you don't pay taxes in order to finance an assortment of civic minded programs but rather to merely avoid prison. It should read, “You don't refrain from lewd comments out of respect for women but rather for fear of losing your job.”
Regarding those that refuse to vote for Trump on moral grounds but are all gungho for the Libertarians this election. Doesn't that party go out of its way to advocate for legalized prostitution? So who are they to insist that things like those articulated by Trump are never to be said to or about women if that is what the customer and the service provider negotiate as an acceptable component of their carnal transaction? I don't imagine those that go to places like the Bunny Ranch make their selections based upon SAT scores and the size of the gal's moral character.
If Megyn Kelley is so opposed to lewd conversation, why did she go on Howard Stern where the primary topic of discussion was her lactating bosom?
Fascinating how the ones applauding Paul Ryan as a statesman of principle for essentially withdrawing his support for Donald Trump rank among those insinuating that Ted Cruz might not even be a “real Christian” for not wholeheartedly endorsing Donald Trump.
Michael Savage flew into a rampage over Shephard Smith warning that those that did not heed hurricane evacuation warnings would likely die. So how was Smith's distinctively exuberant delivery appreciably different in style than Savage's own tirades?
When a pastor claims that the point of his sermon is not to persuade the listener one way or the other regarding Halloween participation but then proceeds to yell at the top of his lungs as to how wicked Halloween happens to be, isn't that the borderline bearing of false witness? Furthermore, will those found out to hold an opinion different the pastor even if they don't publicly rock the boat to the point of being disruptive be allowed to hold positions of ministry or leadership within the congregation? The ones insisting that Trump is now unfit for the presidency such as Albert Mohler than turn around and insist that a man that as a result of behaving properly around women was never deemed attractive by women and as a result remained single should regularly be berated by a litany of Biblical injunctions pulled out of context and be condemned as unfit for political or ecclesiastical office.
In a tirade against Halloween that turned into one against Christmas as well, a SermonAudio pastor condemned children that await Santa but don't await Jesus coming in the clouds. That's because they are children. Their lives are not yet necessarily so miserable that the joy has been sucked out (often by professional religionists) that they don't have anything else to look forward to. While he is at it, does the pastor also plan to condemn those anticipating life's other commemorative festivities or milestones?
In an interview with Bloomberg.com, Russell Moore lamented Evangelicals that align themselves with Mormons over political issues despite the vast theological differences between the two faiths. But isn't that less of an outrage than the resources of good Christians this Baptist functionary directed to support the building of Islamic mosques?
Too bad the federal government is not as eager to enforce the nation's laws as explicitly written as it is to prosecute Sheriff Joe Arpaio for enforcing the laws that at this particular moment the Obama regime deliberately refuses to uphold.
In a sermon against Halloween, a pastor claimed that there are certain things that man was not meant to know. As an example, the pastor provided the issue of whether or not there is life on Mars. The minister insisted that all that he needed to know is that God created Mars. There is a difference between knowledge that is considered occultic and that which is considered the physically scientific. The average human being is no more able to directly examine the workings of their respective innards as they are the minutiae of the Martian sands. If the pastor's mindset is to be applied to medical care, is there appreciable difference between the implications of this particular Baptist's worldview and that of the rigorous adherent of the Christian Science sect?
President Obama has admonished Donald Trump to stop his whining. One might respond physician heal thyself but one really ought not to overburden the medical system any further because of the doctor shortage caused by the “Affordable Care Act”.
A Hillary campaign commercial categorizes Donald Trump as “America's bully”. As if the Obama regime has allowed Christian bakers to pass on baking cakes for gay weddings because of their religious convictions and allowed those happy with their doctor to keep their doctor.
The leftwing media is insinuating that it is dangerous for Trump to insist that the election is rigged. Then how come the media does not take similar linguistic caution when covering trial verdicts where it is pretty much guaranteed that agitated minorities are going to loot electronics and haircare products?
Hegemonic elites thinking that political power ought to be their's by default like some sort of birthright are outraged and dismayed that in the third presidential debate that Donald Trump did not definitively agree to accept the alleged outcome of the election. But to paraphrase Bill Clinton's equivocation regarding the word “is”, what exactly does “accept” mean? One could “accept” the outcome of the election by not urging riots in the street but continuing to make remarks about the legitimacy of the outcome for years to come. Al Gore has pursued that particular approach for well over a decade now as a side hussle along with yo-yo dieting and fornicating with massage therapists.
If liberal propagandists are going to insist that Trump's allegation that the election is rigged threatens and undermines American democracy or rather the republic, do they intend to speak out as forcefully against Black Lives Matters activists and racialist subversives?
If you are of such diminished capacity that you can't vote on the designated day and can't think ahead to acquire an absentee ballot, perhaps the nation is better off if you don't vote to begin with.
It was insinuated that apparently people that don't smile much are full of themselves. Perhaps people that aren't inclined to smile were made that way by God. Therefore, aren't the ones thinking they know more than God as to what an individual's underlying personality as a reflection of the divine creator the ones that are really full of themselves?
During the debate, Hillary repeatedly mocked the financial support Trump received early in his business career from his father. So are we to assume Chelsea worked and clawed for everything she has in life, starting off mopping vomit from amusement park thrill rides and fetching carts from Walmart parking lots.
Why shouldn't nasty women be called nasty? Given the logic of those jacked out of shape over Trump's comment, are we to assume that Eva Braun should be spoken of in only the utmost of respect?
It has been suggested that, because his father was against Catholics, Donald Trump should not have been at the Al Smith dinner. Given that logic, since his father despised the United States, shouldn't Barack Obama not been allowed to be President. Given this logic, since Cardinal Dolan has undermined Catholic teaching against homosexuality through acts such as issuing statements favorable of gay pride rallies and closing congregations in favor of those attended by homosexuals, perhaps that particular prelate should not have been invited either.
In a Washington Post column, Southern Baptist functionary Albert Mohler reflected upon the moral quandary of Evangelical electoral support for Donald Trump. Interesting how he did not publish a similar column in the Washington Post critical of the Evangelical support remaining behind C.J. Mahaney despite the denomination he headed not only falling into a child sex abuse scandal but also in light of the claims that Mahaney's former congregation Covenant Life Church was administered along the lines of a quasi-cultic philosophy. Mohler's support for Mahaney went far beyond holding one's nose and voting for the lesser of two evils at a recent conference to a sickening display of ecclesiastical brown-nosing where Mohler assured Mahaney that the disgraced minister was there with the support of a thousand of his closest friends.
If assorted leftwing academics (of the sort that usually vote Democratic) insist that objective truth does not exist and to maintain that it does is an imposition of heteronormantive Eurocentricism, why are they getting so jacked out of shape if Trump creates his own cognitive milieu where the election results are not legitimate?
A webinar was titled “Cultivating Diversity and Inclusion at Museums and Historic Sites”. In other words, how to alienate your primary visitors and wonder why they don't come back.
The ultrapious in regards to this election have posted that “America is getting what it deserves”. The person making such a comment is an American. As such, if, in the future, police state goons bust the door in to drag this person off to a reeducation camp or a Muslim gangs rapes his wife and hacks off his head, as an American would he be getting exactly what he deserves?
Regarding those that have praised the President of the Philippines as a refreshingly strong leader for giving Obama the proverbial finger. Fine, let us leave and allow the Chinese to take over and brutalize them. Just make sure that it's made explicitly known that this time MacArthur isn't returning.
In a pastoral round table discussion posted on SermonAudio, one of the multiple clergy on staff at Berean Baptist Church remarked that he was not all that impressed with pundit Todd Barnes because the frequent Fox News contributor was often “over the top”. How is that different than numerous pronouncements broadcast by this particular church? For example, in the cover photo posted to the church's SermonAudio profile, the church building is surrounded by a perimeter of flags like the Washington Monument. Yet the church administrators have uploaded multiple podcasts to SermonAudio insisting that flags in the church and Fourth of July services are a form of idolatry. Isn't this akin to preaching a sermon against carnality while have a cage or pole dancer on either side of the pulpit?
It was asked in a podcast what do you do if in a Bible study group you have one set of parents whose children are allowed to Trick or Treat and a set of parents whose children are not allowed to do so. The solution is simple. Perhaps one ought not to attend these Bible studies nowhere mandated in Scripture. Secondly, if you still have a desire to attend, perhaps it is best not to tell the others in attendance what your family does it its free time and for you not to ask questions of others in attendance if the response could possibly cause you to come unhinged. Furthermore, shouldn't people be so tired at the end of the day that they don't need to be going to all of these group functions if they have already found a mate and procreated?
In a homily posted at SermonAudio against the evils of pragmatism, it was insisted that certain Americans are drawn to Trump because they are angry about not getting what they want. However, the matter goes deeper than an Obama voter demanding their free smartphone or a Sanders partisan rampaging for free college. The average Trump supporter is dismayed by a litany of elected officials repeatedly putting the nation's enemies ahead of our own particular wellbeing. As evidence, the pastor cited Trump's suggestion to ban the entrance of Muslims into the United States. Admittedly, such a proposal might have been too broad in its original enunciation. However, where is it elaborated in the Constitution that non-citizens are entitled to admission if they have not met certain predetermined criteria? Should mass numbers of have Germans been allowed entrance without considerable certainty as to where their loyalties were during World War II?
It was said in a sermon that, if a young man comes to church every week with a different girl, such ought to be condemned. But so long as he is not fornicating with her, is it really any of the church's business?
In an address at Ocean City Tabernacle, columnist Cal Thomas remarked that Muslims in their private schools should not be allowed to teach hatred of Jews and Christians. The American people ought to know what the adherents of the so-called religion of peace believe and are up to. However, does Thomas really want government bureaucrats to determine and decree what private educators may or may not teach in terms of doctrine and ideology? For what is to prevent such technocrats from declaring that Jesus is the only way or the superiority of heterosexual marriage as the ideal family arrangement in which to raise children as hateful beyond acceptability?
In a podcast griping about the status of youth in America, a group of pastors in a discussion uploaded to SermonAudio complained how quickly things are produced these days. Instead, they celebrated the pace from the hypothetical era of their grandfathers that relished true craftsmanship. Perhaps they'd also like to return to the conditions of their grandparents' era when people dropped dead from infected blackheads or from appendicitis in their 40's (don't tell me it didn't happen as two of my great grandparents befell such scenarios).
In a podcast regarding sermon preparation, Sean Harris of Berean Baptist Church said that the bivocational pastor is doing his congregation a disservice with two occupations competing for his attention. Unlike Berean Baptist Church, not every congregation is so rich that they can surround their church building with a perimeter of flags despite uploading numerous homilies to SermonAudio insinuating that it is an act of idolatry to have a flag in the church or even an occasional worship service incorporating patriotic elements into the liturgy. Regarding the denigration of bivocatioalism, it's interesting how some ministers seem to now exist on a level surpassing Peter, Paul, and apparently even Jesus.
Fuss is being made that the majority of Whites voting for Donald Trump lacked college degrees. As if the minorities voting for Obama for free cellphones and for thinking they would no longer be required to pay their mortgages because such would be taken care of from the President's stash were fonts of common sense and accumulated learning?
Fuss is being made that the majority of Whites voting for Donald Trump lacked college degrees. Given that those needing psychological intervention in the form of play-doh to deal with the election returns and rioting in the streets are primarily those in pursuit of formalized higher learning, it seems these programs aren't necessarily the measurement of education that they used to be.
Hillary in her concession speech says that America owes the Obama's an enormous debt. Wasn't the record debt accumulated under his regime enough already?
If DC residents are so outraged over the state of their Congressional representation, why don't they move elsewhere or might that disrupt receipt of whatever public assistance program they are on?
Multiculturalism holds all societies are equal with no country being better than any other. If so, why is it that the leftist deadbeats so exasperated over Trump's election victory insist upon fleeing to Canada (which is probably even more lily White than America) as their first destination of refuge rather than Mexico (which we are assured contains a population of only hardworking, law-abiding, family-oriented people).
So if California secession is to be encouraged, why were Southerners threatened, coerced, and intimidated into taking down their Confederate battle flags in the name of national unity?
The sad thing is how people comport themselves intellectually they are so dimwitted that they cannot run their own lives without a President. The government might need a President. Do you really need one directly telling you what to do if you do not work for the national government?
Propagandist Van Jones categorized Trump's election victory as a “whitelash”. If he speaks out against citizens working for change within the established system, is he as condemnatory of those that vocalize their alleged political disapproval through the looting of electronics and haircare products?
Van Jones excused Hillary for not making her concession speech election night because it was well past 2 AM when the winner was determined. But didn't Hillary advertise herself as being the candidate you could reach in the middle of the night if the situation warranted?
A caller to the Chris Plante Show remarked she never felt as proud of her nation as when Trump was elected President. Isn't that as bad a Michelle Obama saying nearly the same thing? The sad thing is that the greatest political investment is now made into the office that should really mean the least in terms of the influence that it ought to exert over our daily lives.
Countering the observation that there were no riots when Obama was elected it was claimed that's because “President Obama wasn't a sexist, racist, knee jerk kind of guy..Trump is not Presidential material and never will be.” That that justifies beating unsuspecting White motorists and destroying private property?
On an episode of “Jay Leno's Garage”, Vice President Joe Biden an Colin Powell made an appearance to drag race their Corvettes. Powell admitted that this was his third Corvette in eight years. I myself have never owned a new vehicle and the used one I purchased in 1999 functions just fine. Yet these are the same establishmentarian globalists that condemn those skeptical of climate change policy propaganda decreeing that private vehicular ownership ought to be discouraged for everyday needs to say nothing of recreational drag racing or as ostentatious replacements for a diminished masculinity.
Planet Fitness has produced a campaign featuring its anti-bullying campaign for the purposes of indoctrinating a “judgment free generation”. It's one thing to prevent bullying behavior. However, its quite another to condition people to be “judgment free”. For such would result in individuals unable to differentiate between right or wrong and unprotected against being taken advantage of.
In a SermonAudio homily, Sean Harris of Berean Baptist Church condemned those whom the extent of their church participation consisted solely of showing up for the service. Maybe he'd prefer they not even do that. Furthermore, how does he know what these folks do the rest of the time? Don't they at least get a few points for Christian character if they don't slap their spouses and go to work or something similarly constructive on a reasonably consistent basis?
In a sermon, it was said that a woman should marry a man to move her out of poverty. Will it be said from the same pulpit that a man should marry a woman to get someone to scrub the toilet or wash laundry?
In light of slurs against Catholics on the part of Clinton campaign functionaries, the Federalist is urging Americans of conscience to adopt the phrase “We are all Catholics now” as a sign of solidarity. Interesting how little is being said how those email exchanges were less than complimentary regarding Evangelicals as well. It must be remembered that this very same conservative website not long ago posted a headline, even though done in the name of humor, referring to Protestants as “heretic scum”. Maybe Podesta found his remarks against Catholics to be similarly mirthful and said in jest.
If deadbeat Europeans burn their own cities over the Trump victory, why should we feel shame about it? Such is the result of their own stupidity.
So why is Steve Bannon's wanting to limit the “Jewish influence” over his children a form of antisemiticism that must be eliminated but we are supposed to open our borders wide open to those advocating the kind of antisemitism that advocates outright violence against a particular group of people?
About the harshest punishment for students from the DC suburbs will face for walking out in protest over the Trump electoral victory will be an excused absence. Would educators go as lightly if students had bolted out of class to pray around the flagpole, to march in solidarity with prolife activists, or chanting “Build the wall”?
Attending the University of Virginia while being driven into your safe space at the sight of a Jefferson quote is nearly the same thing as attending Liberty University and insisting that the mention of Jerry Falwell sickens you.
Apparently with Trump's electoral victory radical leftists now insist that states' rights and local control are the ways in which America was intended to be governed.
If Californians wanting to secede and urban centers vowing to remain sanctuary cities in defiant of presidential order are to be applauded as expressions of robust localism, shouldn't the rest of America remind its own business as to what one hillbilly mayor from West Virginia posts online about Michelle Obama?
A Maryland school is being commended for allowing for the selection of a “gender neutral” homecoming court. But shouldn't these pedagogues still be condemned for the continuation of this practice promoting non-egalitarian classism?
Was the establishmentarian media as ever concerned about Van Jones' profession of being an avowed Communist, Anita Dunn's confession of Mao being her favorite political philosopher, and Barack Obama's political career beginning in the living room of convicted terrorist Bill Ayers as they are regarding Steve Bannon's alleged ties to the “alt right”?
Much hullabaloo is being made over the “60 Minutes” video in which Donald Trump urges his supporters to stop heckling minorities. Is “60 Minutes” as concerned about the candidate's opponents and detractors destroying property, blocking roadways, and beating unsuspecting citizens on the basis of their electoral decision deduced primarily from the basis of race?
Clothing designer Sophie Theallett, who has designed for Michelle Obama, has announced her refusal to dress Melania Trump primarily for ideological reasons. So shouldn't she be destroyed financially in a way similar to the Christian bakers refusing to bake wedding cakes for gay nuptials?
The cast of the play "Hamilton" chewed out Vice President Elect Mike Pence for being in the audience. Could a Christian baker be allowed to bake the gay cake anyway and tell the couple off as the cake and money are exchanged with there being no legal repercussions?
In responding to the Trump electoral victory, President Obama admonished that we must be cautious of a tribalism that promotes a mentality of Us vs. Them. Does he intend to make similar pronouncements against the Occupy Movement, Black Lives Matter, La Raza, and even his own presidency?
by Frederick Meekins
Monday, November 21, 2016
Saturday, November 19, 2016
Friday, November 18, 2016
Thursday, November 17, 2016
Wednesday, November 16, 2016
Tuesday, November 15, 2016
Monday, November 14, 2016
Friday, November 11, 2016
Thursday, November 10, 2016
Wednesday, November 09, 2016
Tuesday, November 08, 2016
Monday, November 07, 2016
Saturday, November 05, 2016
Friday, November 04, 2016
Thursday, November 03, 2016
Wednesday, November 02, 2016
Moore commences his analysis by detailing the plight of an Alabama church in decline as the vicinity of the congregation's physical locality transitions from a predominantly White to Black population. Moore blames the decline on the fact that during the tumultuous years of the civil rights movement, often marked by shocking and noteworthy acts of violence, the church decided to focus on its primary mission of “simple gospel preaching”.
But how was the activism Moore would hope for in that historic setting appreciably different than the cultural Christianity that this theologian now explicitly celebrates the demise of? Interesting how Moore calls for the law and justice imperatives heralded in Scripture when it is minority lives and property on the line but seemingly downplays the physicalized expression of outage when it is Whitey's or a capitalist's window being shattered.
In mentioning this tragic violence, Russell Moore hopes to link its perpetrators with Donald Trump and any that might vote for the blunt real estate tycoon. As I have mentioned in previous columns, if we are to pursue this line of reasoning, why shouldn't we conclude that Russell Moore through his assorted ecclesiastical relationships must believe pedophile pastors and the churches that shelter them haven't done anything all that wrong and shouldn't be sanctioned so severely?
For at a recent pastor's conference, Moore's mentor and close colleague Albert Mohler did not chastise C.J. Mahaney for allowing a sex abuse scandal to spiral out of control. Instead, Mohler instead assured the megachurch minister that he was in the company of thousands of his closest friends. Mind you, these are the very same kinds of people that will call the validity of your faith into question if you are not in church multiple nights per week or aren't married by the time you are 23 years old.
In the indictment of Trump that reads reminiscent of the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal, Moore writes, “This election has cast light on the darkness of pent-up nativism and bigotry ...There are not-so-coded messages denouncing African-Americans and immigrants; concerns about racial justice and national unity is ridiculed as 'political correctness'. Religious minorities are scapegoated for the sins of others, with basic religious freedoms for them called into question.”
Daniel Patrick Moniyhan (a Democrat actually) was credited with popularizing the concept of the bigotry of low expectations. Dr. Moore craves nothing more than to be applauded as a Southerner that has come around to the perspective of the Yankee elite regarding racial issues. However, given that he does not apply the same standard to all individuals irrespective of skin color, it must be asked does Brother Moore view minorities as fully human in the same manner as he would his fellow Caucasians?
If Dr. Moore is so concerned about the causes of national unity and racial justice, why doesn't he resign his position from the board of the National Hispanic Leadership Conference? For by the organization's very name, the National Hispanic Leadership Conference is exclusionary of the interests of Caucasians of a non-Iberian ethnography. If Caucasians of a more northern European extraction are not worthy of status and privilege (to invoke the parlance of these crypto-Marxists) on the basis of what color they emerge from the birth canals of their respective mothers, why are Hispanics deserving of such on the basis of Scripture which says that before God there is neither Greek nor Jew?
Despite whatever errors he might have made in terms of his presentation on the Fox News Channel, Glenn Beck is to be lauded for making the public aware that the notion of “social justice” is not about justice at all but rather about in the name of socialism downplaying the rights and protections afforded to the individual in favor of the collective and what is allegedly better for specific groups as determined by largely unaccountable technocrats. That is the kind of threat posed by Russell Moore in his raising the battle cry of “racial justice”.
If persons are not to be considered as individuals and the totality of their accomplishments but rather upon the shortcomings inflicted by and/or on certain groups, what if Dr. Moore's string of highly prestigious positions were seized from him and bestowed upon someone that has hardly cracked a book open a day in their lives but instead knocked over a few liquor stores and sired a number of out of wedlock children by as many women because a life of study and delayed gratification were categorized as acting just “too White”? By the very standards advocated by Dr. Moore, wouldn't a response other than affirmative agreement to such a course of action not only undermine social cohesion but also negate a number of Biblical imperatives such as submitting to authority and turning the other cheek?
Dr. Moore goes on to lament, “The Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's 'I Have A Dream Speech' did not envision that more than 50 years later 'Go back to Africa' would be screamed at black protesters.” Probably because, as someone enamored in part with the delusions of socialism, Martin Luther King might not have been able to fathom Black people often lavished with a standard of living enviable by world standards descending into debaucheries most of them avoided when the status of this demographic was at its lowest in terms of material prosperity.
Perhaps Dr. Moore should have provided additional context such as where and to what particular group this directional imperative was being directed. For example, could these have been the sorts of protesters that express their disagreement with particular trial verdicts or police actions by appropriating the latest electronics or haircare products unencumbered by medium of exchange after the proprietors of such establishments have left the premises for the evening or in fear of the repercussions the mob might decide to inflict upon bystanding property owners?
Russell Moore is making quite a reputation for himself regularly publishing tirades against what academics such as himself might lament or denounce as White majoritarian culture. Does he ever intend to speak out as eloquently against outrages such as the knockout game?
In Moore's column, one is given the impression that the remark “Go back to Africa” is a negative or bad thing. Yet doesn't fostering this impression expose Moore's own ethnocentricism or White privilege?
For in a world where, as Moore writes, “The man on the throne in heaven is a dark-skinned, Aramaic-speaking 'foreigner' who is probably not all that impressed by chants of 'Make America great again', who is to suggest America is a more desirable place to live than Africa?
Moore continues, “The center of gravity for both orthodoxy is not among Anglo suburban evangelicals but among African Anglicans and Asian Calvinists and Latin American Pentecostals.”
The first part of that statement that ought to be like fingernails across a chalkboard to the mind of the discerning reader is the way in which “Anglo suburban” is articulated like a slur. What it means is that Moore has a problem with Whites that work hard and save their resources to provide for a reasonably comfortable dwelling where the occupants are able to stay to themselves and their individual families.
What the communitarian new urbanists of whom Moore is probably an enthusiast prefer is to chorale people into congested population centers where the residents probably don't even own their property, where they are more easily controlled, and where it is easy to snoop into someone's private affairs. For nowhere in his comments did Dr. Moore condemn the largely White beatnik hipsters that prefer to habitate in largely metropolitan settings.
While we are at it, even if he does not provide his address outright, perhaps Dr. Moore should describe in which manner of dwelling he hangs his own ecclesiastical robes or clerical collars. It is doubtful it is in a rundown apartment project where English is about as dead as Latin.
For in the mind of this theologian under scrutiny in this particular analysis, Mrs. Moore and the little ones are no doubt deserving of a safe and spacious place in which to live and thrive. It is your obligation, dear pewfiller, however to put your own family at risk for reasons little more than because some pulpit blowhard tells you to in order to assuage his ever expanding sense of racialist guilt.
What must be asked next about this assertion that contends that the center of theological gravity is to be found among African Anglicans, Asian Calvinists and Latin American Pentecostals is why is it acceptable for Christians of these particular phenotypes to clump together for the purposes of religious identity and affiliation but not acceptable for White believers to do so? And if you were to grill members of each of these demographics they would probably admit that they are no more eager for their traditional way of doing things to be overwhelmed by the nebulous “other” postmodernist sociologists are always droning on about as those attending the aging Caucasian congregation.
Furthermore, just how much doctrinal compromise ought the Christian to agree to in pursuit of Russell Moore's demographic amalgamation before we are verbally reamed for abandoning those ballyhooed “Baptist distinctives”? After all, the problem with the church initially mentioned by Moore was not necessarily doctrine but rather because it was “too White”.
The Anglicans no doubt practice infant baptism and don't fly into a frenzy as to whether or not adults seeking membership have been dunked or sprinkled in what is considered this Christian act of initiation. This particular modality of ecclesiology also tends to follow a highly ritualized liturgy many Baptists would denounce for stifling the move of the Spirit.
With the Latin American Pentecostals, at the bare minimum the problem would arise at the opposite end of the decorum spectrum from the Anglicans. For an old joke describing how to tell the difference between Baptists and Pentecostals observes that Pentecostals jump over the pews while Baptists sleep in them.
Wanting to look as multicultural as possible, those such as Russell Moore will respond that Whites more uptight in church will just have to adopt the more exuberant forms of religious expression often practiced in minority communities. For if you ask the overly rambunctious to tone it down a bit, you will be accused of demanding that these other groups “act White” before their worship is deemed acceptable in the eyes of God.
But who was it that taught these aging White Baptists so despised by Moore to stifle the expression of their feelings in favor of an order of worship that emphasizes the rationally didactic over emotionalism? Why none other than the professional religionists and denominational functionaries once holding the kinds of prestigious positions now occupied by the likes of Russell Moore! It is amazing how these leaders seldom take responsibility for the policies or decisions of their particular class without first blaming it on the mere pewfillers and concocting ways to make the common church goer feel that they are nothing more than someone obligated to keep the collection plate filled.
Beyond the Pentecostal tendency towards emotional outbursts, for the sake of ethnographic solidarity, just how much Charismatic buffoonery is the average Baptist expected to put up with to placate the honchos flagellating themselves on the floor of the annual convention? Kenneth Copeland has insinuated off and on over the course of his ministry that those of his theological persuasion can resurrect the dead both feline and human. Joyce Meyers believes that she is so important that she shouldn't have to do her own housework. Todd Bently socked an alleged cancer patient in the stomach in the name of curing that particular affliction.
Critics will respond that each of these is White. Fine, if you want to play the game that character is indeed determined by the color of skin, I will be more happy to comply with such a silly standard.
T.D. Jakes has denied that the Godhead is a unity composed of three distinct persons known as the Trinity. Instead, this particular televangelist holds that the verbal identifiers of “Father”, “Son”, and “Holy Spirit” are rather masks or roles assumed by the singular unitary God.
Frederick Price is yet another Black pastor that espouses doctrinal notions nearly as aberrant. The website LetUsReason.org in an article titled “Fred Price: Is The Price Right Or Is The Price Wrong” examines a number of these. Among these rank the idea that we enjoyed a preincarnate existence (not unlike Mormonism) and that Jesus was rich while He dwelt upon the Earth despite Scripture teaching that he didn't even have a place to lay his head.
As errant as these happen to be, Prince propagates others that are even more dangerous. According to Price, the believer is so assured of bodily healing in this life that the truly faithful can even forbid sickness to enter into one's home, meaning that the Christian is in no need of medical interventions such as surgery. Unless of course you are Mrs. Price who had a cancer operation despite similar procedures being frowned upon for the less prominent amongst their flock.
But hey, that's no big deal. If Russell Moore wants to remain consistent, doesn't he have to assure us that compromise for the sake of superficial appearances and heartwarming photo op is more important than sending the wrong impression resulting from standing for the faith once delivered unto the saints.
Galatians 3:28 says that before God there is neither Greek nor Jew. It is also through the providence of the Almighty that all of humanity that traces its origin back to one single family now finds itself distilled into a variety of nations, tongues, ethnicities, and races largely to prevent for the time being the equivalent of another Tower of Babel. As such, a church should extend kindness and courtesy to anyone showing up on its doorstep sincerely seeking the Lord. Yet if particular varieties of people show up more at certain congregations more than others, there is no reason for controlling snobs at denominational headquarters (whose own offices are described nowhere in the pages of Scripture) to hand down pronouncements as to how ungodly such natural affiliation happens to be in their particular eyes.
By Frederick Meekins
Saturday, October 29, 2016
Friday, October 28, 2016
Thursday, October 27, 2016
Tuesday, October 25, 2016
Monday, October 24, 2016
Saturday, October 22, 2016
Friday, October 21, 2016
Thursday, October 20, 2016
Wednesday, October 19, 2016
Tuesday, October 18, 2016
Will The Archbishop Of Canterbury Join The Pope In The Vatican’s Campaign Against Free Enterprise & Private Property?
Monday, October 17, 2016
Saturday, October 15, 2016
Friday, October 14, 2016
Isn’t Allowing Men In The Ladies’ Room More Of An Outrage Than Lewd Comments About Probably Lewd Women?
Thursday, October 13, 2016
Wednesday, October 12, 2016
Tuesday, October 11, 2016
Monday, October 10, 2016
A Muslim flight attendant is suing for being suspended for refusing to serve alcoholic beverages because doing so would violate her religion. Why shouldn't she be punished similarly to the Christian bakers refusing to prepare cakes for gay weddings? Will Hooters be required to alter its uniform policies to accommodate Muslim waitresses refusing to adorn themselves with the eatery's questionable apparel?
Do those jacked out of shape about Trump's Second Amendment remarks get as upset regarding the shocking number of Clinton associates and critics that have actually met unexpected and mysterious ends? Its probably why Obama selected Joe Biden as Vice President rather than Hillary.
The DEA has ruled against medical marijuna. So apparently terminal cancer patients will be denied access to that to which the Obama children apparently have at their fingertips.
Is Trump saying Obama created ISIS any worse than blaming the USA for Saddam Hussein or Bin Laden?
On Fox News, Geraldo insisted that Trump does not do saracasm well. But isn't it more that the contemporary liberalism is wound so tight in pursuit of revolutionary societal transformation that adherents of this ideology have lost whatever sense of human they might have initially possessed.
In a New York Times interview in which presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church Micheal Curry spent an inordinate amount of time reminding readers that he is Black, he said of the pending presidential election, “Love, at least as Jesus articulated it, has to do with seeking the good and the welfare of others before one's own enlightened self-interest. Our politicians must reflect that.” It must be from that renunciation of self-interest why the Episcopal Church drags congregations into court that have come to the conclusion that their own spiritual well being might be more fully met in another denomination such as the Anglican Church of North America. For nothing says loves like forcing someone to stay in a relationship against their will.
In January 2014, a marine biologist was convicted of a misdemeanor for feeding whales in a protected federal sanctuary. The prosecutor assured that the punishment wasn't an example of excessive punitive overreach. A strong message needed to be sent because, when these animals are fed by humans, they lose their instincts by becoming dependent and eroding their innate sense or wariness. Such a situation endangers both human beings and cetaceans. The science policy advanced by both academia and government contends that human beings are actually nothing more than animals ourselves. If that is the case, then wouldn't extensive ongoing handouts provided by the government also interfere with and alter the inherent instincts of the able-bodied that would otherwise be compelled to make at least a good faith effort to provide for themselves?
In the attempt to prevent Islamist immigration, Donald Trump has suggested that those seeking entrance into the United States need to be scrutinized to determine if these applicants harbor antisemitism or hatred towards gays and women. But dependent upon how these are defined, what guarantees will be put in place to prevent these ideological tests from being applied against Christians by the social engineers infesting numerous governmental bureaucracies? For in certain circles, antisemitism is defined as believing that Jesus is the only valid path towards God. Being anti-gay is increasingly defined as believing that a legitimate marriage can only be contracted between a man and a woman. And hatred towards women is defined as little as failing to put the toilet seat down.
So long as someone is not out constantly awhoring, is it really the business of a church if someone is single? In a podcast posted at SermonAudio, the pastoral staff of Berean Baptist Church bragged that they were all married in their early 20's. That means there wives were likely as young. So under what obligation are we second tier folks nobody wanted in the early round picks obligated to settle for other apparently less than desirables where no one is going to be happy and are for the most part settling out of a sense of socio-religious obligation imposed by these kinds of hardline religionists?
In a pastoral roundtable of Berean Baptist Church posted at SermonAudio, it was insinuated that children should be allowed to wander about pretty much unsupervised as they pleased. Will this church pick up the tab for the legal bill when the parents heeding this advise are slapped with accusations of neglect by child protective services? Will the church pay for the medical and even longterm care expenses when children are injured or even mangled in accidents? But that might divert funds from missionaries of the variety that do not so much love the souls they minister to as they do the opportunity to badmouth the American way of life from foreign shores.
There is no winning with most pastors. In sermons, a common complaint is that most parishioners after church briefly chat amongst themselves about mundane matters such as what they've watched on TV lately or what they will be doing once they get home. But it was handed down in a homiletical pronouncement that a church cannot tolerate those in attendance standing around on the property following the proceedings criticizing where the pastor might have fallen short in either doctrine or delivery. So the moral of the story is not to articulate amongst fellow believers what might be on your mind but rather that which will ingratiate yourself to the ecclesiastical authority structure.
In a Berean Baptist pastoral round table posted at SermonAudio griping about the state of American youth, the practice of giving at least a small token to each child that participates in organized athletics was condemned. The practice may have gotten out of hand. However, you are going to have to do something to keep the children that might not excel at athletics coming back or otherwise your league is going to collapse. Even the players on the NFL teams that consistently lose get handsome salaries even if they aren't given a Super Bowl ring. There are only so many Bible verses that can be stretched out of context to coerce compliance from the standpoint of old fashioned Fundamentalst guilt before that sort of manipulation no longer works.
President Obama played a round of golf with comedian Larry David. Given that David urinated on a picture of the Virgin Mary as part of a routine, isn't this a great outrage than if Obama invited Paula Deen to cater a White House State dinner?
In a sermon, an article was referenced lamenting that, each year, five percent of missionaries leave the field. How do we not know God is not leading them to another endeavor? For often is it really so much God that is leading people into this variety of ministry or rather overly zealous religious functionaries and administrators?
In a sermon addressing the Biblical text admonishing women to be keepers at home, a pastor remarked that his wife often babysat for women that worked outside of the home. But if women working outside of the home is sinful as the homily seemed to suggest, isn't providing babysitting services for such women akin to running a motel that charges rates by the hour for the purposes of facilitating adulterous liaisons?
A number of schools are implementing policies where biological males identifying as transgendered will be allowed to slumber (and possibly even horizontally frolic) with the females on overnight academic excursions. Does this require a track record of ongoing psychosis despising the reproductive pleasure anatomy with which God endowed you or can it be the result of a sudden pre-trip epiphany based largely upon whom you'd rather be snuggled up against and entwined with in the middle of the night?
In a Washington Post interview, the president of the leftwing think tank Demos Heather McGhee insisted that, out of a sense of patriotism, Americans must be willing to admit how profoundly prejudice they are and renounce economic policies that are the result of such. That translates as higher taxation imposed upon those that work to lavish additional handouts upon those unwilling to do so. Don't expect much to be said to discourage the destruction of private property in response to unpopular judicial rulings or police actions.
Regarding the so-called “burkini”, so long as a woman is clothed at the beach, on what grounds do you penalize someone for wearing one? For is the garment that markedly different in appearance from a scuba wetsuit?
A knife-wielding demoniac murdered at least 19 at a facility for the disabled. Will there now be a call for knife control legislation? After all, we really don't need knives. Food can be precut before purchase or officials can be placed on standby to be called when we mere subjects of the realm are faced with a situation requiring cutlery. For if you can wait around for police to take their sweet time in a life or death situation as they traverse the distance from the doughnut shop to your location, surely there is no inconvenience in waiting for someone to cut up the steaks environmentalists and meddlesome health officials insist we shouldn't be eating in the first place.
On a children's wildlife program, it was said EVERY living thing in an ecosystem is essential for its ongoing sustainability. Does that include plague causing microorganisms?
Of a review of “Orthodoxy” I posted at a Christian social network it was said, “For those that do not know, Chesterton was a Roman Catholic. He was a fine writer, and I've enjoyed his fiction, but couldn't recommend his books to believers.” So because Chesterton was Roman Catholic, that invalidates every last thing the man ever said even in those areas where Roman Catholics and conservative Evangelicals are in agreement? Whatever happened to the idea of selectively embracing the ideas of an author? And by holding to this prohibition, aren't you saying of your fellow believers that they are too stupid to sift the truthful from the questionable? Isn't this the kind of attitude that might nudge your coreligionists in the direction of the Vatican? Perhaps it might be more productive to turn this criticism for suggesting a book by Chesterton into an examination as to why Protestants are not as appreciative of those that can articulate basic Christian teaching and doctrine outside the formalized ecclesiastical authority structure when that brand of the faith claims not to be as dependent upon a centralized organization.
A pastor on SermonAudio asked why, in a church full of converted people, do Christians have to be begged to teach. Probably because many churches impose a litany of rules and regulations not necessarily clearly spelled out in the pages of Scripture. A congregation can administer its affairs as the assembly sees fit. Just don't get upset when many decline to participate beyond a minimal level.
Pastor Jason Cooley in a SermonAudio oration condemned online ministry because of the tendency of those engaged in such to easily denounce those with whom they disagree as heretics. And how is that markedly different than the sort of Baptist church that practices radical blanket separationism rather than a discernment of degree based upon the issue under consideration?
Berating a depressed individual by yelling at them that they need to get their eyes off themselves and onto God isn't necessarily going to lift a person out of their funk. It's just going to cause a number to wonder what kind of self-absorption does God suffer from that He can't take a moment or two out of His schedule upon hearing that someone has the blahs.
In the attempt to spread fear and panic about, well, fear and panic, Pastor Jason Cooley in a SermonAudio homily warned that depression and a downcast spirit can spread from one person to the next. As evidence, he relayed the case of such an incident that transpired during street preaching. Street preaching is where the unsuspecting are verbally ambushed on the street regarding their need for Jesus. The person prone towards discouragement should have probably not participated in this form of confrontational outreach. But there is often no other way to advance or even retain status among this variety of militant fundamentalism.
In a sermon condemnatory of Christians suffering from depression, Pastor Jason Cooley remarked that often unbelievers exhibit more outward joy than many Christians. Maybe that's because they are not regularly harangued from the pulpit regarding a number of matters that are one's person opinion and not something clearly elaborated in the Word of God.
In a sermon critical of depression, it was asserted that most health issues are mental issues and that you cannot feel sorry for yourself. But is this kind of sentiment articulated out of concern for the suffering or rather because those purveying such advice don't want to be bothered hearing about other people's problems?
In condemnation of Internet ministry, Pastor Jason Cooley remarked that the primary failing of online critics is that they do not discuss the matter that they are addressing face to face. But if they are preemptively categorized as “Jezebel's” or as “women laden with sin” by this kind of pastor, what is the point in doing so? For isn't this pastor exhibiting a similarly unteachable spirit as well?
In reaction to a John MacArthur meme, a Calvinist theologian posted, “Exactly! We need to be judging and assessing the salvation of others. Churches and filled with undisciplined pagans professing to be Christian.” And what is the point of doing so if God has already through deliberative aforethought selected those who are bound for Heaven and whom He will allow to slip into Hell? Maybe there would be fewer of these crypto-pagans that nothing can allegedly been done for in church if we weren't constantly beaten over the head about being in church every time the door is open and the suggestion propagated by certain varieties of Calvinism that a number of opportunities should be denied to those that are not formalized members ranging from the recognition of one's marriage and the resultant children as legitimate in the eyes of organized religion to voting in civil elections and holding public office.
In the March 21, 2016 issue of Businessweek is a piece about a men's retailer that sells one pair of shorts for $75, another pair for $55, and a shirt for $98. Unless these also double as a working invisibility cloak, apparently some people have more money than common sense. $5 for a pair of brightly colored socks or a novelty tie is pushing it.
In a podcast, it was admonished that Christians are obligated to make their gardens more beautiful for Christ. If there is going to be that much stress in connection with something that is for the most part a leisure activity, why bother planting one in the first place?
Hillary Clinton has promised a new mental health program. If implemented, perhaps she will be the first to avail herself of these services.
Now that her own bosom is probably sagging and whithered beyond the uplifting hope of reconstructive repair, former Baywatch Bimbo Pamela Anderson is urging men not to gaze upon pornography.
Democratic Vice Presidential Candidate Tim Kaine has condemned Donald Trump's audience with the Mexican President as a “diplomatic embarrassment”. But wasn't this meeting where both figures agreed to the importance of mutually respecting each other's nation's borders more productive than Obama's own preelection preening here he sauntered to locations such as Berlin where he attempted to hoodwink the assembled throngs into believing he was the Messiah or some such equivalent?
Russell Moore now laments Evangelicals deriving much of their identity from politics. What he probably means is that he is upset many Evangelicals disagree with his preferred politics. From his public pronouncements, it would seem Moore would need to be among the first to repent. For did not Moore rank the foremost calling into question the validity of the profession of faith those Christians expressing electoral support for Donald Trump? Does not Moore himself sit on the board of the National Hispanic Leadership Conference, a group dedicated to the advancement of a particular groups interests at the expense of another based primarily on skin color and related physical characteristics? If Moore believes that the primary concern of the Christian ought to be the evangelistic or doctrinal, why did he leave his original position as a seminary professor to head the Ethics and Public Policy Commission which is essentially the political arm of the Southern Baptist Convention?
A Marvel Comic about a Black superhero that in part confronts gentrification has been canceled. The fact that it proudly focused on gentrification pretty much tells you why it was canceled.
More time has elapsed between the premiere of Star Trek: The Next Generation and now than between the premieres of Star Trek: The Original Series and Star Trek: The Next Generation. So shouldn't the upcoming online series be Star Trek: The Next Next Generation rather than rehashed prequel material of everywhere we have already been before? Are producers that bereft of creativity? If nothing else, couldn't they focus on the Time Wars hinted at in Star Trek: Enterprise or a time ship like the one featured on an episode of Voyager?
So regarding a church that plans to hold a clothing swap but refuses to hold a flea market, garage sale, or craft fair from perspective that such activities are sinful, why is it acceptable to trade clothing on church property but wrong to sell it?
If someone says on 9/11 that the date is a commemoration of remembrance but that they refuse to fill their mind with such images, aren't they filling their minds with such by simply mentioning it? Furthermore, isn't this perspective not that much different than saying that one does not want to focus on the sufferings of Christ but rather concentrate on His moral teachings? Isn't the Christian, especially if the individual presents themselves as a spiritual leader, supposed to approach reality as it actually exists?
If a pastor says that he'd rather do something he finds satisfying rather than be paid for in order to manipulate people into doing things for the congregation, shouldn't he put his proverbial money where his mouth is by refusing any kind of financial reimbursement from the church? If we are supposed to only do things that satisfy rather than because they pay as counseled from a pulpit, who will end up funding a church and, perhaps more importantly, these numerous missionaries many of these churches like to finances often at the expense of the church's own financial viability?
Pulling Titus 3:13 entirely out of its exegetical context, a pastor insisted that it was mentioned that Zenas was a lawyer as proof that Christians practicing secular professions are obligated to offer their skills on behalf of the church gratis. But does not Scripture teach that a workman is worthy of his hire? Where does it say in holy writ that this teaching applies only to professional religionists?
The question should be asked. Did the principal that urged parents to have their children exempted from standardized tests in order not to bring down the school's average break any laws or regulations? If not, he cannot be made the scapegoat for utilizing a provision allowed by policy or procedure. It might not have been the politically correct thing to do, but he not only has to look out for his own position but he must also take into consideration jeopardized funding that would be denied to the more capable students at the school. Wouldn't the ones to blame be rather the legislators or regulators that implemented such a system?
Regarding those such as celebrities threatening to leave America if Trump is elected president. That should upset us why? Such consequences would probably make America a better place. Therefore, good riddance.
While addressing the Colin Kaepernick fiasco, the pastoral staff of Berean Baptist Church lamented in a discussion uploaded to SermonAudio the rise of “Fox News Christianity”. By that, the gaggle of theologians meant a variety of religious devotion that conflates patriotism with the Christian faith. Is it that the two have become dangerously intertwined or are these professional religionists jacked out of shape that some people might have interests and concerns beyond constant church attendance? Interestingly, in these remarks the conservative Christian is admonished that Kaepernick is within his Constitutional rights to be as disrespectful as he wants to be. However, when the conservative believer articulates their particular social vision, these same pastors bore them a new one how the Bible and the Constitution are not the same and how we really have no rights. Usually that sort of rhetoric is invoked to opposition to mistreatment or abuse taking place within a religious context.
If your cutoff shorts are cut so short that the pockets dangle lower than the cut off, it's pretty safe to say that the shorts are now risque.
Hillary Clinton said her pneumonia is the first time Republican men have ever expressed concern regarding women's health. This has got to be the first time the phrase “WOMENNNNNNN's health” wasn't employed as a euphemism for wanton fornication and infanticide. An infomercial is urging viewers to invest in a company developing the technology to hold 3D holographic events. In essence, you too can own a little piece of the Antichrist. The technology in itself is morally neutral. However, cannot help but have that verse come to mind about life being given to the image of the Beast.
Those wanting the name of Jefferson Davis Highway in Alexandria changed are probably carpetbaggers not even from Virginia.
Authorities are asking bystanders with possible recorded footage of the NYC dumpster bombers to come forward. When this video depicts perpetrators other than Whites of a conservative visage, will such vigilant citizens be harassed like those insisting that they saw a third Oklahoma City bomber?
The extent to which those in the ruling regime and their dutiful supplicants in the media are reluctant to categorize an act of violence as terrorism is evidence of the degree to which terrorists and allied subversives have eroded the American spirit.
Hillary's pronouncement in light of the NYC dumpster bombing that it is better to delaying arriving at a conclusion about a matter until more information is available reveals the thinking of a woman having spent a lifetime denying what is staring her right in the face such as about what Bill was putting into Monica's.
At the United Nation's, Obama insisted that we are obligated to throw our borders open to Islamist refugees. Maybe a number can be relocated to reside alongside him in the family quarters at the White House and at his assorted properties when he leaves office.
In a sermon where the modern believer was condemned for having a Walmart nearby unlike the humble ancient agrarian who only had God to rely upon, it was fascinating to hear the pastor stumble when the Power Point froze. For is not the pastor relying on images to compensate for lackluster homiletical delivery unlike the prophets of old who were empowered by God's spirit rather than Microsoft apparently?
In a sermon on singleness, it was decreed that singles not volunteering in the church are “not being accountable” (that nebulous catch all when professional religionists want to chew you out for something but really can't clearly point out exactly what you are alleged to have done wrong). If the pastor is getting paid, you are not obligated to do anything on behalf of a religious organization unless you have contractually agreed to for a predetermined amount of pay.
In a SermonAudio homily, Sean Harris of Berean Baptist Church lamented that the suburbanite is not required to rely upon the provision of the Lord to the same degree as the agrarian. So why is he the pastor of a religious entertainment complex in fairly modernized Fayetteville rather than somewhere in the remote mountains of North Carolina?
It was suggested in a sermon that singles ought to volunteer to babysit the children of the married people in the church. Shouldn't the children be taken care of by the parents that had the sex bringing the whelps into existence? And if these singles are obligated to babysit the married people's kids, shouldn't they be paid for this labor?
It was said in a sermon on singleness that viewing someone not married by the age of 25 as an old maid was from a certain perspective at one time rooted is supposedly Scriptural ideas. Nearly the same sort of thing used to be said about sending the Black folks to the back of the bus.
It was said in a sermon on marriage that most men enter into it selfishly. As if most wenches settle for ugly men with no bank account, automobile, property, or steady job.
So long as a “do good” initiative is voluntary, fine and dandy. Thing is, the contemporary dogooder is of the mind to force you to do good even if what they consider doing good is at variance with those eager to parade their virtue?
Fuss is being made that CIA director John Brennan voted for the Communist Party candidate in 1976. Perhaps the more pressing concern ought to be that for the past several election cycles that the Communist Party simply endorses the Democratic candidate as its nominee?
If liberals can remove Confederate monuments and recognitions from public memory, perhaps conservatives should begin to lay the framework to eventually remove Obama's name from buildings where he was bestowed this honor for simply having emerged from his mother's birth canal half Black.
On the WRC 4 website regarding the story about proposed enhanced security measures at Arlington Cemetery, of all the military personnel buried there, the accompanying photo just happened to focus on the grave of a Muslim.
If one can't be compelled to show a photo ID in order to vote, then why should one be compelled to show a photo ID to enter Arlington Cemetery as proposed by the military? If one is to be made to feel like a criminal for making the effort to visit these solemn grounds, what is to prevent the average American from no longer caring about such places if they become yet another venue in which the state can practice its conditioning techniques resulting in increased docility?
In the first 2016 presidential debate, Hillary Clinton criticized Donald Trump for capitalizing upon and speaking favorably of the real estate crisis. How is what Trump did appreciably different than the actions of Clinton financier George Soros who deliberately conspires to collapse entire currencies and economies?
In the first 2016 presidential debate, Hillary Clinton condemned the American people for their implicit prejudice that prompts them to think in ways not authorized by tolerancemongers and selected social engineers. Does she intend to speak as directly against those that help themselves without benefit of recognized economic transaction to the inventory of nearby merchants following an unpopular trial verdict or police action?
Apparently pink gloves denote breast cancer awareness. Don't gloves prompt you to think more of prostate cancer?
USA Today has declared Donald Trump unfit to be President. Some have always insisted that USA Today isn't fit to be considered a newspaper.
A NYC councilman insists he's no less patriotic for refusing to stand for the pledge of allegiance. Probably because he wasn't very patriotic to begin with.
The U.S. Navy has announced that personnel will be addressed by rank rather than job classification in the attempt to avoid articulating the profanity “man”. Does the Russian or Chinese militaries sit around wringing their hands about such banalities?
In a homily posted on SermonAudio, Sean Harris of Berean Baptist Church condemned those not risking their lives for Christ in the same manner as the Apostles and early Church Fathers. Such exhortations might carry more weight if the pastor wasn't sitting so comfortably as the head honcho of a sizable religious entertainment complex. If the pastor replies to mere pewfillers perceptive enough to raise these sorts of observations that he is exactly where God wants him to be, the retort to that ought to be is how does he know that the mere pewfiller isn't exactly where God wants them to be?
According to Sean Harris of Berean Baptist Church, the Christian ought to take risks for Christ with little consideration of the consequences. If they do and loose their jobs, will the church pick up the tab or do new vacation Bible school puppets every year take precedence in terms of the disbursement of the offering?
Some are building bunkers and emergency shelters fearing the prospects of a Trump election victory. See, he's already stimulating the economy with many of these jobs no doubt going to migrant laborers.
Donald Trump has been condemned for wondering how Hillary would fair without an armed Secret Service detail. His son has been condemned for suggesting that those willing to allow entrance to poorly vetted refugees should be willing to eat a handful of Skittles from a bowl where only a few of the candies are poisoned. Apparently on the part of liberals there is an expectation that those subjected to their totalitarian brand of social engineering are to be forbidden from speaking out against the consequences or implications of misguided policies.
Hillary Clinton is urging millennials to participate in a day of service to give to something larger than themselves. How about urging them to look for jobs and to pay their own way in life?
Frau Obama condemned birther propaganda as undermining her husband's regime. Did she ever speak out as forcefully against “that guy from their neighborhood” Bill Ayers whose subversive acts actually resulted in the destruction of government property? Does the First Lady condemn contemporary acts of subversion where businesses are vandalized and looted following unpopular police actions or trial verdicts not even involving these victimized merchants?
Isn't it also an insult to accuse a campaign of being insult-driven?
Did those now accusing Trump of bigotry for at one point questioning the legitimacy of President Obama's citizenship condemn Obama of bigotry for insisting that those residing in rural Pennsylvania bitterly clung to their God and their guns?
Regarding the imperative of evacuating from the path of the oncoming hurricane, President Obama insisted that property can always be rebuilt. Those confronted with FEMA regulations and prohibitions following the destruction of a dwelling might legitimately argue otherwise.
A CNN propagandist reminded Fox News broadcasters that they don't work for Donald Trump. Will he as deliberatively conscientious in directing a similar admonition to the moderator of the Vice Presidential debate that similarly she does not work for the Clinton campaign?
For purchasing advertising time on the Weather Channel ahead of the pending hurricane, the Clinton campaign is accused of attempting to benefit from fear and panic. When is this different than any other time? For without fear and panic, would politicians as an occupational class even exist. Will erectile dysfunction cures and feminine hygiene products be accused of attempting to grow their audience share during the crisis brought on by this natural calamity as well?
That's quite revealing in regards to the historic Donald Trump/Rosie O'Donnell spat that the take away from that was how horrible it was that Trump dared ridicule a WOMANNN's appearance (the term “woman” used loosely in regards to Rosie) rather than his suggestion free speech ought to be curtailed.
By Frederick Meekins
Sunday, October 09, 2016
Saturday, October 08, 2016
Friday, October 07, 2016
Thursday, October 06, 2016
Wednesday, October 05, 2016
Tuesday, October 04, 2016
Monday, October 03, 2016
Sunday, October 02, 2016
Saturday, October 01, 2016
Friday, September 30, 2016
Thursday, September 29, 2016
Wednesday, September 28, 2016
Tuesday, September 27, 2016
Will Bakers Refusing To Bake Police Retirement Cake Be Financially Ruined & Reeeducated Against Their Wills?
Monday, September 26, 2016
Sunday, September 25, 2016
In those, the Texas Senator, instead of endorsing Donald Trump explicitly, urged the American people to vote their consciences.
It has yet to be explained how that message differed from that articulated by Trump's own daughter who revealed she votes individual rather than party.
If anyone knows self-serving, it is Cal Thomas.
In “Blinded By Might”, the mass communicator allegedly repented of his involvement with Moral Majority and that his fellow Christians ought to embrace a spirit of political pacificism in order to assuage his own conscience.
However, with the ascendancy of Donald Trump, Thomas certainly didn't mind contributing in the name of Christian values to an issue of National Review seeking to derail the Trump candidacy.
But with Trump triumphant, Thomas now goes out of his way to badmouth any conservative or Republican failing to march in lockstep or even question the direction in which this movement might be taking America.
Thomas often likes to point out his tenuous familial connection to Calvin Coolidge.
However, it seems the figure from political history he has the most in common with might be none other than Talleyrand
By Frederick Meekins
Saturday, September 24, 2016
Friday, September 23, 2016
Thursday, September 22, 2016
Wednesday, September 21, 2016
Tuesday, September 20, 2016
It is claimed that, earlier in the presidential campaign season, Ted Cruz promised to endorse whomever it was that voters (or moneyed secret societies dependent upon your view as to how this process is determined in the end) selected as the Republican candidate. At the time, it was believed that Donald Trump would never be triumphant and that this rhetorical stunt might be enough to forestall a third party bid on the part of the real estate tycoon that would likely result in Hillary Clinton winning the White House.
At the time, it seemed that Donald Trump and Ted Cruz might have had a considerable degree of compatibility. Some pundits and strategists even speculated that Cruz might have even made a good vice president on a ticket headed by Donald Trump.
Given Trump's New Yorker mentality, his preferred strategy consisted of repeatedly insulting his opponents into submission and compliance. By the time he got around to Cruz, it seems this verbal barrage could not be turned off.
A number of Trump's most scathing retorts against Cruz were actually aimed at the physical appearance of Cruz's wife Heidi and at Cruz's father for supposedly being part of the conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy. For unlike Trump, Cruz apparently takes serious the clause in the traditional wedding vows about marriage being until death and not until the first sign of crows feet.
Yet it would seem surprisingly to the most thoroughgoing and rigorous of Christians that PR stunts along the campaign trail are a far more serious matter than promises made before God at the marriage altar or loyalty to family.
Apart from a situation resulting in profound criminality such as treason, terrorism, or an act that would result in discernible quantifiable harm to an individual, one's foremost loyalties ought to be to one's family rather than the state necessarily. Even much less is owed to an individual that hasn't even as of yet been elected to public office.
Ted Cruz might have promised to endorse whomever the Republican candidate was to be once the dust settled. However, that promise was made before Trump disparaged Cruz's family in some of the most visceral ways imaginable.
Yet as of much concern to the spiritually inclined ought to be the elevation of this incident at the Republican convention to the level of a litmus test by which Senator Cruz's profession of faith is judged valid or not.
There are a number of different interpretations as to the procedural mechanics by which an individual attains the state of salvation according to the various confessional traditions within the Christian faith. However, at the most fundamental, a Christian is someone that has professed faith in the Lord Jesus Christ for dieing upon the cross as payment for our sins and rising from the dead so that those that believe in Him might have eternal life in Heaven.
Nowhere in the historic creeds held by any legitimate denomination does it say anything about your mansion in the beatific beyond being forfeited as a result of renigging on your promise to endorse a particular presidential candidate should your relationship with this aspiring leader turn sour. Pietistic sticklers might snipe that Scripture dictates by someone's fruits that you will know a person and that faith without works is dead.
According to the concepts of the orders of creation and subsidiarity, for the smooth functioning of human society, God established certain spheres of authority to oversee the complexity of the world and that the authority closest to a particular concern ought to be the one to address the matter. As such, the loyalty that ought to be the strongest should be for immediate family such as one's spouse, children, parents, and siblings. In a properly balanced system, the loyalty and deference due a distant aspiring leader and even the offices which such figures seek ought to be minimal or perhaps even tentative at its most intense.
By conscious volition in terms of the marriage vows before God and men, the first loyalty of Ted Cruz is to his wife. Coming in at a close second is that to his father given that, from all indication, it seems that the two have an intact familial relationship. If anything, Ted Cruz's profession of faith should be called into question if he did not prioritize their honor by taking some kind of symbolic stand that realizes that, while there might not be any other electorally viable alternative to Hillary Clinton other than Donald Trump, in good conscience he cannot pledge fealty to the man.
The conspicuously devout that pride themselves on finding a Biblical text for nearly every life contingency will no doubt rush to the Old Testament and invoke the narrative of Jepthah as proof that the believer is obligated to abide by his promises no matter how outlandish. Jepthah in Judges 11:31 vowed that he would offer as a sacrifice the first thing he saw emerge from his domicile upon his return home if the Lord would grant him victory over the Ammonites.
It turned out that that would be his daughter. And to prove that he was a man of his word, Jepthah did kill her.
Religious enthusiasts will rejoice, “See! This is proof that Ted Cruz is obligated to fulfill his vow to Donald Trump and the Republican Party.” Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps those holding to this position ought to contemplate the implications of what they are advocating.
Jepthah made this vow to God. So are those critical of Cruz regarding this matter telling us that Trump is, in their view, God or deserving of the same unwavering loyalty that is owed to the Almighty?
Even in terms of the traditional wedding ceremony, the binding lifelong nature of that union is probably characterized as such more so because one swears this promise not so much to one's intended spouse as one is making this promise to and before a righteous and holy God. Since Donald Trump has been married three times with an undisclosed additional number of women before, during, and after each of these marriages, it is pretty safe to say that he does not rise to the same level of perfection as the triune Godhead.
Those that continue to insist that Ted Cruz is likely not a Christian or at least not a very good one need to be quite careful. For does not Scripture say that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God?
As such, does that not also include those leveling these kinds of accusations against Senator Cruz? If these critics continue to insist that they are without sin, does not I John 1:8 say of them that they are liars? If they are going to hold that the slightest shortcoming in the life of the professed believer is evidence of the likelihood that the individual is likely not a believer, might these types wallowing in self righteousness in regards to the Ted Cruz question be in danger of the hottest hellfire of all?
You aren't going to get through life without a few mistakes which theologians would categorize as sin. On the Day of Judgment would you rather stand before God having failed to uphold the honor of your wife and father or having failed to placate a presidential candidate that by that point probably doesn't even reside in the desired habitation of the Afterlife if he continues to insist that he has never done anything wrong in need of a Savior's forgiveness in the first place.
By Frederick Meekins