From Days of Praise, August 21, 2010
Marriage Is Honorable
by Henry Morris, Ph.D. | Aug. 21, 2010
"Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge." (Hebrews 13:4)
Ever since the divine union of Adam and Eve, the institution of marriage has been between a man and woman. However, the "bed" has often been defiled, with all kinds of sexual perversions. Homosexual behavior is often mentioned in the Bible, and always explicitly condemned, even being called an "abomination" by the Lord (Leviticus 18:22). Adultery, fornication, prostitution, incest, bestiality, and all forms of sexual practice outside of heterosexual marriage relations are also condemned. Indeed, "God hath made man upright; but they have sought out many inventions" (Ecclesiastes 7:29).
Yes, but times have changed, we are told. The so-called "gay" lifestyle is now a normal option, they say, and even "same-sex" marriages are acceptable. Premarital sex, as well as adultery, are very common today, all over the world, often even impacting Christian homes and churches. Indeed, the world has changed!
But God has not changed, and His commandments and purposes have not changed. "For I am the LORD, I change not" (Malachi 3:6), He says. In the last book of the Bible, the glorified Christ said that "the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death" (Revelation 21:8).
The Greek word for "whoremongers," incidentally, includes anyone who practices or promotes illicit sex of any kind and the Bible says that "whoremongers and adulterers God will judge." However, God will forgive and purge away any of these sins when they are repudiated and Christ is accepted as Savior. HMM
Saturday, August 21, 2010
Thursday, August 5, 2010
On Human Marriage
Marriage can only exist between a man and a woman. We know this because God made the woman from the man and brought her to him so that they could become one flesh (Genesis 2:18 – 25). Jesus Christ, the Son of God, confirmed this when He said, speaking of marriage, that in the beginning God made them male and female (Mark 10:2 – 9). Since both God the Father and God the Son have already ruled on this, no earthly judge or panel of judges can change it. Nor is it open to “majority rule.”
Because the primary purpose of marriage is procreation (Genesis 1:28), logic dictates that marriage can exist between a man and a woman only. It is impossible for two individuals of the same sex to produce a child. This is against nature (Romans 1:26 – 32).
Some may argue that marriage should exist between a man and a woman because of “societal norms” or “traditional family values.” These are false reasons because they change. However, God’s standard never changes.
Any judge or panel of judges who arrogantly attempt to overrule the Lord God concerning marriage should be impeached. God has the final word on human marriage.
I remain yours in the Name above every Name, Jesus Christ,
"Mr. Phil"
Because the primary purpose of marriage is procreation (Genesis 1:28), logic dictates that marriage can exist between a man and a woman only. It is impossible for two individuals of the same sex to produce a child. This is against nature (Romans 1:26 – 32).
Some may argue that marriage should exist between a man and a woman because of “societal norms” or “traditional family values.” These are false reasons because they change. However, God’s standard never changes.
Any judge or panel of judges who arrogantly attempt to overrule the Lord God concerning marriage should be impeached. God has the final word on human marriage.
I remain yours in the Name above every Name, Jesus Christ,
"Mr. Phil"
Saturday, July 24, 2010
What’s Wrong With America?
Our “christian” culture is the way it is because our “christian” families and churches are the way they are.
The Problem
Rather than quote a long string of statistics, we can firmly state that we just somehow KNOW that things are broken. Peruse these articles for various viewpoints regarding the decline of our culture:
http://www.christianinformation.org/article.asp?artID=88
http://allanturner.com/article14.html
http://www.brutallyhonest.org/brutally_honest/2005/02/whats_wrong_wit.html
http://www.christianpost.com/blogs/christianity/2009/05/something-is-wrong-with-the-church-04/index.html
The Solution
Discussion of the solution to the problem assumes that those who profess to be followers of Christ are being true to their profession. “9That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” (Romans 10:9, 10) One who is not a true follower of Christ is said to be “dead in trespasses and sin.” A dead person cannot influence family, church, or culture.
Very simply, we must begin operating with a renewed mind. “ . . . be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.” (Romans 12:2)
The Christ we claim to follow tells us we are to be the salt and light in the culture. “13Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men. 14Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. 15Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. 16Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.” (Matthew 5:13 – 16)
Thankfully, we still have many pastors / teachers who are willing to run counter to the culture and encourage Christian families to build stronger churches and positively influence the culture. See the following resources for a small sample:
http://www.redbankbaptist.org/resources.html
http://shop.churchandfamilyreformation.org/What-He-Must-Be-If-He-Wants-to-Marry-My-Daughter-BKWHMBVB.htm
Conclusion
Our “christian” culture is the way it is because our “christian” families and churches are the way they are. What will you do to create positive change?
I remain yours in the name of Jesus Christ, the Name above every name.
“Mr. Phil”
The Problem
Rather than quote a long string of statistics, we can firmly state that we just somehow KNOW that things are broken. Peruse these articles for various viewpoints regarding the decline of our culture:
http://www.christianinformation.org/article.asp?artID=88
http://allanturner.com/article14.html
http://www.brutallyhonest.org/brutally_honest/2005/02/whats_wrong_wit.html
http://www.christianpost.com/blogs/christianity/2009/05/something-is-wrong-with-the-church-04/index.html
The Solution
Discussion of the solution to the problem assumes that those who profess to be followers of Christ are being true to their profession. “9That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” (Romans 10:9, 10) One who is not a true follower of Christ is said to be “dead in trespasses and sin.” A dead person cannot influence family, church, or culture.
Very simply, we must begin operating with a renewed mind. “ . . . be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.” (Romans 12:2)
The Christ we claim to follow tells us we are to be the salt and light in the culture. “13Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? it is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men. 14Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. 15Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. 16Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.” (Matthew 5:13 – 16)
Thankfully, we still have many pastors / teachers who are willing to run counter to the culture and encourage Christian families to build stronger churches and positively influence the culture. See the following resources for a small sample:
http://www.redbankbaptist.org/resources.html
http://shop.churchandfamilyreformation.org/What-He-Must-Be-If-He-Wants-to-Marry-My-Daughter-BKWHMBVB.htm
Conclusion
Our “christian” culture is the way it is because our “christian” families and churches are the way they are. What will you do to create positive change?
I remain yours in the name of Jesus Christ, the Name above every name.
“Mr. Phil”
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Hell Invading Helena?
You decide:
http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=37368
http://www.helena.k12.mt.us/images/documents/curriculum/HealthCurriculum/K12FinalHealth.pdf (See Page 45 ff)
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/07/09/montana-school-proposes-controversial-sex-education-program/
Good reasons to home school!
http://www.catholic.org/national/national_story.php?id=37368
http://www.helena.k12.mt.us/images/documents/curriculum/HealthCurriculum/K12FinalHealth.pdf (See Page 45 ff)
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/07/09/montana-school-proposes-controversial-sex-education-program/
Good reasons to home school!
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Every Believer a Witness (1)
My life before I met Jesus:
I was born in Winchester, VA, the youngest of four siblings. My sister and two brothers are still living there in my hometown.
I was very sad when my parents divorced when I was ten years old. School was a great way for me to lose myself in academics. I also remember watching the Washington Senators on TV with my mother. I learned to play a clarinet in school.
My mother sent me to Sunday School, but I stopped going when I turned ten. My life as a teenager was wrapped up in school. I especially enjoyed amateur radio in those years. I thought I had everything going my way until I went off to college.
After high school graduation, I went off to state university, but that did not last long. Although I had been brought up in a non-religious home, I had received moral teaching. My morals and state university did not mix. So, I went off to a Christian university.
Next installment: How I came to accept Jesus into my life
I was born in Winchester, VA, the youngest of four siblings. My sister and two brothers are still living there in my hometown.
I was very sad when my parents divorced when I was ten years old. School was a great way for me to lose myself in academics. I also remember watching the Washington Senators on TV with my mother. I learned to play a clarinet in school.
My mother sent me to Sunday School, but I stopped going when I turned ten. My life as a teenager was wrapped up in school. I especially enjoyed amateur radio in those years. I thought I had everything going my way until I went off to college.
After high school graduation, I went off to state university, but that did not last long. Although I had been brought up in a non-religious home, I had received moral teaching. My morals and state university did not mix. So, I went off to a Christian university.
Next installment: How I came to accept Jesus into my life
Friday, March 12, 2010
The Stop Sign, Part 8
The Stop Sign, Part 8
The warm reception by his parents gave young Jimmy Wilson a sense of doing the right thing, and knowing that he was now on the right road, not only to heaven but also to a life of goodness. Little did he realize that he would eventually leave that road.
The departure came gradually. It was hard, he thought, to put a finger on the precise moment when things began to change but it seemed that there were subtle things in the air when he began high school. It was there, he recalled, that teachers were not so kind to the words of the bible. They began casting some doubts on it. At first, he thought, this was a horrible thing but he discovered that in order to get a good grade in the class, he would have to accept what the teachers were saying. Initially this was a problem but eventually it became easier to see that what they were saying was “more scientific” and must be right…and the bible, somehow, incorrect…maybe even downright wrong.
In high school he began to hear more and more about evolution, especially in biology(i) but also in other science classes; even in things dealing with politics and economics. It seemed that wherever he turned, someone or some book was talking about evolution. Seeing it mentioned in so many ways, Jimmy Wilson had to assume it was true. And increasingly he set aside his determination to hear and read what God had to say about things. “Those things in the bible are only myths,” he kept hearing from teachers, people he was expected to honor. Besides, could they be wrong, he thought.
When he started college and was working his way through the years of undergraduate and graduate studies he became committed to the evolutionary perspective, setting aside all he had ever thought to be true of God. He stopped attending church by this time, though he knew that he shouldn’t have. About the only time he returned to church was the day he married Sally Witherspoon, a beautiful gal from Fort Wayne, Indiana. She was a music major at the time and later gave private voice lessons in their home, all of that followed the addition of three children to their home: two boys and a girl. After graduation, with a Ph.D. in biology, Wilson secured the job he has been holding for nearly 30 years, a job he was about to leave.
It was much the order of the day for him to teach evolution as he had been taught. Of late, however, the task had not been so easy. Several years earlier he had come to read some books that cast serious doubts on the idea of evolution. Maybe the first was Michael Denton’s book: Evolution-A Theory in Crisis. Other books followed this and lectures, all of which cast dark shadows on the things he thought were true. He came to realize that the orientation of amino acids didn’t make sense in a world unless they were created. He came to see that there was no way the complexity he observed in living organisms could have occurred through chance. He understood that the design he saw in nature was not an “apparent” design but was real design, requiring a designer. Increasingly he felt tension in what he was hearing and reading and what he was telling his students. But he had tried to ignore this tension, arguing that it wouldn’t be long and he would be outside the campus, no longer having to worry about what he taught or what he said. If he could only hang on, he thought, just a little longer until retirement, then he would be able to shed the cloak of evolution which had so much been a part of his life but which he now knew to be wrong and unscientific.
It is hard, he thought, to admit he was wrong….but Sally knew something was awry.
“What’s the problem, Jim? She would ask this over supper. She had a way of knowing these things but he seldom had the courage to admit the real problem. “I’m alright,” he said…”Maybe a little tired.”
Dan Schobert, W9MFG@charter.net
"(i)..you could say that I lost the last remnants of my faith in God during biology class in high school when I first was taught that evolution explained the origin and development of life. The implications were clear. Charles Darwin's theory eliminated the need for a supernatural creator...."
So says Lee Strobel in his 2000 (Zondervan) book, The Case for Faith which I had the occasion to read this week, on audio tape. Strobel's work follows closely on the heels of his earlier piece, The Case for Christ. Strobel, a former atheist and award winning legal editor at the Chicago Tribune, used the approach of a journalist by raising important questions, in this particular case about faith and going to several experts in the field for reasonable answers. On the question of faith and science, he spoke with Walter Bradley. Though I believe Bradley might be classified as an Old Earth Creationist, he did point out the vast data which points, on the basis of the information, to an initial source of intelligence.
Perhaps more than anything, this work of Strobel builds the case for understanding and accepting the Word of God as being true. This book is easy to read and a handy tool to give unbelieving friends.
(Footnote added in May 2004): Strobel has now added another book to this discussion. The Case for a Creator, from Zondervan became available in 2004 and, like the earlier works, presents information which places into question much of what has so often presented as evidence for evolution.
The warm reception by his parents gave young Jimmy Wilson a sense of doing the right thing, and knowing that he was now on the right road, not only to heaven but also to a life of goodness. Little did he realize that he would eventually leave that road.
The departure came gradually. It was hard, he thought, to put a finger on the precise moment when things began to change but it seemed that there were subtle things in the air when he began high school. It was there, he recalled, that teachers were not so kind to the words of the bible. They began casting some doubts on it. At first, he thought, this was a horrible thing but he discovered that in order to get a good grade in the class, he would have to accept what the teachers were saying. Initially this was a problem but eventually it became easier to see that what they were saying was “more scientific” and must be right…and the bible, somehow, incorrect…maybe even downright wrong.
In high school he began to hear more and more about evolution, especially in biology(i) but also in other science classes; even in things dealing with politics and economics. It seemed that wherever he turned, someone or some book was talking about evolution. Seeing it mentioned in so many ways, Jimmy Wilson had to assume it was true. And increasingly he set aside his determination to hear and read what God had to say about things. “Those things in the bible are only myths,” he kept hearing from teachers, people he was expected to honor. Besides, could they be wrong, he thought.
When he started college and was working his way through the years of undergraduate and graduate studies he became committed to the evolutionary perspective, setting aside all he had ever thought to be true of God. He stopped attending church by this time, though he knew that he shouldn’t have. About the only time he returned to church was the day he married Sally Witherspoon, a beautiful gal from Fort Wayne, Indiana. She was a music major at the time and later gave private voice lessons in their home, all of that followed the addition of three children to their home: two boys and a girl. After graduation, with a Ph.D. in biology, Wilson secured the job he has been holding for nearly 30 years, a job he was about to leave.
It was much the order of the day for him to teach evolution as he had been taught. Of late, however, the task had not been so easy. Several years earlier he had come to read some books that cast serious doubts on the idea of evolution. Maybe the first was Michael Denton’s book: Evolution-A Theory in Crisis. Other books followed this and lectures, all of which cast dark shadows on the things he thought were true. He came to realize that the orientation of amino acids didn’t make sense in a world unless they were created. He came to see that there was no way the complexity he observed in living organisms could have occurred through chance. He understood that the design he saw in nature was not an “apparent” design but was real design, requiring a designer. Increasingly he felt tension in what he was hearing and reading and what he was telling his students. But he had tried to ignore this tension, arguing that it wouldn’t be long and he would be outside the campus, no longer having to worry about what he taught or what he said. If he could only hang on, he thought, just a little longer until retirement, then he would be able to shed the cloak of evolution which had so much been a part of his life but which he now knew to be wrong and unscientific.
It is hard, he thought, to admit he was wrong….but Sally knew something was awry.
“What’s the problem, Jim? She would ask this over supper. She had a way of knowing these things but he seldom had the courage to admit the real problem. “I’m alright,” he said…”Maybe a little tired.”
Dan Schobert, W9MFG@charter.net
"(i)..you could say that I lost the last remnants of my faith in God during biology class in high school when I first was taught that evolution explained the origin and development of life. The implications were clear. Charles Darwin's theory eliminated the need for a supernatural creator...."
So says Lee Strobel in his 2000 (Zondervan) book, The Case for Faith which I had the occasion to read this week, on audio tape. Strobel's work follows closely on the heels of his earlier piece, The Case for Christ. Strobel, a former atheist and award winning legal editor at the Chicago Tribune, used the approach of a journalist by raising important questions, in this particular case about faith and going to several experts in the field for reasonable answers. On the question of faith and science, he spoke with Walter Bradley. Though I believe Bradley might be classified as an Old Earth Creationist, he did point out the vast data which points, on the basis of the information, to an initial source of intelligence.
Perhaps more than anything, this work of Strobel builds the case for understanding and accepting the Word of God as being true. This book is easy to read and a handy tool to give unbelieving friends.
(Footnote added in May 2004): Strobel has now added another book to this discussion. The Case for a Creator, from Zondervan became available in 2004 and, like the earlier works, presents information which places into question much of what has so often presented as evidence for evolution.
Friday, February 26, 2010
Families – Threats – Morality not being taught in schools
From our Introductory Post:
“The righteous have sat back and allowed the wicked to take over our relationships to God, families, churches, governments, schools and colleges, journalism, entertainment, sports, sciences, and a whole litany of other endeavors in our society.”
Families – Threats – Morality not being taught in schools
In our previous post we considered the topic of Threats to Families, specifically Pornography. We will now take a look at another threat to the family, Morality not being taught in schools.
We must understand from the start that this blog considers all Morality to be Biblical in nature because true morality derives from the Bible, the Word of God. Some may disagree with this approach, and that is your privilege, but the only reasonable approach is that morality is objective. Any morality that is subjective can change and, therefore, is not truly morality.
“In Colonial America the schools were mostly run by the churches. The first settlers in America felt that it was important that children learned to read so they could read their Bibles.” This statement from http://www.schoolprayerinamerica.info/ provides the basis for teaching Biblical morality in American schools. Students of that day read the Bible and the New England Primer. “Daily school prayer was a natural part of this educational system. After the American Revolution, Noah Webster introduced the Blue-backed Speller which also used Bible verses to teach reading and spelling. In 1836 the McGuffey Reader was introduced which also featured Bible verses to teach moral values. This school system produced some of the world’s brightest inventors and set the Industrial Revolution in motion. The schools continued to be run mostly by Christian Churches until the 1890's at which point States started to take control of the existing schools. By 1900 many other text books were in use and they all had Bible quotes in them.”
In today’s schools people expect the continued teaching of “morality,” but many of them think of morality in terms of a humanist approach, as in http://www.freeinquiry.com/teaching-morals.html . Cities are concerned about the incidence of crime and feel that the problem can be addressed through the educational system. “While everyone in our city (New Orleans, LA) should seek to comprehend why so many high school- and college-aged people are involved in violence, educators have a particular responsibility to understand the problem and take action.” See http://blog.nola.com/guesteditorials/2009/01/why_schools_must_teach_moralit.html . Some school systems approach the teaching of morals as “character education.” Such terms as “fairness” and “respect” are used without explaining the basis of these character traits. See http://www.hcde.org/site/partners/character_ed/default.aspx .
All approaches are doomed to failure except a return to Biblical morality. How can anyone argue with a system that produced the greatest republic in the history of the world? Even with all of our present problems America is still the shining light attracting people from all over the world.
Summary
This post has examined morality not being taught in schools as a major threat to families. We discovered that the solution is found in returning to the Biblical morality of our founding ancestors. Our next post will take a look at another threat to families, Poverty.
I remain yours in the name of Jesus Christ, the Creator and Name above every name.
“Mr. Phil”
“The righteous have sat back and allowed the wicked to take over our relationships to God, families, churches, governments, schools and colleges, journalism, entertainment, sports, sciences, and a whole litany of other endeavors in our society.”
Families – Threats – Morality not being taught in schools
In our previous post we considered the topic of Threats to Families, specifically Pornography. We will now take a look at another threat to the family, Morality not being taught in schools.
We must understand from the start that this blog considers all Morality to be Biblical in nature because true morality derives from the Bible, the Word of God. Some may disagree with this approach, and that is your privilege, but the only reasonable approach is that morality is objective. Any morality that is subjective can change and, therefore, is not truly morality.
“In Colonial America the schools were mostly run by the churches. The first settlers in America felt that it was important that children learned to read so they could read their Bibles.” This statement from http://www.schoolprayerinamerica.info/ provides the basis for teaching Biblical morality in American schools. Students of that day read the Bible and the New England Primer. “Daily school prayer was a natural part of this educational system. After the American Revolution, Noah Webster introduced the Blue-backed Speller which also used Bible verses to teach reading and spelling. In 1836 the McGuffey Reader was introduced which also featured Bible verses to teach moral values. This school system produced some of the world’s brightest inventors and set the Industrial Revolution in motion. The schools continued to be run mostly by Christian Churches until the 1890's at which point States started to take control of the existing schools. By 1900 many other text books were in use and they all had Bible quotes in them.”
In today’s schools people expect the continued teaching of “morality,” but many of them think of morality in terms of a humanist approach, as in http://www.freeinquiry.com/teaching-morals.html . Cities are concerned about the incidence of crime and feel that the problem can be addressed through the educational system. “While everyone in our city (New Orleans, LA) should seek to comprehend why so many high school- and college-aged people are involved in violence, educators have a particular responsibility to understand the problem and take action.” See http://blog.nola.com/guesteditorials/2009/01/why_schools_must_teach_moralit.html . Some school systems approach the teaching of morals as “character education.” Such terms as “fairness” and “respect” are used without explaining the basis of these character traits. See http://www.hcde.org/site/partners/character_ed/default.aspx .
All approaches are doomed to failure except a return to Biblical morality. How can anyone argue with a system that produced the greatest republic in the history of the world? Even with all of our present problems America is still the shining light attracting people from all over the world.
Summary
This post has examined morality not being taught in schools as a major threat to families. We discovered that the solution is found in returning to the Biblical morality of our founding ancestors. Our next post will take a look at another threat to families, Poverty.
I remain yours in the name of Jesus Christ, the Creator and Name above every name.
“Mr. Phil”
Friday, February 12, 2010
The Stop Sign, Part 7
The Stop Sign, Part 7
Soon the hall was empty except for Billy and the professor who remained sitting on his desk. Shortly Billy rose from his seat, grabbed the loops of a backpack and walked down the slanted aisle to where the professor sat. Reaching into his pack, Billy took out a brown paper wrapped item, a gift with a colorful red ribbon and placed it on the professor’s brief case. Billy extended his hand to the professor.
“I really appreciate your thoughts,” he said. “I think it was difficult to share those in today’s class. Good luck as you retire.”
The professor grabbed Billy’s hand and shook it but not sure exactly what it meant. In his heart he wanted to confirm what Billy Lynch had said but it seemed unwise at the moment as he simply wanted the day to end, not knowing what might happen next as the word spread among the students that he had actually questioned the validity of evolution.
“Thanks,” he said. “Thanks for being in my class today. What is in the package,” he asked, lifting it from its place on the desk and balancing it in his hand.
“It is something I’ve been holding for you,” said Billy. “I hope you enjoy it.”
With that, Billy Lynch left the professor sitting on the desk, walked up the stairway to the hallway and disappeared.
The professor sat on his desk for a long time, pondering the comments he had just made and heard and wondering about the package he held. He wondered how it could be that he had drifted so far away from the goals he had embraced when a child. His mind took him back to moments when, as a ten-year-old lad at a church camp, he had decided that being a Christian was the right thing to do. His decision followed a week of camp fun; lots of swimming, hiking, singing and bon fires at Camp Lake Louise in Michigan. It was a great trip for a kid like him. He remembered the ride in a old green school bus which took the young people from their small country church near Bowling Green, Ohio to the camp not far from the big Mac bridge at the northern tip of Michigan’s southern peninsula. He could nearly smell the inescapable odors of the Cedar boards used in the construction of the cabins and the wonderful meals; the experiences came back to his mind as though they occurred yesterday. It had been a memorable experience. Each night at the campfire, the camp pastor would tell bible stories and challenge the young people to give their lives to Christ. On the last night little Jimmy Wilson (that’s what they called him) raised his hand and decided then and there that he would live for God the rest of his life.
When he returned to the Ohio farmhouse where he lived with his mother and father, he was quick to share the news of his time at camp, especially of deciding to be a Christian.
“This is wonderful,” said his father. “We have been praying for you even since you were born.” His mother hugged him and kissed him on the check. “We are so happy,” she said.
Dan Schobert, W9MFG@charter.net
Soon the hall was empty except for Billy and the professor who remained sitting on his desk. Shortly Billy rose from his seat, grabbed the loops of a backpack and walked down the slanted aisle to where the professor sat. Reaching into his pack, Billy took out a brown paper wrapped item, a gift with a colorful red ribbon and placed it on the professor’s brief case. Billy extended his hand to the professor.
“I really appreciate your thoughts,” he said. “I think it was difficult to share those in today’s class. Good luck as you retire.”
The professor grabbed Billy’s hand and shook it but not sure exactly what it meant. In his heart he wanted to confirm what Billy Lynch had said but it seemed unwise at the moment as he simply wanted the day to end, not knowing what might happen next as the word spread among the students that he had actually questioned the validity of evolution.
“Thanks,” he said. “Thanks for being in my class today. What is in the package,” he asked, lifting it from its place on the desk and balancing it in his hand.
“It is something I’ve been holding for you,” said Billy. “I hope you enjoy it.”
With that, Billy Lynch left the professor sitting on the desk, walked up the stairway to the hallway and disappeared.
The professor sat on his desk for a long time, pondering the comments he had just made and heard and wondering about the package he held. He wondered how it could be that he had drifted so far away from the goals he had embraced when a child. His mind took him back to moments when, as a ten-year-old lad at a church camp, he had decided that being a Christian was the right thing to do. His decision followed a week of camp fun; lots of swimming, hiking, singing and bon fires at Camp Lake Louise in Michigan. It was a great trip for a kid like him. He remembered the ride in a old green school bus which took the young people from their small country church near Bowling Green, Ohio to the camp not far from the big Mac bridge at the northern tip of Michigan’s southern peninsula. He could nearly smell the inescapable odors of the Cedar boards used in the construction of the cabins and the wonderful meals; the experiences came back to his mind as though they occurred yesterday. It had been a memorable experience. Each night at the campfire, the camp pastor would tell bible stories and challenge the young people to give their lives to Christ. On the last night little Jimmy Wilson (that’s what they called him) raised his hand and decided then and there that he would live for God the rest of his life.
When he returned to the Ohio farmhouse where he lived with his mother and father, he was quick to share the news of his time at camp, especially of deciding to be a Christian.
“This is wonderful,” said his father. “We have been praying for you even since you were born.” His mother hugged him and kissed him on the check. “We are so happy,” she said.
Dan Schobert, W9MFG@charter.net
Monday, February 8, 2010
The Stop Sign, Part 6
The Stop Sign, Part 6
Professor Wilson was surprised, as were his students, to hear such words in a University classroom, words that had not resonated there in many years, though it was commonly discussed in the early days of the institution, those days when the leadership and founders had dedicated the campus to the Glory of God. A lot had happened in the following years, decades of gradual decline until the present moment when it seemed that even the mention of God was like expressing an ugly word.
Billy Lynch appeared to be satisfied with the answer. “Thank you professor,” he said. “It seems to me,” he continued, “that if God is the one who provides absolutes, He would also be the one who could give important information about the origins of things. This being the case, it would seem necessary to consider His words. But the lectures we have been getting have pretty much tossed the Bible aside and asked us to believe that everything we see around us are the result of time and chance. I am aware that there have been many attempts to reconcile both views but, in my opinion, these have failed because, in the long run, they have tended to down play the role of God. So, perhaps, it comes down to trusting God.”
“But there is more,” he said. “Let’s say that I have a gun.”
He quickly pushed his right hand into his pocket. The students and Professor gasped, perhaps thinking they were going to be victims. Slowly Billy Lynch pulled his hand from his pocket but it was in the form of a gun, with his index finger pointing ahead and thumb erect, the kind of gesture kids make when playing. He pointed the “gun” around the room, finally taking aim at the professor.
“Imagine this is a real gun,” he said. “And I was about to shoot you or maybe some of my classmates, even myself. Though an illegal act, and besides the fact that you probably wouldn’t like me to shoot you or anyone else, on what basis can it be said that I shouldn’t do this? I mean, we have been hearing in this lecture series that evolution has always proceeded on the basis of survival. And maybe I sense that you and the others in this room are a danger to my survival and believe that removing you would increase my longevity. So, under the rules of evolution, I have every right to do just that, and not be punished for it because I would be acting in accordance with the rules of evolution.”
Billy slowly put his “gun” back into his pocket and sat down. The hall was quiet except for the hum of the air conditioner. Professor Wilson said nothing. He was stunned because he knew that what Billy Lynch had said was true. He knew it to be true and he also knew that most of his fellow professors, deep down, would agree.
Soon the students began to file out. Some paused at Billy’s desk, shaking his hand or giving him a thumbs up salute. “Way to go,” someone said in passing.
Not a few, however, shook their heads, believing Lynch to be some sort of fanatic. “You’re crazy,” one said. “What are you, a religious nut?” someone shouted.
Dan Schobert, W9MFG@charter.net
Professor Wilson was surprised, as were his students, to hear such words in a University classroom, words that had not resonated there in many years, though it was commonly discussed in the early days of the institution, those days when the leadership and founders had dedicated the campus to the Glory of God. A lot had happened in the following years, decades of gradual decline until the present moment when it seemed that even the mention of God was like expressing an ugly word.
Billy Lynch appeared to be satisfied with the answer. “Thank you professor,” he said. “It seems to me,” he continued, “that if God is the one who provides absolutes, He would also be the one who could give important information about the origins of things. This being the case, it would seem necessary to consider His words. But the lectures we have been getting have pretty much tossed the Bible aside and asked us to believe that everything we see around us are the result of time and chance. I am aware that there have been many attempts to reconcile both views but, in my opinion, these have failed because, in the long run, they have tended to down play the role of God. So, perhaps, it comes down to trusting God.”
“But there is more,” he said. “Let’s say that I have a gun.”
He quickly pushed his right hand into his pocket. The students and Professor gasped, perhaps thinking they were going to be victims. Slowly Billy Lynch pulled his hand from his pocket but it was in the form of a gun, with his index finger pointing ahead and thumb erect, the kind of gesture kids make when playing. He pointed the “gun” around the room, finally taking aim at the professor.
“Imagine this is a real gun,” he said. “And I was about to shoot you or maybe some of my classmates, even myself. Though an illegal act, and besides the fact that you probably wouldn’t like me to shoot you or anyone else, on what basis can it be said that I shouldn’t do this? I mean, we have been hearing in this lecture series that evolution has always proceeded on the basis of survival. And maybe I sense that you and the others in this room are a danger to my survival and believe that removing you would increase my longevity. So, under the rules of evolution, I have every right to do just that, and not be punished for it because I would be acting in accordance with the rules of evolution.”
Billy slowly put his “gun” back into his pocket and sat down. The hall was quiet except for the hum of the air conditioner. Professor Wilson said nothing. He was stunned because he knew that what Billy Lynch had said was true. He knew it to be true and he also knew that most of his fellow professors, deep down, would agree.
Soon the students began to file out. Some paused at Billy’s desk, shaking his hand or giving him a thumbs up salute. “Way to go,” someone said in passing.
Not a few, however, shook their heads, believing Lynch to be some sort of fanatic. “You’re crazy,” one said. “What are you, a religious nut?” someone shouted.
Dan Schobert, W9MFG@charter.net
Saturday, January 30, 2010
The Stop Sign, Part 5
The Stop Sign, Part 5
He said it with a particular sense of awe and reverence. It was the word he had long before vowed to avoid in his conversations, in his classes, in his life. But he knew, deep down, this was the answer; it was the answer he had been avoiding for his thirty years of teaching because he knew that what he had been teaching about evolution had only eliminated the word, but not God Himself. He knew that the idea of evolution was questionable at best but he had been teaching it anyway, hoping against hope that he would never be called on the carpet to defend it. In the end, he knew, the real answer to the great questions of life did not come from something that emerged from a slimy pit eons ago, but came from God. As though emerging from a moment of silent prayer, Professor Wilson raised his eyes to the fourth row, fifth seat where Billy Lynch remained standing, hands in his pockets.
“Is that the answer you wanted,” asked the professor with a voice, though a whisper, it could be heard by everyone.
“Thank you Professor Wilson. That is the answer but I have to wonder where you received information about God. This does not seem to have an evolutionary source. If the idea of God has also come through evolutionary processes, it would make His existence no different from any other idea we might hold. I mean, it is maybe easy to say the word GOD but saying it doesn’t make something exist, does it?”
The professor moved away from the chalkboard and stood again in front of his gray metal desk, the kind with two drawers on either side of the place where a person sits, the kind the University administration seemed to think is befitting a lecture hall. Pushing aside his briefcase and several books, the professor sat on the desk edge with his feet, encased in a pair of Brown penny loafers, dangling several inches from the floor. With his left and right hands grasping the desk edges to his sides, he seemed lost in his thoughts. ‘Where do I go next with this discussion,’ he wondered. Raising his head, he scanned across the audience and looked into the eyes of his students, these young people who had been listening to him talk about evolution. He also had a flash back to those thousands of students which had been in those same seats for the many years of his teaching, students whom he had failed because he hadn’t spoke to them about really important things but instead had told them a fairy tale about life and they had bought it, as they should have, in order that he would give them a passing grade and allow them to move on to additional studies. He, at the moment, felt he had let them down and he was beginning to sense the harm he had done to so many.
After looking into the eyes of those who were staring at him, his focus returned to Billy Lynch, this young man who remained standing, a lone figure among a sitting crowd.
“Yes,” he finally said. “Yes, God is more than a three letter word on a University chalkboard. Even if I had not written that word, God would still exist. He exists, not because I say so, but because the Bible says so. It is there we learn about such an important matter.”
Dan Schobert, W9MFG@charter.net
He said it with a particular sense of awe and reverence. It was the word he had long before vowed to avoid in his conversations, in his classes, in his life. But he knew, deep down, this was the answer; it was the answer he had been avoiding for his thirty years of teaching because he knew that what he had been teaching about evolution had only eliminated the word, but not God Himself. He knew that the idea of evolution was questionable at best but he had been teaching it anyway, hoping against hope that he would never be called on the carpet to defend it. In the end, he knew, the real answer to the great questions of life did not come from something that emerged from a slimy pit eons ago, but came from God. As though emerging from a moment of silent prayer, Professor Wilson raised his eyes to the fourth row, fifth seat where Billy Lynch remained standing, hands in his pockets.
“Is that the answer you wanted,” asked the professor with a voice, though a whisper, it could be heard by everyone.
“Thank you Professor Wilson. That is the answer but I have to wonder where you received information about God. This does not seem to have an evolutionary source. If the idea of God has also come through evolutionary processes, it would make His existence no different from any other idea we might hold. I mean, it is maybe easy to say the word GOD but saying it doesn’t make something exist, does it?”
The professor moved away from the chalkboard and stood again in front of his gray metal desk, the kind with two drawers on either side of the place where a person sits, the kind the University administration seemed to think is befitting a lecture hall. Pushing aside his briefcase and several books, the professor sat on the desk edge with his feet, encased in a pair of Brown penny loafers, dangling several inches from the floor. With his left and right hands grasping the desk edges to his sides, he seemed lost in his thoughts. ‘Where do I go next with this discussion,’ he wondered. Raising his head, he scanned across the audience and looked into the eyes of his students, these young people who had been listening to him talk about evolution. He also had a flash back to those thousands of students which had been in those same seats for the many years of his teaching, students whom he had failed because he hadn’t spoke to them about really important things but instead had told them a fairy tale about life and they had bought it, as they should have, in order that he would give them a passing grade and allow them to move on to additional studies. He, at the moment, felt he had let them down and he was beginning to sense the harm he had done to so many.
After looking into the eyes of those who were staring at him, his focus returned to Billy Lynch, this young man who remained standing, a lone figure among a sitting crowd.
“Yes,” he finally said. “Yes, God is more than a three letter word on a University chalkboard. Even if I had not written that word, God would still exist. He exists, not because I say so, but because the Bible says so. It is there we learn about such an important matter.”
Dan Schobert, W9MFG@charter.net
Friday, January 29, 2010
Families – Threats – Pornography
From our Introductory Post:
“The righteous have sat back and allowed the wicked to take over our relationships to God, families, churches, governments, schools and colleges, journalism, entertainment, sports, sciences, and a whole litany of other endeavors in our society.”
Families – Threats – Pornography
In our previous post we considered the topic of Threats to Families, specifically Cohabitation Before Marriage. We will now take a look at another threat to the family, Pornography.
We continue looking at areas that may create some ire among certain readers. Generally, when pet sins are exposed, even professing “christians” take exception. I am really not concerned about sparing feelings at this point so will be as objective as I can about this topic and other topics as they present threats to the family. Those who take offense need to deal with it between themselves and God.
How often have we heard, "Men, women and sometimes even children are saturated by sexual content, and more significantly, are told that it has no real effect. It's just a little amusement."? This quote from Pat Fagan, senior fellow of the Family Research Council, reveals the tension caused by the proliferation of pornography throughout our culture. Dr. Fagan in the same article, http://www.christianpost.com/article/20091202 , details some of the negative effects of pornography summarized by the statement, "pornography corrodes the conscience, promotes distrust between husbands and wives and debases untold thousands of young women."
Jill C. Manning, M.S., in testimony before a U.S. Senate committee in November, 2005, detailed the negative effects of pornography as related to the family.
“1. Increased marital distress, and risk of separation and divorce,
2. Decreased marital intimacy and sexual satisfaction,
3. Infidelity
4. Increased appetite for more graphic types of pornography and sexual activity associated with abusive, illegal or unsafe practices,
5. Devaluation of monogamy, marriage and child rearing,
6. An increasing number of people struggling with compulsive and addictive sexual behaviour.” ( http://www.heritage.org/research/family/tst111405a.cfm?renderforprint=1 )
With all of these negative effects documented and intuitively known it is fair to ask why pornography continues to be tolerated by our nation. First Amendment considerations aside, a report from PBS’s Frontline is insightful here:
“It's one of the hottest industries in America. Easier to order at home than a pizza, bigger than rock music, it's arguably the most profitable enterprise in cyberspace. AT&T has been in the business. Yahoo! has profited from it. Westin and Marriott have made more money selling it than selling snacks and drinks in their mini-bars. And with estimates as high as $10 billion a year, it boasts the kind of earnings that most American businesses would envy.” (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/porn/view/ )
It would seem the real bottom line regarding pornography, as with most things, is the bottom line. There is simply too much money being made from this industry to get anyone in authority to do anything substantive about.
The solution here is found in the Biblical admonitions, “Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,” (2 Corinthians 6:17) and “For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness.” (1 Thessalonians 4:7) among others. By simply saying no to many of the offerings of the media and the Internet and replacing them with God’s Word, wholesome books, DVDs, downloads, films, etc. we can overcome the negative effects of the plague of pornography in our families.
Summary
This post has examined Pornography as a major threat to families. We discovered that the solution is found not only in observing Biblical injunctions but providing positive practical alternatives to the programming offered by the typical media outlets and the Internet. Our next post will take a look at another threat to families, Morality not Being Taught in Schools.
I remain yours in the name of Jesus Christ, the Creator and Name above every name.
“Mr. Phil”
“The righteous have sat back and allowed the wicked to take over our relationships to God, families, churches, governments, schools and colleges, journalism, entertainment, sports, sciences, and a whole litany of other endeavors in our society.”
Families – Threats – Pornography
In our previous post we considered the topic of Threats to Families, specifically Cohabitation Before Marriage. We will now take a look at another threat to the family, Pornography.
We continue looking at areas that may create some ire among certain readers. Generally, when pet sins are exposed, even professing “christians” take exception. I am really not concerned about sparing feelings at this point so will be as objective as I can about this topic and other topics as they present threats to the family. Those who take offense need to deal with it between themselves and God.
How often have we heard, "Men, women and sometimes even children are saturated by sexual content, and more significantly, are told that it has no real effect. It's just a little amusement."? This quote from Pat Fagan, senior fellow of the Family Research Council, reveals the tension caused by the proliferation of pornography throughout our culture. Dr. Fagan in the same article, http://www.christianpost.com/article/20091202 , details some of the negative effects of pornography summarized by the statement, "pornography corrodes the conscience, promotes distrust between husbands and wives and debases untold thousands of young women."
Jill C. Manning, M.S., in testimony before a U.S. Senate committee in November, 2005, detailed the negative effects of pornography as related to the family.
“1. Increased marital distress, and risk of separation and divorce,
2. Decreased marital intimacy and sexual satisfaction,
3. Infidelity
4. Increased appetite for more graphic types of pornography and sexual activity associated with abusive, illegal or unsafe practices,
5. Devaluation of monogamy, marriage and child rearing,
6. An increasing number of people struggling with compulsive and addictive sexual behaviour.” ( http://www.heritage.org/research/family/tst111405a.cfm?renderforprint=1 )
With all of these negative effects documented and intuitively known it is fair to ask why pornography continues to be tolerated by our nation. First Amendment considerations aside, a report from PBS’s Frontline is insightful here:
“It's one of the hottest industries in America. Easier to order at home than a pizza, bigger than rock music, it's arguably the most profitable enterprise in cyberspace. AT&T has been in the business. Yahoo! has profited from it. Westin and Marriott have made more money selling it than selling snacks and drinks in their mini-bars. And with estimates as high as $10 billion a year, it boasts the kind of earnings that most American businesses would envy.” (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/porn/view/ )
It would seem the real bottom line regarding pornography, as with most things, is the bottom line. There is simply too much money being made from this industry to get anyone in authority to do anything substantive about.
The solution here is found in the Biblical admonitions, “Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,” (2 Corinthians 6:17) and “For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness.” (1 Thessalonians 4:7) among others. By simply saying no to many of the offerings of the media and the Internet and replacing them with God’s Word, wholesome books, DVDs, downloads, films, etc. we can overcome the negative effects of the plague of pornography in our families.
Summary
This post has examined Pornography as a major threat to families. We discovered that the solution is found not only in observing Biblical injunctions but providing positive practical alternatives to the programming offered by the typical media outlets and the Internet. Our next post will take a look at another threat to families, Morality not Being Taught in Schools.
I remain yours in the name of Jesus Christ, the Creator and Name above every name.
“Mr. Phil”
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
The Stop Sign, Part 4
The Stop Sign, Part 4
There, he thought…he had actually used that word, the one he dreaded to say because saying something is ‘absolute’ meant it came from somewhere outside of himself though his college education in science had forced him to believe that nothing existed that could not be tested. He knew that the only source of absolutes was God but God had been far from his mind since entered the education field.
Lifting his eyes, raising his eyebrows toward Lynch, he said: “Is that the answer you wanted?”
The class, though anxious to leave the hall and get to another room, sat in their seats as though they were glued in them. There was little movement except the turning of heads from the professor to their classmate who had suddenly become the focus of attention, something they thought a little strange since few had given Lynch much notice. Now they looked at Billy and began to wonder about him. What gave him the strength to stand up to a professor? Wasn’t he concerned about getting a lower grade?
Lynch, still standing as the other students sat and gazed at him, kept his eyes on the professor.
“Thank you professor, that is part of the answer I was seeking,” said Billy. “Can you tell me, tell us (motioning with his hands), what might be the source of this absolute value? That is…during your course lectures you have repeatedly said that all of what we see…reality. . is the result of time + chance. In such a situation of happenstance, there doesn’t seem to be any way for something to be absolutely true. It seems to me that anything we say and anything we do would be like a toss of dice. Who can truly say that something like an absolute exists when the word itself may simply be an expression of some interesting, chance connection in the brain?”
The class was stunned to hear such a thing. Many of Billy’s classmates had not given such thoughts any consideration before this moment. They had failed to see that the idea of evolution was more than biology; it was more than physics or chemistry. There was more here than they had realized and they remained in their seats, not so much concerned with their next classes but wondering where this face-to-face discussion was going to lead.
Professor Wilson, himself somewhat stunned by the student’s courage and intrigued by the ongoing expression of Lynch’s mind, looked down from the audience. His head bowed, as though in deep thought, he moved toward the chalkboard and picked up a new, three inch piece of chalk. Slowly, and with as much care as possible, Wilson slowly wrote three big letters on the board. G-O-D is what he wrote, with a broad white underline for emphasis.
“That is the source of my, of our, absolute statement(1),” said Wilson.
Dan Schobert, W9MFG@charter.net
Note
(1)In a recent national survey conducted by the Barna Research Group, people were asked if they believe that there are moral absolutes that are unchanging or if moral truth is relative to the circumstances. By a 3-to-1 margin (645 vs. 22 %), adults said truth is always relative to the person and the situation. Among teens who were polled, 83% said moral truth depends on the circumstances, and only six % said moral truth is absolute. Born-again Christians were more likely than others to accept moral absolutes. George Barna, head of the research group, noted that substantial numbers of people who call themselves Christians believe that activities such as abortion, gay sex, cohabitation, drunkenness, and pornography are morally acceptable. “Without some firm and compelling basis for suggesting that acts are inappropriate, people are left with philosophies such as “if it feels good, do it,’ ‘everyone else is doing it,’ or ‘as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else, it’s permissible.’” Barna went on to say that based on these findings the church is in trouble and that failure to address this issue at its root, and to do so quickly and persuasively, will undermine the strength of the church for at least another generation and probably longer. (cited in Church Around the world, May 2002, from Tyndale Publishers)
There, he thought…he had actually used that word, the one he dreaded to say because saying something is ‘absolute’ meant it came from somewhere outside of himself though his college education in science had forced him to believe that nothing existed that could not be tested. He knew that the only source of absolutes was God but God had been far from his mind since entered the education field.
Lifting his eyes, raising his eyebrows toward Lynch, he said: “Is that the answer you wanted?”
The class, though anxious to leave the hall and get to another room, sat in their seats as though they were glued in them. There was little movement except the turning of heads from the professor to their classmate who had suddenly become the focus of attention, something they thought a little strange since few had given Lynch much notice. Now they looked at Billy and began to wonder about him. What gave him the strength to stand up to a professor? Wasn’t he concerned about getting a lower grade?
Lynch, still standing as the other students sat and gazed at him, kept his eyes on the professor.
“Thank you professor, that is part of the answer I was seeking,” said Billy. “Can you tell me, tell us (motioning with his hands), what might be the source of this absolute value? That is…during your course lectures you have repeatedly said that all of what we see…reality. . is the result of time + chance. In such a situation of happenstance, there doesn’t seem to be any way for something to be absolutely true. It seems to me that anything we say and anything we do would be like a toss of dice. Who can truly say that something like an absolute exists when the word itself may simply be an expression of some interesting, chance connection in the brain?”
The class was stunned to hear such a thing. Many of Billy’s classmates had not given such thoughts any consideration before this moment. They had failed to see that the idea of evolution was more than biology; it was more than physics or chemistry. There was more here than they had realized and they remained in their seats, not so much concerned with their next classes but wondering where this face-to-face discussion was going to lead.
Professor Wilson, himself somewhat stunned by the student’s courage and intrigued by the ongoing expression of Lynch’s mind, looked down from the audience. His head bowed, as though in deep thought, he moved toward the chalkboard and picked up a new, three inch piece of chalk. Slowly, and with as much care as possible, Wilson slowly wrote three big letters on the board. G-O-D is what he wrote, with a broad white underline for emphasis.
“That is the source of my, of our, absolute statement(1),” said Wilson.
Dan Schobert, W9MFG@charter.net
Note
(1)In a recent national survey conducted by the Barna Research Group, people were asked if they believe that there are moral absolutes that are unchanging or if moral truth is relative to the circumstances. By a 3-to-1 margin (645 vs. 22 %), adults said truth is always relative to the person and the situation. Among teens who were polled, 83% said moral truth depends on the circumstances, and only six % said moral truth is absolute. Born-again Christians were more likely than others to accept moral absolutes. George Barna, head of the research group, noted that substantial numbers of people who call themselves Christians believe that activities such as abortion, gay sex, cohabitation, drunkenness, and pornography are morally acceptable. “Without some firm and compelling basis for suggesting that acts are inappropriate, people are left with philosophies such as “if it feels good, do it,’ ‘everyone else is doing it,’ or ‘as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else, it’s permissible.’” Barna went on to say that based on these findings the church is in trouble and that failure to address this issue at its root, and to do so quickly and persuasively, will undermine the strength of the church for at least another generation and probably longer. (cited in Church Around the world, May 2002, from Tyndale Publishers)
Monday, January 25, 2010
The Stop Sign, Part 3
The Stop Sign, Part 3
“Thank you professor but it still isn’t clear to me why you wouldn’t like someone to get hurt or killed. Is this an opinion you have? Maybe there is someone in the world, even someone in this room who would be delighted if someone was hurt or killed for failing to stop at a stop sign. What would make your thought any more valid than that thought? Is your position on this seemingly strange question one of absolute truth, or is it an opinion?
Professor Wilson, stalling to ponder the issue on the floor, continued to put away his lecture notes, stuffing them into the black leather brief case, the one he had been given 30 years ago when he began his teaching career. The case was showing its age; the handle needing some repair. He snapped the case shut with a click, left it on his desk and slowly moved to the front of the desk, his hands behind his back. He had long ago been aware that a question like this might arise; he had expected it but had hoped that he could get through his teaching career without having to address the thought behind the question. He remembered that long ago, before college, he would have had a quick answer to this kind of question but his college education had changed his mind. He had known & been aware that the things he was teaching about evolution had a moral concern but he had put the problem aside, so that he could accept this position at the University and live a good life. He simply wished to maintain his career with the least amount of confrontation, accepting his comfortable paychecks without having to deal with questions that bothered him. Wilson was keenly aware that much of what he taught about evolution was nonsense but he did it anyway. What would his colleagues think of him if he didn’t spew the usual story? He would be laughed at; he might even lose his position. No, he thought, during his 30 years of teaching…he would teach what he had been taught to teach and not worry about other things. But here he was, facing a crowd of some 600 eyes…all wishing to have some word of wisdom from the old professor.
He stood in front of his desk for a long time, his eyes focused on young ‘Billy’Lynch. Not that he was at a loss of words but he wondered about the connection between this strange question and the many lectures that preceded it, though he feared where the question might be leading. What was the connection between stopping for a stop sign and the hours of telling the students about evolution? In all his years of attending school himself, he had never found himself in this kind of situation.
Wilson was not a big man, as men go. His 200 pounds were spread over a frame that would hardly qualify for a football team. Most of his hair was gone, not that he was bald but he had, several years earlier, decided to keep his hair short, not skin-head short but clipped very close. He wore steel rimmed glasses; bifocals. They sat on his broad nose just above a thin line mustache. His chin was now beardless though he often sported a beard, a goatee of sorts. He had recently shaved it off, giving him a new look, even a freshman look, perhaps fitting for the retirement he had envisioned with Sally, his wife, as they made plans to visit Europe as soon as things on campus were wrapped up. He was wearing a light blue denim short-sleeved shirt, one with a banded collar, unbuttoned at the top. The shirt was tucked into his dark blue Levi trousers, and he had a wide western style belt with a large buckle, the kind many cowboys wear.
He lowered his hands to his sides, realizing that he had to say something.
“Yes,” he said. “It is absolutely true that it would not be a good thing for someone to be hurt or killed at a stop sign.”
Dan Schobert, W9MFG@charter.net
“Thank you professor but it still isn’t clear to me why you wouldn’t like someone to get hurt or killed. Is this an opinion you have? Maybe there is someone in the world, even someone in this room who would be delighted if someone was hurt or killed for failing to stop at a stop sign. What would make your thought any more valid than that thought? Is your position on this seemingly strange question one of absolute truth, or is it an opinion?
Professor Wilson, stalling to ponder the issue on the floor, continued to put away his lecture notes, stuffing them into the black leather brief case, the one he had been given 30 years ago when he began his teaching career. The case was showing its age; the handle needing some repair. He snapped the case shut with a click, left it on his desk and slowly moved to the front of the desk, his hands behind his back. He had long ago been aware that a question like this might arise; he had expected it but had hoped that he could get through his teaching career without having to address the thought behind the question. He remembered that long ago, before college, he would have had a quick answer to this kind of question but his college education had changed his mind. He had known & been aware that the things he was teaching about evolution had a moral concern but he had put the problem aside, so that he could accept this position at the University and live a good life. He simply wished to maintain his career with the least amount of confrontation, accepting his comfortable paychecks without having to deal with questions that bothered him. Wilson was keenly aware that much of what he taught about evolution was nonsense but he did it anyway. What would his colleagues think of him if he didn’t spew the usual story? He would be laughed at; he might even lose his position. No, he thought, during his 30 years of teaching…he would teach what he had been taught to teach and not worry about other things. But here he was, facing a crowd of some 600 eyes…all wishing to have some word of wisdom from the old professor.
He stood in front of his desk for a long time, his eyes focused on young ‘Billy’Lynch. Not that he was at a loss of words but he wondered about the connection between this strange question and the many lectures that preceded it, though he feared where the question might be leading. What was the connection between stopping for a stop sign and the hours of telling the students about evolution? In all his years of attending school himself, he had never found himself in this kind of situation.
Wilson was not a big man, as men go. His 200 pounds were spread over a frame that would hardly qualify for a football team. Most of his hair was gone, not that he was bald but he had, several years earlier, decided to keep his hair short, not skin-head short but clipped very close. He wore steel rimmed glasses; bifocals. They sat on his broad nose just above a thin line mustache. His chin was now beardless though he often sported a beard, a goatee of sorts. He had recently shaved it off, giving him a new look, even a freshman look, perhaps fitting for the retirement he had envisioned with Sally, his wife, as they made plans to visit Europe as soon as things on campus were wrapped up. He was wearing a light blue denim short-sleeved shirt, one with a banded collar, unbuttoned at the top. The shirt was tucked into his dark blue Levi trousers, and he had a wide western style belt with a large buckle, the kind many cowboys wear.
He lowered his hands to his sides, realizing that he had to say something.
“Yes,” he said. “It is absolutely true that it would not be a good thing for someone to be hurt or killed at a stop sign.”
Dan Schobert, W9MFG@charter.net
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Open Letter to Candidates
During this 2010 election year I have decided to send an open letter to each candidate for each office for which I will cast a vote. I have reproduced that letter in this blog. The writing of this document took me a number of days of reflection and prayer.
I truly believe that this document reflects the type of individual we need in elective office. Everything in this letter reflects either a Biblical or truly traditional American principle. I did not make up any of this. Any person who decides to reject the principles in this document is likely either ignorant or evil or both and is not worthy to seek elective office in this country.
I encourage you to copy this letter and, after customizing for your situation, send it to your newspaper or online editorial section or office seekers in your area.
I remain yours in the name of the Lord, Jesus Christ,
“Mr. Phil”
“Dear . . .,
I appreciate your interest in serving as . . .
When an individual decides to seek elective office at any level in our great Republic, it is understood that a wonderful opportunity is available to educate the public, especially traditional families, through that campaign. The American election process is more about passing on the American tradition of governance and free enterprise than winning individual elections or shifting the “balance of power” at the local, state, or national level.
Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence said, “. . . all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights . . .” Modern statists, insisting rights are granted by a central government, would not agree with Mr. Jefferson’s belief that rights are derived from God.
John Jay, first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, stated, “Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” In Jay’s day, “Christian” had a rather different meaning than it does today. He would likely write, “persons of Biblical faith” in today’s language.
Jay was a Founding Father, member of the 1st and 2nd Continental Congresses, President of the Continental Congress, instrumental in the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, a writer of the Federalist Papers, involved in the writing of the Constitution of New York state, Governor of New York, and had many other accomplishments. John Jay was a man who should be studied and emulated by our children.
John Adams, second President of the U.S. said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." Adams also stated in correspondence to Thomas Jefferson, "I have examined all religions, as well as my narrow sphere, my straightened means, and my busy life, would allow; and the result is that the Bible is the best Book in the world. It contains more philosophy than all the libraries I have seen." He went on to say, "Without Religion this World would be Something not fit to be mentioned in polite Company, I mean Hell." Modern secularists, insisting that “religion” should remain within the four walls of a church, would not agree with Mr. Jay or Mr. Adams. At the same time they are doing all they can to promote their religion of evolutionary secular humanism through the government school systems.
The colonists of Plymouth Plantation despaired of working “for the common good” and gave up the idea of expending effort so that others, who would not work, could share in the benefits. This resulted in poverty and starvation. William Bradford, Governor, replaced the failed collectivist economic system of the London sponsors of that colony with a system of free enterprise. After the implementation of free enterprise, in which each person retained the fruits of his labor, the situation turned around and led to further colonization by others of like mind from the European continent. A system of trade with the local native population was developed, resulting in greater prosperity for all concerned.
Therefore, considering that we are likely less wise than our Founding Fathers, I would encourage use of the campaign pulpit to teach from their ideas our families and children, along with the general voting public, what it means to be an American, a Christian or person of Biblical faith, and an entrepreneur. Please read publicly, first from the Bible, and then from our Founding Documents without shame and embarrassment. As Adams said, our system will work “only for a moral and religious people.” The wisdom of William Bradford prevailed in ensuring a free enterprise approach in the founding of an economic system within the new Republic. We are all responsible to promote that kind of society.
Thank you for caring.
Sincerely,”
I truly believe that this document reflects the type of individual we need in elective office. Everything in this letter reflects either a Biblical or truly traditional American principle. I did not make up any of this. Any person who decides to reject the principles in this document is likely either ignorant or evil or both and is not worthy to seek elective office in this country.
I encourage you to copy this letter and, after customizing for your situation, send it to your newspaper or online editorial section or office seekers in your area.
I remain yours in the name of the Lord, Jesus Christ,
“Mr. Phil”
“Dear . . .,
I appreciate your interest in serving as . . .
When an individual decides to seek elective office at any level in our great Republic, it is understood that a wonderful opportunity is available to educate the public, especially traditional families, through that campaign. The American election process is more about passing on the American tradition of governance and free enterprise than winning individual elections or shifting the “balance of power” at the local, state, or national level.
Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence said, “. . . all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights . . .” Modern statists, insisting rights are granted by a central government, would not agree with Mr. Jefferson’s belief that rights are derived from God.
John Jay, first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, stated, “Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” In Jay’s day, “Christian” had a rather different meaning than it does today. He would likely write, “persons of Biblical faith” in today’s language.
Jay was a Founding Father, member of the 1st and 2nd Continental Congresses, President of the Continental Congress, instrumental in the ratification of the U.S. Constitution, a writer of the Federalist Papers, involved in the writing of the Constitution of New York state, Governor of New York, and had many other accomplishments. John Jay was a man who should be studied and emulated by our children.
John Adams, second President of the U.S. said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." Adams also stated in correspondence to Thomas Jefferson, "I have examined all religions, as well as my narrow sphere, my straightened means, and my busy life, would allow; and the result is that the Bible is the best Book in the world. It contains more philosophy than all the libraries I have seen." He went on to say, "Without Religion this World would be Something not fit to be mentioned in polite Company, I mean Hell." Modern secularists, insisting that “religion” should remain within the four walls of a church, would not agree with Mr. Jay or Mr. Adams. At the same time they are doing all they can to promote their religion of evolutionary secular humanism through the government school systems.
The colonists of Plymouth Plantation despaired of working “for the common good” and gave up the idea of expending effort so that others, who would not work, could share in the benefits. This resulted in poverty and starvation. William Bradford, Governor, replaced the failed collectivist economic system of the London sponsors of that colony with a system of free enterprise. After the implementation of free enterprise, in which each person retained the fruits of his labor, the situation turned around and led to further colonization by others of like mind from the European continent. A system of trade with the local native population was developed, resulting in greater prosperity for all concerned.
Therefore, considering that we are likely less wise than our Founding Fathers, I would encourage use of the campaign pulpit to teach from their ideas our families and children, along with the general voting public, what it means to be an American, a Christian or person of Biblical faith, and an entrepreneur. Please read publicly, first from the Bible, and then from our Founding Documents without shame and embarrassment. As Adams said, our system will work “only for a moral and religious people.” The wisdom of William Bradford prevailed in ensuring a free enterprise approach in the founding of an economic system within the new Republic. We are all responsible to promote that kind of society.
Thank you for caring.
Sincerely,”
Thursday, January 7, 2010
Families – Threats – Cohabitation Before Marriage
From our Introductory Post:
“The righteous have sat back and allowed the wicked to take over our relationships to God, families, churches, governments, schools and colleges, journalism, entertainment, sports, sciences, and a whole litany of other endeavors in our society.”
Families – Threats – Cohabitation Before Marriage
In our previous post we considered the topic of Threats to Families, specifically Absentee Fathers. We will now take a look at another threat to the family, Cohabitation Before Marriage.
Now we move into areas that may create some ire among certain readers. Generally, when pet sins are exposed, even professing “christians” take exception. I am really not concerned about sparing feelings at this point so will be as objective as I can about this topic and other topics as they present threats to the family. The usual argument goes something like, “You wouldn’t buy a pair of shoes unless you tried them on!” Excuse me; trying on a pair of shoes does not equate to a lifetime commitment to a man or woman in marriage. Those who take offense need to deal with it between themselves and God.
Before considering the effects of this phenomenon, we should investigate the extent of it. The United States Census Bureau has reported that “. . . the number of cohabiting households increased from 1.1 million in 1977 to 4.9 million 20 years later in 1997. Cohabiting households made up 1.5 percent of all households in 1977, increasing to 4.8 percent by 1997.” A more ominous aspect of the extent of the problem of cohabitation is revealed when we consider that “. . . in 1997, 43 percent of unmarried couple households contained children . . .” and “. . . the proportion of unmarried couple households containing children has increased from 29 percent in 1977 to 43 percent in 1997.” The entire report, Historical Estimates of Cohabitation by Lynne M. Casper, Philip N. Cohen, and Tavia Simmons, may be read at:
http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0036/twps0036.html
The June, 2003, Catholic Update reports numerous negative effects of cohabitation such as “higher risk of divorce, less satisfactory adjustments in marriage, harmful effect upon children, ducking tough issues, repressed anger, avoiding criticism of each other’s annoying behavior, failure to develop realistic and satisfactory financial habits, suffering strained relationships with parents, close family members and treasured friends, and struggling with an undercurrent of guilt by this violation of one's conscience or religious upbringing.” See the report, Cohabitation Before Marriage by Joseph M. Champlin, at:
http://www.americancatholic.org/Newsletters/CU/ac0603.asp
The Washington Post is hardly a religious publication. The August 16, 2009, piece, Force of Cohabit: Making or Breaking a Marriage? by Ellen McCarthy, discusses the phenomenon of cohabitation in a somewhat more balanced fashion but is surprisingly negative. Scott “Stanley, a University of Denver psychologist, has spent the past 15 years trying to figure out why premarital cohabitation is associated with lower levels of satisfaction in marriage and a greater potential for divorce.” Stanley discovered that “. . . almost 19 percent of those who lived together before getting engaged had at some point suggested divorce, compared with 10 percent for those who waited until marriage to live together.” "Cohabitation may not be making some relationships more risky," Stanley says. "What it may be doing is making some risky relationships more likely to continue." Read the whole article at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/13/AR2009081304118_pf.html
What is the solution to the problem of cohabitation? It may be nothing more than old fashioned preaching against sin. See “Flee also youthful lusts:” (2 Timothy 2:22) and “Flee fornication.” (1 Corinthians 6:18), among others.
Summary
This post has examined Cohabitation Before Marriage as a major threat to families. We discovered that the solution is found in observing Biblical injunctions. Our next post will take a look at another threat to families, Pornography.
I remain yours in the name of Jesus Christ, the Creator and Name above every name.
“Mr. Phil”
“The righteous have sat back and allowed the wicked to take over our relationships to God, families, churches, governments, schools and colleges, journalism, entertainment, sports, sciences, and a whole litany of other endeavors in our society.”
Families – Threats – Cohabitation Before Marriage
In our previous post we considered the topic of Threats to Families, specifically Absentee Fathers. We will now take a look at another threat to the family, Cohabitation Before Marriage.
Now we move into areas that may create some ire among certain readers. Generally, when pet sins are exposed, even professing “christians” take exception. I am really not concerned about sparing feelings at this point so will be as objective as I can about this topic and other topics as they present threats to the family. The usual argument goes something like, “You wouldn’t buy a pair of shoes unless you tried them on!” Excuse me; trying on a pair of shoes does not equate to a lifetime commitment to a man or woman in marriage. Those who take offense need to deal with it between themselves and God.
Before considering the effects of this phenomenon, we should investigate the extent of it. The United States Census Bureau has reported that “. . . the number of cohabiting households increased from 1.1 million in 1977 to 4.9 million 20 years later in 1997. Cohabiting households made up 1.5 percent of all households in 1977, increasing to 4.8 percent by 1997.” A more ominous aspect of the extent of the problem of cohabitation is revealed when we consider that “. . . in 1997, 43 percent of unmarried couple households contained children . . .” and “. . . the proportion of unmarried couple households containing children has increased from 29 percent in 1977 to 43 percent in 1997.” The entire report, Historical Estimates of Cohabitation by Lynne M. Casper, Philip N. Cohen, and Tavia Simmons, may be read at:
http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0036/twps0036.html
The June, 2003, Catholic Update reports numerous negative effects of cohabitation such as “higher risk of divorce, less satisfactory adjustments in marriage, harmful effect upon children, ducking tough issues, repressed anger, avoiding criticism of each other’s annoying behavior, failure to develop realistic and satisfactory financial habits, suffering strained relationships with parents, close family members and treasured friends, and struggling with an undercurrent of guilt by this violation of one's conscience or religious upbringing.” See the report, Cohabitation Before Marriage by Joseph M. Champlin, at:
http://www.americancatholic.org/Newsletters/CU/ac0603.asp
The Washington Post is hardly a religious publication. The August 16, 2009, piece, Force of Cohabit: Making or Breaking a Marriage? by Ellen McCarthy, discusses the phenomenon of cohabitation in a somewhat more balanced fashion but is surprisingly negative. Scott “Stanley, a University of Denver psychologist, has spent the past 15 years trying to figure out why premarital cohabitation is associated with lower levels of satisfaction in marriage and a greater potential for divorce.” Stanley discovered that “. . . almost 19 percent of those who lived together before getting engaged had at some point suggested divorce, compared with 10 percent for those who waited until marriage to live together.” "Cohabitation may not be making some relationships more risky," Stanley says. "What it may be doing is making some risky relationships more likely to continue." Read the whole article at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/13/AR2009081304118_pf.html
What is the solution to the problem of cohabitation? It may be nothing more than old fashioned preaching against sin. See “Flee also youthful lusts:” (2 Timothy 2:22) and “Flee fornication.” (1 Corinthians 6:18), among others.
Summary
This post has examined Cohabitation Before Marriage as a major threat to families. We discovered that the solution is found in observing Biblical injunctions. Our next post will take a look at another threat to families, Pornography.
I remain yours in the name of Jesus Christ, the Creator and Name above every name.
“Mr. Phil”
Friday, January 1, 2010
The Stop Sign, Part 2
The Stop Sign, Part 2
Encouraged by the professor, and hoping to stand his ground in what he felt would be a decisive give and take, Billy Lynch pushed on.
“No disagreement there professor. We put up stop signs to encourage people to stop. So my next question, if I may, is this: Why do you want people to stop?
Although he was feeling the urge to quickly do away with the question, Dr. Wilson sensed that he should continue.
“I would want people to stop because if they didn’t stop, they might get hurt, even killed,” he said. The students’ attention switched from Wilson to Lynch, wondering where this was leading.
“True enough,” said Lynch. “I believe we can agree that this would be likely. I simply wonder why you care that people not be hurt or killed if they fail to observe a stop sign.”
The professor quickly responded: “You don’t want people to get hurt or killed, do you?”
Billy Lynch began to feel pressured to respond as the professor expected but he knew there was a better way.
“Meaning no disrespect Professor Wilson, but it is not my role to provide an answer since you were the one who asked for questions. It is to you that I am looking for an answer to my concern. Here I am wondering why you care if someone gets hurt or killed at a stop sign…and your answer should not be in the form of a question to me. I know how I would respond but I wonder about your response.”
The class was a little stunned at Lynch’s bravado. He was actually putting the professor in the hot seat and this fact was not lost on Professor Wilson. He was being asked something very important, but didn’t really know what to say. Neither Professor Wilson nor the other students knew much about Billy. They didn’t know that he was a brilliant young man, having entered college at the age of 16, after quickly going through a home school program taught by his mother. It was at her knees that he had learned to be alert and to think deeply about ideas. He had, at her insistence, heard all about evolution and its many faults. He had been encouraged to study carefully the evidence for evolution and, in the process, had come to see that the evidence for evolution was actually interpretations which had been turned around as evidence; that the concept of evolution was nothing more than a clever scheme to deny the existence and work of God. He had a big advantage over his classmates who had been nearly forced to accept, what some have called, “an adult fairy tale” in order to graduate.
“You are right, absolutely right Mr. Lynch. I did ask for questions and this is what you’ve done. It is up to me to provide answers. When it comes to not wanting anyone to be hurt or killed because they fail to observe and obey a stop sign, I believe my answer is that I wouldn’t like it. And that is my final answer.”
This brought a few laughs from throughout the lecture hall as they recalled the now famous line from a popular TV quiz program.
Dan Schobert, W9MFG@charter.net
Encouraged by the professor, and hoping to stand his ground in what he felt would be a decisive give and take, Billy Lynch pushed on.
“No disagreement there professor. We put up stop signs to encourage people to stop. So my next question, if I may, is this: Why do you want people to stop?
Although he was feeling the urge to quickly do away with the question, Dr. Wilson sensed that he should continue.
“I would want people to stop because if they didn’t stop, they might get hurt, even killed,” he said. The students’ attention switched from Wilson to Lynch, wondering where this was leading.
“True enough,” said Lynch. “I believe we can agree that this would be likely. I simply wonder why you care that people not be hurt or killed if they fail to observe a stop sign.”
The professor quickly responded: “You don’t want people to get hurt or killed, do you?”
Billy Lynch began to feel pressured to respond as the professor expected but he knew there was a better way.
“Meaning no disrespect Professor Wilson, but it is not my role to provide an answer since you were the one who asked for questions. It is to you that I am looking for an answer to my concern. Here I am wondering why you care if someone gets hurt or killed at a stop sign…and your answer should not be in the form of a question to me. I know how I would respond but I wonder about your response.”
The class was a little stunned at Lynch’s bravado. He was actually putting the professor in the hot seat and this fact was not lost on Professor Wilson. He was being asked something very important, but didn’t really know what to say. Neither Professor Wilson nor the other students knew much about Billy. They didn’t know that he was a brilliant young man, having entered college at the age of 16, after quickly going through a home school program taught by his mother. It was at her knees that he had learned to be alert and to think deeply about ideas. He had, at her insistence, heard all about evolution and its many faults. He had been encouraged to study carefully the evidence for evolution and, in the process, had come to see that the evidence for evolution was actually interpretations which had been turned around as evidence; that the concept of evolution was nothing more than a clever scheme to deny the existence and work of God. He had a big advantage over his classmates who had been nearly forced to accept, what some have called, “an adult fairy tale” in order to graduate.
“You are right, absolutely right Mr. Lynch. I did ask for questions and this is what you’ve done. It is up to me to provide answers. When it comes to not wanting anyone to be hurt or killed because they fail to observe and obey a stop sign, I believe my answer is that I wouldn’t like it. And that is my final answer.”
This brought a few laughs from throughout the lecture hall as they recalled the now famous line from a popular TV quiz program.
Dan Schobert, W9MFG@charter.net
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)