Priorities Of Preservation

There is a push today to limit human suffering, to prevent any pain from occurring at all. This cringing drive is so rabid that a father sues his daughters’ school when she is stung by a bee on the school yard. There are schools refusing to allow recess, there are schools sanitizing their play equipment, removing anything which may remotely cause any risk. The schools don’t have a choice, the parents will sue them out of existence if their children encounter the slightest discomfort.

This issue here is contained in the fundamental difference in perspective cause by a proper understanding of mans inherent value before a creator God. A humanist will not

Compare this to the lifestyle lived by many Christians seeking to save the soul and the mind. In God’s design the body is temporary, it dies, but the soul is immortal, it is freed from the body by death and lives forever. To a Christian, more important than the body is the soul. A Christian may be called to give up their life, literally or figuratively, to save peoples’ souls. A Christian does not discount the value of a body. You find Christians at the forefront of most of the humanitarian efforts around the world, seeking to protect the bodies of millions of human lives, regardless of whether or not those being protected are Christian or not. The Christian seeks to preserve the body because under God we are all equally valuable, and because the body is the corporeal home of a soul which either needs saving or has a life to live and purposes yet to accomplish.

The world seeks to preserve the body, while summarily dismissing the mind, allowing anything whatsoever to creep its way into the receptive, untrained recesses. And even then they desire to allow anything we want to be used on our body, so long as we do the choosing. We can choose abortion, we can choose drugs, we can choose tattoos, just so long as we do the choosing. It is a matter of control. God is God, He holds choice in His hands. He allows us to choose all the time, but there are many times He chooses for us,for His glory, for our good. Mankind does not want God to choose for us. All of nature are God’s tools, and He wields Nature for the furthering of His plans. As we seek to limit the influence of God over our lives we will find Nature rising up and thwarting our plans, exerting His control over us.

I love butterflies. I have lots of experience with butterflies. I worked over the course of 2 or 3 consecutive summers for a local butterfly farm in my home town. We bred and raised monarch butterflies and sold them for weddings funerals, graduations, research, etc… There is a crucial stage of every butterflies development when the caterpillar has grown to the right maturity level it crawls to the underside of the leaf in the wild or our special rearing containers in the lab and in a weird jerking dance encloses itself in a chrysalis. The caterpillar goes through a metamorphosis, a fundamental change in it’s very nature and emerges and beautiful and brilliant butterfly. The escape from the chrysalis is one of the most important passages in its brief life. Without this struggle the butterfly will die. With the metamorphosis complete the chrysalis turns transparent and the orange and black wings are scrunched against the body in the little space left by the bulging abdomen of the butterfly. The butterfly braces itself against the chrysalis wall and pushes until the skin of the chrysalis breaks at the butterflies shoulders. The butterfly pulls itself with great difficulty out of the chrysalis shell and hangs from it, pumping its wings slowly it pushes the fluids from it’s distended abdomen into its wings, inflating them slowly until they are stiff and straight.

If the butterfly were to fall too easily out of the chrysalis, it would not have the strength to pump its wings full of the fluid. The stunted wings would hang limply in a bundle at the doomed insects side and it will die. There is not an option here. The butterfly either engages in an intense and painful struggle or it dies.

We as humans need pain and need struggles to grow many times. Pain and discomfort serve many purposes and there is no way I can explore all of them here. Pain can mean we’re human and we live in a physical world. It is a sensation, a feeling. A bee sting means that we offended a bee and he is willing to give his life in order to offend us a little. Pain can be a warning. A hot stove burns us and we are careful not to put out hands there again. Pain can be growth. The aches and pains of childhood as our bodies stretch to new and unfamiliar heights are not bad, but merely a sign that we’ll not be looking quite so far up at the rest of the world very much longer. Pain is not bad, it is an indicator, a sign.

And yet, in spite of the necessity and normalcy, the elite of our culture push for protection of the body. Control.

The Christian perspective is different. The soul and the mind are more important because they exist eternally. The body is just a temporary home.

How To Win The Culture War

Romans 1:18-32 (ESV):

(18) For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. (19) For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. (20) For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. (21) For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. (22) Claiming to be wise, they became fools, (23) and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.

(24) Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to (25) because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves,

(26) For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; (27) and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

(28) And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to what ought not to be done. (29) They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, (30) slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, (31) foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless. (32) Though they know God’s decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

This passage is contains the litany of sin from it’s roots, to it’s inception, to it’s fruition. Of particular importance is the fact that this litany is particularly applicable to a lifestyle of sin.

The process of temptation described in James 1:14-15 (ESV) is more universal in it’s application:

(14) But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. (15) Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.

James’ process applies to all in that even we as Christians are prone to temptation, lustful desires, sin, and spiritual death or dormancy.

Paul’s process and description is more applicable to the sin of lifestyle. From a consistent denial of God and His attributes, God will cast them down into degrading passions. If they will not exalt Him, He will deny them even ‘human’ decency.

But in our sinful state, the heart of man seeks approval, approbation, and acceptance. As our sins have crawled out of the closet and been accepted by others, they have gained courage and through courage, further acceptance. Eventually, and this is the state of our nation today, sin and acceptance reach critical mass and breaks out into the mainstream, demanding recognition as something other than what it is.

But how do we deal with this? The lines have been drawn, the gauntlet thrown down, our children are being indoctrinated in school and our cities are being cajoled into hosting sex-fests in their streets in the form of “gay pride parades”.

We’ve confronted them, attacked their ideology, beaten back their growth at times, but bit by bit they seem to be winning as people stop caring and say to themselves: “what’s so wrong about it, they aren’t hurting anybody”.

A key fact in any war is that those fighting FOR something have a distinct advantage over those fighting AGAINST something. A positive goal inspires confidence and wins allies, while a negative goal works against the human spirit bringing discouragement and desperation.

So far in our culture war, we’ve been fighting against the encroaching forces of multi-culturalism, sexual deviancy, and other forms of social decay. At times we remind ourselves that we’re fighting for our families and children and nation, but overall, it is a war of defense.

We have lost the high-ground though. The momentum is with the enemy. We are being backed into walls in nearly all fronts of this war. This is a good thing.

Yes, this is a good thing.

We now have something to fight for.

But what are we fighting for, and how do we wage that battle most effectively.

In the last year of blogging here at I, Pandora, I’ve come to realize the futility of forcing political change. Bringing about a political change may bring temporary gains, but we have to compromise. We force ourselves to accept less-than-optimal options in our leaders.

Political change is still important, very important. Those who stand in the gap for us are heroes who ought to be protected, and prayed over, and supported. But unless the hearts change, the same people will keep coming back with the same goals: to wipe out the influence and effectiveness of God’s word in the world.

Don’t be misguided, the people who champion the wrong ideas’ personal goals may be the forced societal acceptance of some deviance. But they are only the faces, they are not the enemy. They need true love, God’s love, as much or more so than any other.

No, the enemy is Satan. The deceiver. And it is in his impending and sure doom that we have our strength.

His goal is not acceptance of homosexuality, it is destruction of individuals in any way possible.

Our counter is the reaching of individuals in any way possible. And just as when Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, and it brought healing to those who saw it, and as Jesus, when He was lifted up on the cross, drew all men to Himself. Lifting God’s standard once again will draw men and women to Him.

The root cause, according to Paul, of the sin lifestyle is a refusal to recognize God, His attributes, and His truth. So we need to place God, His attributes, and His truth before them in an unimpeachable, undeniable, and undeniable way.

This is not done necessarily with posters and signs, slogans and shouts. But with lives lived wholly for Him.

The mission field is not just in Zimbabwe or Zambia, China or Croatia, or India. It may be in Indianapolis, or Sacramento, or Dallas, or Boston. For you it is wherever you are, whenever you are there. And if you’ve not started yet, it starts right now.

Your mission: to live your life wholly for God.

This does not mean perfection or even the illusion of perfection. God’s law and God’s love balance each other and provide guidance for us through our struggles and our triumphs.

The family is under assault, so shore up the breeches. Starting with as solid a foundation as can be found, Christ’s love, build your family with hard work and constant prayer. Grow it as large as God will give, and share and spread.

It is humorous, but conservative, loving, Christianity enjoys a distinct advantage over all alternate and deviant lifestyles even if only through the “Rabbit Method”: where we out-grow the deviant by means of procreation. (Soberingly, this is exactly how Muslims are taking over much of the world, by having large families).

Large families are not required, and I know many good people who choose a single life of service, or if they cannot have children, use their additional freedom to free energy to wage mighty war against the enemy.

The important thing is not that we have large families, but that we follow God’s call for our lives.

In our stable and strong, God-fearing, and God-glorifying relationships, we have something the rest of the world, including every religion and worldview and mythos, envies: peace.

Not a hypnotized, brainless, mind-numbing peace. But an despite-the-world-falling-around-us peace which comes from having the Master and Maker of all creation caring for us and promising that He’ll work everything together for our good.

That peaceful life, lived on ever lane and at each corner, in the car and on the roads. Lived in public and in private, at the grocery store and the lumber mill and the cannery. And yes, even on the battlefields around the world. Will draw all people.

So don’t beat your plowshares into swords or your rakes into Uzis. Using your plowshares and rakes to God’s glory will bring a far greater, far more lasting, and far more effective harvest.

American evangelicals are the wests best hope (American Thinker).

End Of January Election Links

Obama and Clinton being children:
There’s a bold line between idealism and fantasy,
neither of them have grown enough to know the difference.

With big thanks to Sweetness & Light.

McCain is the front runner, but he’s not won yet. America’s Mayor has endorsed him after ending his own bid to become America’s President. The Governator is expected to endorse him as early as today. (Politico)

McCain will be a “hold-your-nose-and-vote” nominee because even he will be preferable to any alternative.

It is telling that, following exit polls, we know that liberals and moderates voted for McCain in Florida, while conservatives voted for Romney.

Speaking of Romney, he has some tough choices to make: Will he write the big check?

Huckabee needs to get his personal vendetta against Romney out of his eyes, drop out of the race, and endorse the one man who will support a real conservative agenda who still has a chance of winning.

Liberals Anonymous is looking for new members:

Liberals Anonymous (LibAnon) is a nationwide organization of current, former, and recovering American liberals and Democrats. Its sole mission is to establish and maintain recovery programs designed to help similar individuals overcome the plethora of congenital illnesses inherent in postmodern American liberalism with which they are embittered. Liberals Anonymous accomplishes this worthy goal by making the idiosyncratic elemental disease nature of liberalism self-evident to the afflicted individual.

(From the American Thinker)

Back to Romney, and Hugh Hewitt. Ace of Spades apologizes for not getting it right…

I can’t keep knocking Hewitt for being a bit overly enthusiastic about being, ultimately, right. If some of us had seen the lay of the land as well as Hewitt and supported Romney as the best realistic consensus conservative candidate, we might not be in the position we’re in now.

…and endorses Romney.

Jay, do you truly think the media darling candidate is your candidate? Come on, you’re better than that. I know it.

And Orson Scott Card thinks religion may play a bigger part of this than we realize:

After the Iowa caucuses, an African-American friend of mine from Los Angeles wrote to me, scoffing at the idea that Obama’s victory there meant that a black man could now be elected president.

I thought he was too pessimistic. But then came Hillary’s “comeback” in New Hampshire.

I keep hearing about how the pollsters “got it so wrong” and how Hillary’s victory came from the Democratic regulars getting out the vote for her.

And Mitt Romney’s defeat was also laid at the feet of many causes, none of which sounded particularly solid to me. Yes, McCain is something of a “favorite son” in New Hampshire now. But he also has another “virtue” that Romney and Huckabee both lacked: He’s not openly religious.

I suspect that racial and religious prejudice are both playing more of a role than anyone is willing to admit.

Read Card’s latest WorldWatch.

Riehl ponders:

Has anyone stopped to think that if McCain gets the GOP nod, there will come a time when the party has to draft a platform with an obstinate, if not defiant, McCain - an often angry man with a history of holding conservatives in disdain?

We need speeches like this more often. Bob Corker, Senator from Tennessee, in debate on the tax rebate checks said:

“What I see in this package is nothing but a political stimulus,” said Corker. “It’s a stimulus to make the American people think that we, as a body, are doing something to actually cause the economy to be stronger.”

(From Copious Dissent)

My chief argument against this package is that it is not tied to taxation. Those who pay no taxes will get as much as those who pay taxes. That is wrong.

This will tie economic stimulus and government largess together irrevocably. Government is a burden. A necessary burden, but a burden nonetheless. The way the government to affect the economy meaningfully is to lighten itself, not to quixotically throw money back to us who were compelled to surrender it to them in the first place. That is adding insult to injury.

Back to Romney. American Thinker asks why the other candidates hate Governor Romney. Some of the answers:

• He can win
• He isn’t beholden to special interest groups
• He believes America’s best days are ahead of it

And once more, from the American Thinker: What does that ACU score really mean for McCain?

So where did McCain differ from the ACU?  The big areas were taxes, campaign finance reform, the environment and, most recently, immigration.  There was also a smattering of support for trial lawyers; federal intervention in health, education, safety or voting issues; internationalism; and some social issues.

New Years Linky Goodness

Hey all, here’s to a wonderful year which will begin new and end well.

May your tomorrows be as safe as your yesterdays and as hopeful as your best days because you’re guided and guarded by the God who made them both and loves you the same through all of them.

While I enjoy reading each and every one of you on my blogroll, there are a few blogs which I’ve found myself clicking out of the feed reader to read the whole article or to follow the story in more depth. I love every one of you, but these are the real gems:

• DougRoss@Journal - A recent addition to my rolls, I click to his articles perhaps more often than any other. Using images and humor to tell his stories gives a real strength to his presentation.
• Dinesh D’Souza - Always a provocative and eye-opening read.
• 4Simpsons - Using words in his titles such as “oxymoronic” and “arrogant” (and in the same title, no less), Neil keeps hitting hard and often at social, political, and religious issues.
• Barb’s Blog - Always a return to common sense, and sometimes to Brainless Canelons, Barb’s love of life is always refreshing.
• Verum Serum - One of my favorite blog titles (”verum” means “truth”) contains deep articles with lots of research and depth. Even if he does support Fred…
• Wit or Wisdom - One of the first blogs I found who actually linked back to me. And yes, he supports Huckabee. But he’s still good.
• SolomonHezekiah - A recent arrival, Sol dispenses wisdom from across the pond tackling deep issues with a breadth of wisdom that could only come from a school teacher.
• Thinking Out Loud - “Commentaries from a female, conservative Christian worldview. Intermittent observations on human behavior and current events. Occasional bursts of personal tirades,confessions, and discoveries.” - What’s not to like?

Happy New Year!

Frank & Ernest: Me Blog

Frank and Ernest, December 14th, 2007

Blogging turns 10 years old today. An article in Wired magazine describes what Jorn Barger considered to be the true or original purpose of blogging and includes ten tips he has for new bloggers. He coined the term “blog” to describe

I think #2 is especially good (except the “posted elsewhere” bit, blogging has evolved and become better and worse for it):

You can certainly include links to your original thoughts, posted elsewhere … but if you have more original posts than links, you probably need to learn some humility.

The idea with blogging now is that the web is personal. A blog brings a collection of links to content along with commentary based on a particular person’s worldview and/or perspective.

The real goal of blogging is to provide a window to your own web.

The web has gotten to a point where it’s size is so far beyond any one person’s or even any single-purposed group’s ability to digest.

By blogging, we bring our perspective as well as our own circle of sites into a predigested with added commentary list for others to peruse both to get to know you and to foment and encourage further exploration, discovery and learning.

Cameron And Comfort Face-Off Against Atheism On NBC Nightline

I know this news is a week old, but better late than never. Besides, considering the ratings network news shows receive and their plunging viewer numbers, maybe most of you didn’t see the debates either. I haven’t yet.

Kirk Cameron, the actor, and Ray Comfort, the preacher, debated two atheists from the Rational Response Squad on national television on NBCs Nightline TV show. NBC has posted videos of the debate online as well.

I’ve heard some of the information put out by Cameron and Comfort, it’s top class. Well explained and yet very deep, full of truth and information which Christians can use to defend their faith and show others the validity of the Christian worldview and it’s superiority compared with philosophies today. I find it humorous that the duo not only claim they can prove God exists without using arguments based on faith or the Bible, but that they can prove atheists do not exist.

I get a mental picture of a plucky underdog battling a massive and lethargic yet vicious conglomerate of evil.

The Problem Of Pain

How do we respond to the human tragedy that occurred in Virginia? Why do bad things happen to normal people? None of us are good and all of us deserve eternal punishment from a Just and Holy God. But why do some people who have done no worse and possibly considerably better than many have to face death in such a tragic and fearsome manner? Why does God allow pain?

Whether it is the pain of an entire nation groaning under the weight of a despotic government bent on destroying its own foundation, killing thousands, millions of innocents. Or one lone crazy evil person bent on destroying as much life as he can before he kills himself. The question is asked: Why does God allow pain?

Their answers come from perspectives across the ideological spectrum: Protestant, Atheist, Episcopal, etc… And they’re all trying to answer the question of pain. Read their responses. Some of the brightest minds of each worldview, you’re sure to find it interesting, enlightening, encouraging, and hopefully, comforting.

Sinning Into Socialism

America is hardly the first nor the last nation to be gripped by socialism. I say this as a matter of fact and in a manner that should not be alarming, because while America is unique in all of history we can’t be so naive to believe it is immune to degradation and failure? No, America is not immune because nothing is free of sin and that which follows in its wake, death. America over the past hundred years and predominantly the last sixty has slowly become more socialistic. I believe taking a look back in history and observing other great nations in history will aid in helping us prevent the failure of another great nation.

I observe the historical empires such as Egypt, Persia, Greece, Rome, and the Ottoman Empire and all fundamentally fell due to a lack of morality. Morality prevents death, disease and upholds life and produces national vitality as it brings the people together under a common banner. There’s still tension in the nation, but moral anarchy is even more damaging. Just as gravity and thermodynamics are true today and tomorrow, for the workings of mankind morality is equally especial and true.

The moral fiber first breaks down with the rejection of God or an object of worship which is similar to God and secondly the rejection of the family (via abortion, divorces, illegitimate pregnancies, polygamy, pornography, homosexuality). The break down of these two slowly lead to disunity, more sin, unrest and inevitable civil war. I believe the Roman Empire is a very good example because its failure began first within via the worship of Caesar, the peoples’ moral degeneracy and civil wars which allowed the Germanic tribes to easily conquer and ruin the Roman Empire. Another historical power is that of the nation of Israel and its rise and fall is detailed very well in the Bible. Under obedience to God Israel grew and became a regional power under King David and Solomon. However, with the disregard for God by David and Solomon and the people Israel fell under the heel of other pagan nations.

Considering history I must now take a hard look at America and ask the question of whether or not we as a nation are on the path towards becoming another statistic. Now I’ve titled this writing, “Sinning Into Socialism” because an indicator of sin in a nation is directly proportional to socialism in a nation; and vise versa. I generally define socialism as the centralization of the individual’s or families’ responsibilities and power into the State government, due to the individual and family abdicating responsibilities. Now I say sin and socialism are directly proportional, in that order, because sin abdicates responsibility and power and produces a void that the State is often more than happy to fill; thus the centralization of responsibility and power. This filling of the void is also necessary as a last resort to restore relative order. One living example of socialism would be public school.

Public school is not the natural means of education, because before there was ever a State or central school children were raised by their parents into a trade or skill. For thousands of years parents have been raising and educating their children without the help of that State. I’m not saying there were never higher levels of learning like colleges and scholastic programs but that children were first taught by their parents and eventually financed onto higher learning.

In public school from the ages of 4 to 5 years unto age 18 or 19 years (~15 years) parents give up all of their responsibilities in managing the time, money and curriculum in order to educate their children, rather these are given to the State to manage. But the State does not generate wealth of its own and has to tax indiscriminately, so whether you are retired or have no children you are taxed to send children to public school. Curriculum wise the State is allowed to determine what is taught in the classroom which logically is a conflict of interest as hopefully you’d see that the State can teach exactly what will perpetuate the State’s agenda and power. While American government is a constitutional republic and in theory is to represent the people, this belief is based on the assumption that the people will be an active role within the government via voting and petitioning but when none of this happens the State becomes an entity of its own without accountability and thus more power. And the more people abdicate their responsibilities and power the more power the State will receive.

Other examples of the State filling the void of responsibility which the people should be caring for such as, social security, welfare and Medicare. Now what happens when even the states within America abdicate their responsibilities? Naturally the Federal governing body which is even more detached from the people gains power and leads to Statism. Often I hear people bemoaning the fact that public schools are not safe or the students are not getting a good education, or I hear Medicare drugs are to expensive, or I hear the question, “What is the president going to do about it,” and at the same time I hear the chains of the masses sounding. Such statements and questions imply the State and Federal government has the responsibility and power. The people have set themselves in debt to the State and thus bondage.

Now I realize I have implicily jumped over making an argument against socialism or in more general words, relying on the state to fulfill certain needs. As socialism is defined and in practice the power is centralized in fewer people in the body called the State. As history has shown the more power fewer have, the more corrupt they become because there’s no accountability. This is exactly the case for socialism, communism, totalitarianism, fascism, etc. “Absolute power, corrupts man absolutely,” as the phrase goes. Thus the more power that can be spread out over the people, assuming the people willingly take on the responsibilities, the better the health of a nation. All the empires I had listed above didn’t begin as a totalitarian government, but rather the people had more power, and it was over time that the State became absolute. So in short we all must rely on ourselves and call ourselves to be good stewards first because we are the foundation for our society.

Going back to the Garden of Eden we can see the action of Adam and Eve abdicating their responsibility and power to Satan by rejecting God and his commandment and also his blessings. After that moment where did God find Adam and Eve, in the garden hiding (abdicating) their responsibilities and thus began the story of man’s bondage. However, I have not only written this to point out the problem, but also to point out the answer.

The answer is simple! People must take responsibility for themselves and their families. People must take back what they have given up to the State whom they have come indebt to. I don’t call for radical revolutions which would honestly cause more harm to America, but slow generation by generation taking back what is rightfully ours. First we must submit ourselves to God and his revealed word in the Bible. Our attitude and worldview must be centered on God and we must stop being the judge of God and the following steps will naturally fall into place. Secondly we must take back the family which is the cornerstone to all of life and civilizations. One man and one woman is marriage and they are commissioned by God to have children in their means and to raise them in the Lord which means to be a self reliant, contributing citizen. Thirdly the Church must stop dividing over pointless doctrines and pride. Forth would be to be a productive person in the State and Federal government to ensure the people are protected from evil acts.

I realize though that no one is perfect and I can say this especially of Christians. Knowing right and wrong and not living in ignorance of Jesus Christ is not easier, it is in fact harder. It’s harder because it’s taking back responsibility for us and our families and I think that is why Christians have such a hard time. We set ourselves in a place where we can easily be called hypocrites and failures, but it is still better than living in ignorance. To deny the one true God and deny one’s calling is easy and I see many people do it. I don’t expect a revolution over night, but rather a generational progress to taking back dominion and being better stewards.

It would, however, be not wise to rapidly abolish all socialism in America because many would be left destitute and unable to care for themselves or their families. For example, removing public school would ruin families dependent on two incomes or even a single parent. They would not be able to run the home and care for their children’s education and furthermore, the state and federal government wouldn’t remove the tax used to pay for public education. Therefore, it’s a slow step by step process first beginning with the man and woman of a family making the decisions to build a family based around a single income and or income from home and then preparing the home for educating their children. Also it requires these families to rightfully vote down bonds and additional taxes for funding public school as the family is now taking on the responsibilities and costs.

I’d like to note that I am NOT talking about instituting a theocracy or any religious state. I am actually a proponent of the complete opposite, I am calling for the many, the people, to take back upon themselves their own responsibilities that they were born into and that they have chosen. This is quite close to what our Founding Fathers created and intended. Once the people take back their power the State or any other institution will fall into its proper place. This is the price of freedom, it isn’t easy and it never will be. The very nature of man calls him to be in bondage and to break free of that is daily work.

In conclusion, only the straight and narrow path of scripture is the means to any hope for America. Not socialism, post-modernism, humanism, communism, statism, relativism, nihilism, etc. I always relate morality and truth to that of the laws which are observed and govern the universe. If the universe is governed by such strict laws, how can we believe that mankind can be governed by anymore than one law? Morality is not relative and it is not us who determines it. The revolution begins with the individual and the family. If America can take this to heart and slowly remove sin within and without, there will be hope. Otherwise this great nation will come and go as all have! This is not speculation or opinion, the wages of sin is DEATH, death of self, families, and state; nothing is free of the wages of sin. The pyramid of civilization begins with the foundation of the people and if the foundation is weak and crumbling the pyramid will fall. For the sake of my family I hope we all can make wiser choices in the years and generations to come.

More Like From Man To Ape…

I always find the secular attacks on Christianity, or any other religion, rather entertaining. The utter ignorance abounds like a gazelle; that is until the claws of truth attacks.

I just found a secular website obviously out to misunderstand Christianity and endeavor to disprove God; *sigh*, another failing attempt. Nietzsche (the acclaimed atheist) realized disproving god was hopeless and thus said, “God is dead,” in a practical sense. He figured he’d just ignore god and live without. Nevertheless, not everyone is insane like Nietzsche and so they can’t just ignore God, they have to make some self satisfactory reason. So I will quote what I found on the site.

“Welcome! The Secular Web is a website operated by the Internet Infidels, a nonprofit educational organization dedicated to defending and promoting a naturalistic worldview on the Internet.

In the words of Paul Draper, naturalism is ‘the hypothesis that the physical universe is a ‘closed system’ in the sense that nothing that is netiher a part nor a product of it can affect it. So naturalism entails the nonexistence of all supernatural beings, including the theistic God.’ “

Naturalism is unapologetically atheistic (at the very least practically agnostic), that is there’s no rational for the statement and it is just a matter of presupposed fact. But how could such a hypothesis ever been proved and thus be made a law or theory? What tools does man have, other than purely ignoring the possibility, to prove only the physical exists? Science? Science is limited to the physical alone. Logic? Logically you or I would have to be god (omniscient or omnipotent) to know for sure. Ultimately the hypothesis is circular and open ended and does not prove anything but the ability of ignor-ance. Nevertheless, lets take the presupposition to one logical end, that of pure causality.

If there is only physical (materialism) then I am in a world of cause and effect. The billions of atomic interactions and chemical reactions all govern the universe. Our thoughts, emotions, beliefs, memories, morals, etc are merely cause and effect. If this isn’t so, then WHAT from a purely naturalistic presupposition can account for right and wrong and abstract thought which are actually immaterial? The ability for abstract immaterial thought logically doesn’t come from immaterial cause and effect!
By denying anything greater than the dirt we are made of, we inherently deny ourselves to be anything greater! Man wants to believe he evolved from an ape, but I believe man has made himself devolve into an ape due to his hatred of anything greater than him. For if nature has priority over man, then man can not be greater and is enslaved to nature’s laws, one of which is causality. It is ludicrous to think that from causality, chance and an amoral nature I could become greater than nature, the substance I am solely created from. The thinkers from Darwin to today realized this and chose the fork in the road which led to disregarding and ignoring god and endeavoring to create an entire worldview without god; the worldview generally called Humanism.

In Humanism science, history, government, religion (”faith”), education, family, morals/ethics, science, math, law, etc are all rewritten without god in mind. In doing this a dualism is instated as there is the rational/material realm and the irrational/supernatural realm; Francis Schaeffer speaks of this in his books. Thus man has become god in his own mind because none is greater; except nature. Evolution is the only great hope and justification for humanism; even for all of its holes. I find it ironic that even humanists have to believe in miracles like that of something from nothing, an eternal universe, life from non-life and molecule to man; none of which evolution can nearly satisfy. I believe these anti-theists will inevitably have to accept some god; but on his own terms of course.

By accepting a supernatural creator, man can logically conclude he is not totally bound to the natural realm and is able to make such things as thoughts and choice. The book of Genesis clearly states man was put in priority over the material world as he was created in God’s image. This image entailed, free-thought, choice, logic, morals, etc but most of all dominion (ie. be fruitful and multiply and take dominion). Man was and is not some ape being bound to causality. But seculars want to have the good but not the god. They want to have the free thought, the choice, the morals, etc, but not the allegiance to God. Yet when what they forget is god is the only piece that unifies anything. Man wants to give meaning and purpose to life and history and also determine what is right and wrong, etc. But who determines such things? The plurality of opinions makes everything meaningless. And for the sake of this discussion just come to the fact that a “god” is necessary; heck I haven’t even got to Yahweh!

When reviewing several of the other articles on the site, it is clear that it is all a matter if ignor-ance. Scriptures are grossly misinterpreted and misapplied, opinions are used instead of scripture, man is the judge of god, lack of context, and just the cloak of personal hate and distrust of God. They just don’t want an answer which is always the case.

The very first step to discovering anything about God is realizing first that you aren’t God; and secondly understanding that God is necessary.

You Will Get Very Mad

So I’m going to make a lot of people mad. People who generally agree with me as well as people who generally don’t agree with me will be very mad. In fact, I’m only sure of one person who will not be mad with me after they get through reading this. So, be forewarned, and consider anger to be a warning that something might not be right with your worldview, because I am certain that while my worldview is by no means perfect, when it comes to this it is the only sensible view.

So major disclaimer aside, here’s what I want to discuss: Homosexuals. Not homosexuality, but the people who practice it. So, laser focus with me on the people, not the action.

First, they are people. Duh, says you. So then I ask what are the implications of being ‘people’? From the Judeo-Christian perspective, that means several things. The pertinent things to this discussion being that people are fallen and people are loved. Fallen from God and loved by Him. If you are not from the Judeo-Christian perspective, I recommend that you get that bit sorted out soon. You may still proceed with this discussion, but there are parts you may not understand completely.

A basic fact of sin is that is it an all-or-nothing state of being. You either are a sinner or you’re lying to yourself and everybody else, and that means you’re sinning. Jesus is the only human able to truly claim perfection. God is also sinless but as He is the creator of humans, he falls outside the category being discussed. There are no grades in sin, no degrees or permutations. This will fly in the face of catholics who believe that they must do things here on earth to shorten their time in purgatory, and that they must spend time in purgatory working off the penalties for sins they’d committed. Also, Muslims will be offended by this because they believe that they need to be as good as possible and follow the demands of Allah and hope Allah is in a good mood when they die so they can get their virgins or whatever a Muslim woman gets in heaven. And even among the Protestant category there are people who argue that there are degrees of sin due to there being differences of apparent punishment. This is ludicrous on its face. The particular gentleman I talked with who espoused this view claimed that because homosexuality resulted in various forms of deadly diseases not generally found in the general population, the homosexuals were damned by God to two punishments, one here on earth and another in the hereafter. To follow this logic one must ignore the plethora of mental illnesses, stress disorders, and various maladies which can be traced back to the most ‘mundane’ of sins. Who has ever refused to forgive someone and found themselves grinding their teeth at night? Stress disorders are common and becoming more common and they can be attributed to or exacerbated by any number of simple sins committed daily by each one of us. Also, if sins were not equal, the payment would not be equal. This is refusing the grace found in the propitiatory act of Christ on the Cross, or at least denying its efficacy. If STDs such as AIDS were punishment, the homosexual, even if they came to Christ and rejected their former ways, would still be under Gods punishment, and we know that there is “no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus,” none. Sin is sin is sin is sin. We are all sinners and equally deserving of the same punishment, an eternity of torment and separation from God (I would submit that the torment is not in addition to separation but rather a result of it, but that is a totally different discussion for a totally different day). We are also all equally invited to forgiveness, and offered the same chance at a new life, a clean slate so to speak.

A friend of mine, in a recent conversation, clarified what I see among Christians in general. We are so abhorred by the very idea of homosexuality that we cannot see the sinner for the sin. So quick to judge the person with the action. So eager to condemn a soul because we cannot see their pain. I do not excuse the actions of homosexuals, but neither do I excuse the actions of a child stealing a candy-bar, they’re both sin. I believe that most of the vitriol that exists in this debate results from the knee-jerk reaction that is felt by both sides of this issue whenever they encounter the other. I cannot speak to the pro-homosexual side because they have no reason to believe I have their best interests at heart. Personally, I cannot witness to anybody until they know that I love them unconditionally, and then that very love is what will draw them to me and then to Christ. This is not to say that I will not do what I can to prevent society from accepting and normalizing homosexual ideals and behaviors, and even this is a result of my love for those who practice homosexuality. However, I will not, extenuating circumstances excepting, engage in head-to-head arguments full of misunderstanding and hate for the person on the other side.

Socially, I cannot allow a ‘redefinition’ of marriage. This is a totally separate issue from accepting homosexuals as humans with all the rights embodied therein. The homosexual lifestyle is not safe, in fact far from that it is destructive, primarily to those actively engaged in it, but also, secondarily, to those around. The average lifespan of a homosexual is significantly lower than that of a heterosexual. This is not propaganda or lies, it is verifiable and true. Just as the shortness of life has never been a result of the backwardness of medicine, homosexual lifespan is not a result of poor medical knowledge. Better medical knowledge improves life expectancy and quality, but that is not a proof of causation, merely correlation. The homosexual is many times more likely to have been sexually victimized by someone in their youth, and also many times more likely to sexually victimize someone else. I will do my best to prevent such a destructive relationship from ever being legitimized and normalized by any society of which I am a member. I do not celebrate the ruination of peoples’ lives.

Why do we agree to call homosexual people gay? Gay is a beautiful word that has been co-opted to identify those who are homosexual. We all abide by those descriptions that define us, as long as they define us accurately, and note there is a difference between accurately and completely. A homosexual might very well be classified by any number of other terms each showing us a small portion of who they are. Just as I can be classified as ‘conservative’, ‘musical,’ ‘dull,’ ‘blonde,’ ‘Christian,’ student,’ and so on, Homosexual is only one aspect of the identity they have chosen for themselves. Just as I can change any number of my descriptors, any one else can too. The word homosexual is a statement of fact, defining those who practice homosexuality, or sexual relations between those of the same gender. Gay means happy, and a person who is gay may very well be a homosexual, but they may very well not be as well.

But the homosexual is a person, first and foremost. They are humans with all the beauty built in them by God and with all the struggles and problems inbred by the fall.

Now I have made everyone mad. If not, wow, send a comment and add any thoughts I believe I missed. This topic could easily fill a large book and I feel as though it is woefully incomplete.

Just remember, words mean things and ideas have consequences. What have your words meant (what you meant to say does not matter), and what consequences result from your ideas?