[Updated with video above]
Awesome Video (60 min) … Google Video
Category: Culture
http://www.reformation21.org/Reformatio … bId__4313/
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main … do0202.xml
For years and years now, the church in the West has enjoyed freedom from hostility. But if this pans out in Europe, eventually it will make it’s way here and as the link at the top states at the end, “And given the way evangelicalism has been going the last 50 years, we aren’t even remotely ready for it.”
Scientists respond to Gore’s warnings of climate catastrophe – Canada Free Press
“[Professor] Carter does not pull his punches about Gore’s activism, ‘The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science.'”
I thought this was an interesting article, proving my point from the last blog entry, that many top-ranking liberals live in a false reality based on non-evidence. But again, you won’t see this in the headlines on any major news site, because that would thwart the liberal agenda (the agenda being to simply get political clout back, not to actually help or represent the American people). Scientists agree there is a slight warming trend in the average temperature of the earth, but most agree that it is not the result of the pollution caused by man, and specifically almost all climatologists disagree with Gore’s assessments. Gore simply has an agenda, and the agenda is not to rid the world of pollution (because he himself has been flying back and forth from one place to another to promote this film), but his real agenda is to take political clout away from conservatives and turn people’s attention to liberals. But again, it failed miserably, and he spent millions of dollars in the process that he could have used to reduce pollution himself! I mean who really wants to see a movie where Gore talks for two hours about the climate, based on a few fringe scientists who are, for the most part, not climatologists to begin with? Please …
Drinking coffee cuts alcohol’s harmful effects – MSNBC.com
Apparently drinking coffee prevents cirrhosis of the liver. I found a quote interesting in this article though that a doctor said concerning those who drink heavily and are in danger of cirrhosis. “The way to avoid getting ill is not to drink a lot of coffee, but to cut down on the drinking” of alcohol, he said. That’s very good logic, is it not? Makes sense. Why is it when the topic of sex is brought up though, this same logic doesn’t apply any longer? Logic is simply thrown out of the window!
Aside from the Biblical moral argument for sex staying only within the confines of marriage, the best way to keep from getting some sexually-transmitted disease(s), becoming pregnant (possibly ruining your prospects for a future), or for that matter, inevitably bringing levels of emotions into a relationship you are not ready to be committed to, is to just not have sex until you are married, right? Well, for some reason, the corrupt, sinful human mind begs to differ. It says, “Well, you just can’t apply the same logic here, because, well, it’s just a totally different thing.” But is it really? Drinking is not necessarily a bad thing, when handled correctly, when it’s not in excess, when you have one or two glasses with dinner. But when it’s taken to an extreme, into alcoholism, it causes cirrhosis of the liver. Too much of anything is bad for a person. Too much food results in obesity, too much water thins out your blood, too much medicine will … you get the idea, fill in the blank.
God Himself created, designed sex and it is indeed a great thing. I’m in no way saying that sex is bad and should be limited. Non-Christians seem to think that’s what Christian’s think. This is just not true. Sex an incredibly wonderful gift from God to man! But God designed it in such a way so that it is only a great thing in the confines of where it was meant to take place: within marriage alone. Just as food and water and alcohol have limitations on them that if carried over past their respective boundaries result in undesired effects, so also, sex, when taken outside of the context of marriage and it’s boundary, will inevitably result in self-destruction of the soul. God doesn’t give us rules, laws, and regulations to make us miserable. He gives us these things for our own good. I mean He’s God! Don’t you think He knows what’s best for His creation?
Only man can take a blessing from God, turn it into an idol (setting it up as God) and distort it to bring about self-destruction and condemnation upon himself. However, it’s inevitable that with the human condition as deteriorated as it is because of sin, man will never see it as God sees it, unless He changes hearts and gives them divine understanding. The world simply says, “Do what feels good to you, that’s all that matters. Sex doesn’t hurt anyone else, it’s your own business.” Man shakes his fist at abstinence, because that is constraining his ability to do whatever he wants. Man wants the freedom God has and will fight to the death to make this freedom his own. This is why abstinence is just not an answer to the world, because man wants to be God. He wants to do “what feels right” in his own eyes. But just because man thinks it’s okay in his mind, doesn’t mean that the consequences won’t be devastating to his soul.
If I have an equation (just for arguments sake, 2 + x = 4) that determines the correct course of a rocket blasting off into space, and I know it equals 4, but have one unknown variable I need to figure out; but I want x to be whatever I want it to be because I don’t want to be limited to the equation; someone tells me (because apparently I’m too dumb to know) I need to make x = 2 for the equation to work; and let’s say I make x = 3; what does that actually do to the end result? It would actually force the answer to be 5 instead of 4, and will cause the rocket to go off course. God is absolute reality, He is absolute truth. He defines what’s right and wrong. He’s revealed these things to us in scripture. Yet man turns from these divine definitions and pursues what he wants. And the end result is devastating, and ultimately it leads man straight to hell.
And so it would seem logical for man to just do what God says, submit to His sovereign rule and authority; but man is illogical and sins, turns away from God. Man takes the things God says to do and doesn’t do them, but then takes the things God says not to do and does them instead! And this is every single person on the earth. But Christ came in order to bring us back into the reality of the defined reality God has created. He came and took the punishment that was ours for our wrong-doing and offered Himself up on the cross, that if you believe in Him you will be saved from the depths of God’s just wrath for your illogical wrong-doing.
I have heard this response from many people I know and I’d like to explain what’s wrong with it. Yes, it’s fiction. But Dan Brown himself has come out publicly and said that within the story, he intends to challenge the historical account of Christ as well as that of Scripture itself by asking, “How do we know any of the things said of Christ are true?” Hmm, that’s a big problem to me, and it’s coming from the author himself. And what a better way to do that in the form of fictional, conspiratorial entertainment that captivates the average American. He has found quite a platform to launch his real agenda.
The story itself is fiction, it never happened, yes. Any “in-your-face” unbeliever must admit that, if they know anything concerning Christianity. It’s really an intriguing story and from what I’ve heard a real page turner. But what Dan Brown does within the fictional story is raises the question, “How can we possibly know if Scripture is breathed out by God, and if that’s the case, how do we know if anything is historically correct about who Christ actually was? If there are 80 other gospels that were written back in the early church, but only 4 were accepted in the canon of Scripture, how can we know if those gospels are accurate in any manner?” One of the big problems is that Dan Brown knows more historical information concerning the early church than most people, and specifically more than most Christians (though he’s dead wrong on about half of it, and it can be proven). He then takes that information and twists it with absolute historical lies in an attempt to paint a picture of the early church that is dead wrong.
The danger of this book is not that people will believe the fictional story actually happened (those who do are missing his main point any way), but rather the danger is that Brown raises questions about the truthfulness of Christianity altogether, and he knows the average American Christian cannot answer the questions that unbelievers will now be raising (which sadly, in my personal estimation, is true). The positive aspect about these questions being raised is that I believe it will separate out those who are the faithful of Christ from those who are frauds. It will separate the sheep from the goats, basically, because much of modern day Christianity has been blurred with the ways of the world because of the passive, watered-down, culture-friendly preaching by pastors within much of the church. We must return to and know how to defend the 5-Solas of the Reformation: Salvation is by Grace Alone, through Faith Alone, in Christ Alone, infallibly revealed in Scripture Alone, all for the Glory of God Alone.
Persecution is good for the church, mainly because it purifies her and makes her holy, sets her apart from the world and it’s ways, and exposes those who do not truly believe within the church, that they may be shown for what they are. Could it shake the faith of some unestablished believer’s? Sure it could. But it will challenge them to know why they believe what they believe, and thus get them established in their faith, that they may know that the roots of their salvation are in God alone and His Son’s work on the cross to bring them back to life from spiritual death … And that they may know that God has revealed Himself through the Scriptures alone and that what has been canonized as Scripture has been breathed out by God Himself through the pens of His people.
The recent world-wide riots in response to the cartoons depicting Muhammad with a bomb in his turban speak volumes about Islam as a religion to me. Now, I in no way believe the Danish journalists were justified in publishing those cartoons. It was a wrong thing to do. I want to make that clear. However, the response was equally if not more condemnable than the publishing of those cartoons. The leaders of Islam state that the terrorists are extremists of Islam, in the minority of what most Islamic people believe. They state Islam is a religion of love. I find it interesting though that if the terrorists are in the minority, how is it that the majority seems to be doing all the rioting in response to a few cartoons? You know, Christianity (Christ) is slammed all the time by the world (even by Islamic people) and yet, for the majority, Christians are not destroying property in response to these attacks on our faith. I do believe Christians should be offended more these days at the attacks made on Christ, but they should not destroy property or riot in response. That’s just wrong.
So how is it that the people of Islam can bash Christ all they want, but as soon as someone bashes Muhammad (not saying I agree that’s a beneficial thing to do), they get in a hissy fit, destroying buildings, people, and themselves in some instances? And it seems to me this is characteristic of Islam, this being a prime example. If it’s such a religion of love, how is it that the majority’s response is something so violent and unloving? Makes me wonder if the leaders of Islam who speak to the Western media understand the religion at all. Maybe they’re just toning it down when speaking to us. These riots show that the majority of Islamic people want the West to vanish in my estimation, it’s just some of them have the guts enough to attempt to make it happen (i.e. the terrorists).
The Danish journalists shouldn’t have done something to encourage their behavior, but the Islamic people shouldn’t be responding the way they are as well. There is responsibility on both sides. If a person I’m doing business with offends me deeply by lying to me about our business deal (before a contract is signed by either of us) and in rage I go and beat him with a club, who’s going to be more at fault? The guy who lied or me for beating him? Who’s going to get the citation and possibly go to jail? Will it not be me? But why? Because I broke the law. Right? The journalists didn’t technically break the law in Denmark, though I don’t agree it was a wise thing to do. And in response some Islamic people are totally destroying at least one Danish embassy (that I know of) and creating havok all over Europe and the Middle East. That’s ridiculous.
All of this over a stupid series of cartoons, showing the opinion of one publisher? Stupid NBC does a lot worse than that all the time toward Christianity … The Book of Daniel, the Will and Grace episode coming up in April. And what should my response be to this? These things offend me deeply because it’s an attack on my Savior, Jesus Christ, who emptied Himself for my sins. I hate that NBC is doing this! But I’m not going to go blow up Rockefeller center or the GE building or cause mass hysteria in response. That would be doing the opposite of the very thing I’m trying to do; win people for Christ, that they may be saved! A staple of Christianity is loving your enemies, just as Christ loved His. So if the majority of devout Islamic people riot over something so trite to begin with, what does it say about the religion as a whole? How can it possibly be a religion of love, selflessness, and sacrifice if this is how they react to someone bashing their faith? If it is a “religion of love” then their leaders in their Mosque’s need to do some serious re-teaching of their faith. I believe history proves though that this is definitely not a religion of love.
Articles pertaining to this:
My Other Blog on the Future of the West Vs. Islam
Islam – Monergism.com
Protests Grow Over Muhammad Drawings
Press urges end to cartoon riots
“Religion of Peace” or Riots
Rabble in the name of Islam
Asians Protest Mohammed Cartoons
NBC Offends Christians Again – CNSNEWS.com
It’s really not all that surprising this is happening. Jesus in fact said in Matthew 10:22, “and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake,” and in Matthew 24:9, “Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name’s sake,” and Luke 6:22, “Blessed are you when people hate you and when they exclude you and revile you and spurn your name as evil, on account of the Son of Man!” and Luke 21:17, “You will be hated by all for my name’s sake,” and John 15:18, “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you,” and John 15:19, “If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you,” and praying to His Father in John 17:14, “I have given them your word, and the world has hated them because they are not of the world, just as I am not of the world.”
It is very clear from this that persecution, whatever the form, is nothing new and has been the case for a long time. And not only this, it should be expected! The world utterly hates Christ, and if you’re associated with Him, you will be persecuted, to one degree or another. We should not be surprised this is happening. It happened to Christ, He was reviled, and we should expect the same if we are to follow Christ. Yes, it is highly offensive what is happening; they are spurning the Son of God, but it is not surprising. The world hates believers’ because it hates Christ. Christ is in believers’ therefore it hates us as as well. Listen what Jesus says though concerning persecution in Matthew 5:10-11, “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account.” When enduring through persecution and showing the love of Christ to these people who hate us, it may be that by God’s grace many of them can be saved. I pray that’s the case. I believe our response should be one of sorrow and love toward these people who constantly slam Christ, because Christ loved us and gave Himself up for us on the tree, having become a curse for us. How can we not but do the same to people who revile us for Christ’s sake?
“For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us.”
“For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.”
“Where is the one who is wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe. For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.”
I’m finishing up Ethics in Management today and man am I glad. This class was a good exercise though in not only defending absolute truth (as it pertains to scripture and such), but also taking down the whole system of relativism which much of ethical theory is based on.
Post-modernity has infiltrated every facet of the West, and it seems people are slowly discovering it’s a dead-end philosophy. However, many within the academic community seem to still be holding on to this thought (not sure why, they’re supposed to be the smart ones). So, taking some of the apologetic arguments from one of my favorite books, Relativism: Feet Firmly Planted in Mid-Air, by Francis J. Beckwith and Gregory Koukl, I was successfully able to take down this system which is what a majority of the theory behind ethics in our day comes from.