When does the 24 hour coverage begin for him?
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Just a quick look at the kinds of people behind this Emergent Churh, communitarian nonsense.
I don't believe the North African dictatorship is mentioned in the above article, but it is mentioned in this link.
If these false prophets wanted to make a break with the past, why wouldn't they disband the group all together and not even have the name of David Moses Berg on affiliated with their ministry.
Is akin to trying to rehabilitate the People's Temple and claim Jim Jones was a good guy deep down despite going off the deep end.
by Frederick Meekins
In this story about the debate of whether chimpanznees or orangutans are humanity's closest relative it concludes with a very revealing statement: "In other words, if the DNA evidence that many biologists use as evidence turned out not to accurately reveal evolutionary relationships, the work of many molecular biologists would be suspect. If this was true, we would lose entire departments at major universities, Disotell said.'I would have nothing to do. I would go become a carpenter'."
Monday, June 29, 2009
To those that are now going to go into vapors over what Boehner said, the word he used is all you are going to have left to eat and keep you warm if Obama's "Climate Change" bill is enacted.
Too bad the media did not go into 24 hour coverage over this usurpation of American living standards rather than Michael Jackson's passing, which though sad, won't really impact your own life by the time winter heating bills arrive in the mail.
Friday, June 26, 2009
Thursday, June 25, 2009
These same critics would then get all jacked out of shape if all the characters spoke with proper "White English".
Jetfire is suppose to be depicted as old.
Should AARP get in an uproar while we are at it?
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
A state-sponsored pregnancy prevention program at the University of North Carolina is paying girls $1.00 a day not to get pregnant.
Since it takes two to make a baby, shouldn't young men be getting this WELFARE also?
If it was reversed, wouldn't NOW nags be crying discrimination?
Some will argue there really isn't anyway to prove boys are complying with the program.
But the same is true with girls up until the time they either have the baby or one notices the bulge in the belly.
So, when this happens, will program administrators subtract back to around the time when the contract was broken and demand any compensation from that point forward be returned to the program's coffers?
How about, instead of handing out money, scaring both boys and girls into keeping their pants on and legs together by emphasizing what will happen to them should they catch an incurable disease or the hardship that will result from having a baby before they get married?
Contrary to the headshrinkers, fear can be a good motivator.
by Frederick Meekins
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Monday, June 22, 2009
Friday, June 19, 2009
Could a President attend a "Caucasian" prayer breakfast without there being media outrage?
Thursday, June 18, 2009
How about that little phrase "all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator..."
Why is it worse if I assault someone without a home than someone with a home?
Will penalties against home invasions be stiffened as this crime is deliberate animus directed against those owning a home?
In Australia they certainly knew how to take guns away but hemmed and hawed in reluctance to define exactly what a "home invasion" was.
And what if one vagrant is violated by another vagrant as is believed regarding bodies buried in a shallow grave in a Washington, DC suburb?
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
If two men are shacked up together in abomination, why can't they both get their own insurance from their respective employers?
Benefits are extended to married couples because traditionally the woman labored in the home as a domestic engineer and childrearing specialist.
Since those of warped affections cannot reproduce, there is no reason to extend these privileges to them and drive up the costs for those living as God intended in either holy matrimony or celebate singlehood.
Wonder if the punishment would have been as harsh if the kiss was directed towards a gay lover.
Officials claim they were enforcing the rules.
Thus, I guess it was more about failing an individual for exhibiting insufficient loyalty to the state since the gesture of a kiss of gratitude towards a parent in defiance of an arbitrary decree would prove the individual's higher devotion was to the family rather than the government.
Tuesday, June 16, 2009
The human mind and spirit cannot endure for very long the chaotic vacillation of such lawlessness before the individual eventually cries out for answers to the extremes of licentiousness and total control. Throughout much of the Modern Era, the Christian apologist could appeal to a shared respect for historic and scientific fact common to both Christianity and commonsense realism. Today, the Christian must first reestablish why anyone ought to believe in anything at all and then assert how the Biblical approach provides the best possible explanation for the condition in which man actually finds himself and the facts as they are rather than how he might like them to be.
The apologist must begin this process by exposing the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of the Postmodernist system. James Sire writes in The Universe Next Door, "If we hold that all linguistic utterances are power plays, then that utterance itself is a power play and no more likely to be more proper than any other (187)."
This claim by Postmodernists that all utterances are merely power plays fails the test of systematic consistency where a philosophical proposition must square with the external world as well as logically cohere with the other statements comprising the set of beliefs under consideration. But more important than the sense of satisfaction resulting from the discovery of this contradiction allowing for a degree of one-upmanship in the battle of ideas is the realization that this contradiction exposes the unlivability of a particular worldview.
Big deal, the Postmodernist might quip in response to this inconsistency since they are not known for their devotion to logical argumentation. Try as they might to gloss over this oversight with platitudes honoring the glories of relativism and tolerance, Postmodernists still deep down possess that human yearning for a universal justice. Romans 2:14-15 says, "Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts..."
It might not be fashionable to contend that there is no such thing as right and wrong and often believing such is even an occupational requirement in certain academic and governmental circles. But when it comes down to it, no one really wants to be treated as if that was the case. C.S. Lewis was fond of noting that those among us preaching the loudest in favor of relativism would cry bloody murder just like the rest of us if egregiously wronged. Just see what happens the next time the faculty nihilist is denied tenure when up for review.
Once it is established by our own existential makeup that there is something to right and wrong beyond the whims of those strong enough to have their way with the weak, it needs to be highlighted where these standards come from. John Frame in Apologetics To The Glory Of God writes, "Now, where does this authority of the absolute moral principle come from? Ultimately, only two kinds of answers are possible: the source of absolute moral authority is either personal or impersonal (97)."
This means that the ethical framework of the universe either arose within its own structure on its own or through the conscientious ordering of a higher organizing mind. Since we ourselves possess consciousness, by default the source of this moral order would have to be aware since it is impossible for the unaware to give rise to the aware or even to establish an ordered universe since that which is not guided and directed is haphazard and random.
If the Christian has been successful up to this point, the Christian has aided the Postmodernist in realizing that there is purpose and direction in life. The next step in the process involved proving to the Postmodernist that the Christian faith is the correct system of thought and meaning. Now the Christian can reintroduce a more traditional apologetic since the Postmodernist is now capable of stomaching objective fact.
The task of the Christian Apologist is to show the unbeliever that the Christian faith is the most viable religious option. This is accomplished by emphasizing the validity of the Biblical account. The first hurdle to overcome regards the historical legitimacy of the Gospel records. To accomplish, Winfried Corduan provides the following checklist of questions in No Doubt About It: The Case For Christianity: "(1) Are the accounts written by people closely associated with the event? (2) Are our present versions of the Gospels what the original authors wrote? (3) Are the accounts so biased as to be unbelievable? (4) Do the accounts contain impossibilities (186)?"
By answering these questions, it is discovered that the Gospels are remarkably well off. The Gospels are themselves written by eyewitnesses or contain the testimony of eyewitnesses. Corduan writes, "Matthew and John were disciples...Mark was a native of Jerusalem and present at the Gospel events...and reported the reminisces of Peter. Luke...was not a disciple...Yet tells of the research he did (189)."
Regarding the quality of the Gospel manuscripts, so many have come down to us in the present day with so few variant readings that there is little chance of some textual huckster committing documentary fraud without someone catching wind of it. As to the matter of bias, while the Gospels and the Bible were written to advance a certain perspective the same as any other book, it is remarkably blunt in cataloging the shortcomings of its most beloved protagonists. Most memoirs and autobiographies go out of their way to cast their subjects in the most favorable light possible even at the expense of factual accuracy.
Lastly, as to whether or not the Gospels record impossibilities is a matter of preconception in the mind of the beholder. One can either maintain the Humean notion that miracles do not occur because miracles do not occur or abide by the canons of historical research and accept these extraordinary events as they come since the rest of the document passes muster.
Since the Gospels are deemed as historically reliable, it would follow that those studying these document should look to those spoken thereof in its pages to provided the content and meaning of these events addressed. After all, the Founding Fathers are still looked to as important sources for interpreting the U.S. Constitution and for what was intended for the early American republic.
Likewise, to comprehend fully the significance of Jesus, the sincere student of history ought to consider what this historical figure said about himself. Jesus says in Matthew 12:39-40, "A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign. But none will be given except for the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and nights in the heart of the earth." From later passages detailing the Resurrection, we see that he carried through on this promise.
In Matthew 16:13-17, Jesus asks His disciples who they think He is. Peter responds, "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God." Jesus did not chastise Peter for idolatry; instead he ratified the Apostle's assertion by replying, "Blessed are you, Simeon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven."
An apologetic designed to address the concerns raised by Postmodernism presents a number of possibilities as well as challenges to the Christian seeking to reach those trapped by this subtle but pervasive mindset. Crafting an apologetic addressing the spirit of the age to an extent makes the evangelistic task somewhat easier.
Postmodernism already wrests asunder most metaphysical pretensions as linguistic obfuscations protecting the powerful. Therefore, the Postmodernist has already done a portion of the Christian’s work by exposing the invalidity of most intellectual systems. The Christian can therefore rush in and expose the contradictory nature of outright nihilism without first having to tear down incorrect theologies and the faulty ethics arising from them. As a result, the Christian can then show how the alternatives found in the Bible strike the proper balance between the liberation and conformity tearing at the heart of contemporary culture and individual well-being.
However, these characteristics can also serve as drawbacks when employing an apologetic addressing Postmodernism. Even though the Apologist does not have to deconstruct (to use a term popular in Postmodernist circles) faulty conceptions of God when dealing with these thinkers, the Christian has to take the time to reestablish why anything matters at all. With those hovering around the periphery, it might be relatively easy to lure them back onto the solid ground of commonsense founded on Christian absolutes; however, those at the heart of this movement churning out its lies and deceptions will be considerably harder to convince and will continue to ensnare unreflective minds.
It is in the campaign against this ongoing subversion that the Christian waging a defensive action to preserve the remaining shreds of moral sanity can get bogged down and neglect the distinctives of the Christian faith in favor of a less offensive set of principles common to various religions and ideologies shocked by the ethical brutality of the contemporary era.
Of the crop of books over the past few years by figures such as Bill Benet, Robert Bork, and James Q. Wilson that bemoan the decline in social morality, Hugh Hewitt writes in The Embarrassed Believer: Reviving Christian Witness In An Age Of Unbelief, “But there is no apologetic content to these writings. And they are mute on the ultimate question, they are ineffective. In fact, they might actually be harmful (154).” The Christian accomplishes little of lasting impact if the message is watered down to attract allies or spends inordinate amounts of time addressing the symptoms of the disease rather than the cause.
Ephesians 6:12 says, “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities and powers, against spiritual darkness in high places.” The Christian is involved in a grand spiritual conflict all around him. As in all wars, weapons and tactics change over time as each side engages in a spiraling exchange of point/counterpoint as each side tries to best the other.
In the Modern era, the Christian utilized an apologetic appealing to a common respect for objective factual knowledge shared with the broader culture. However, in the change to Postmodernism, the Christian has had to alter the apologetic to show how life without objective truth is unlivable. From that point the Apologist can go on to show how what Francis Schaeffer termed “true truth” indelibly points towards Christ.
By Frederick Meekins
If "Everyone Leads" as this group claims, why do we have to volunteer while these charity fat-cats likely pull down hefty salaries?
Monday, June 15, 2009
Friday, June 12, 2009
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
And what's so wrong with that you ask?
Nothing, but I am not the one that delivered a campaign speech condemning Americans for "eating what we want, riding around in SUV's, and keeping homes at 70 degrees".
Since this kind of outing has no bearing whatsover on national security concerns, shouldn't the Obama's sit their rearends at home like everybody else?
Seems there is no hurry to kick anyone else out though.
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Monday, June 08, 2009
Sunday, June 07, 2009
A site perhaps even more frightening than the alien pictured below.
Wonders if he'd be so tough without his body guards or likely living in a gated community.
The naive forecaster claims he merely wanted to share the experience he thinks all Americans should be compelled to take part in.
However, if those like him are going to wantonly broadcast the identities of jurors for criminals and their associates to see, why ought Americans step forward to fulfill this civic obligation?
And if others are going to make the case that posting such photos is part of their First Amendment Rights, I hope they are just as vigorous in defending Second Amendment Rights by expanding concealed weapons permits so those forced to serve on juries can then protect themselves.
Saturday, June 06, 2009
Thursday, June 04, 2009
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
The response was in regards to a queston pertaining to gay marriage, however, the former Vice President's exact words were "I think people ought to be free to enter into any kind of union they wish, any kind of arrangement they wish."
Under such a banner, society would be required to sanction polygamy between consenting adults as, contrary to popular perception, not all such unconventional households consist of a preteen being paired off with a sixty-year-old.
Thought this cover of the New Yorker sparked the imagination.
Glancing at it sends the mind spinning in so many directions.
Is it a statement that the printed word will outlast computers?
You will notice that the technologically sophisticated alien has a book in hand while reading amidst electronic refuse such as discarded keyboards and CD's.
Also, one imagines is the alien here as a conqueror or come to study us as an archeological subject long after we have departed as the buildings his saucer hovers over look worn down and decayed.
Is that from attack or the passage of the centuries?
Tuesday, June 02, 2009
I hope this does not include the military versions of these vehicles.
As some may recall, it was Arnold Schwarzenegger, who now tells you how to live in the name of the environment, that got the manufacturer to produce these vehicles for the consumer sector.
Is it really wise to have our greatest potential enemy to be producing these?
One must condemn both incidents. However, interesting isn't it, how the murder of the baby butcher ranks top billing among headlines and is being blamed on Fox News for daring to do a report on him whereas very little is being reported about the killing of two soliders in front of a recruiting station by a fanatical Muslim?