Human Scum - The people who trafficked in human souls over 135 years ago are already paying for their sins if they did not repent and throw themselves upon the mercy of God through the substitionary death of Christ. As Jesus said, they already have their reward.
That said, I cannot find words strong enough to condemn the moral bankruptcy of the people in this story who attempt to profit from their ancestors' slavery.
Reprehensible, revolting, disgusting and vile come to mind immediately.
They violate the Law of God by breaking at least the 8th, 9th and 10th commandments, but I suspect that idolatry is also involved, violating the 2nd commandment, and they certainly bring shame on their parents, thereby violating the 5th commandment.
The lawyers who brought this suit should be disbarred and publicly reprimanded for wasting the time of all parties involved. I was going to say they should be publicly humiliated, but anyone this shameless is obviously incapable of experiencing so cleansing an emotion.
Wednesday, March 27
Monday, March 25
A Christian response to Global Warming? - A story out of Science Magazine tells us of evidence that global warming is a natural phenomena, not a man-made one.
If this is true, (and the evidence against man-made global warming is overwhelming), then how should we think about this whole global warming gig?
Like many issues, the answers are simple, though not necessarily easy.
1. Examine the scientific evidence. Determine for yourself if global warming is something caused by man. The vast weight of the evidence contradicts the thesis, everything from the article quoted here, to the impossible physics of the thesis, to the failure of the computer models.
2. Examine the political evidence. Who stands to gain as a result of perpetrating lies about global warming? It appears to me that the same crowd that does not trust you with with your own guns, your own money or your own body also want to prohibit the use of hairspray and refrigerants.
3. Compare the beliefs of the global warming-niks with the Law of God. As best as I can tell, the people who tell me that I shouldn't have a refrigerator or a car because it's making the polar ice cap melt are lying about the evidence. That all by itself is not necessarily a violation of God's Law, but when they use those lies as a means of stealing my property, they are violating both the 8th and the 9th commandments. And make no mistake, regardless of whether or not man-made global warming is actually happening, the global-warming crowd want to deprive you of the use of your own property.
I suspect they also covet the fruits of western civilisation - better standard of living, more personal freedom and greater opportunity - and are too lazy to earn their own bread. If true, they also violate the 10th commandment. But I'll give them the benefit of the doubt on this one.
If this is true, (and the evidence against man-made global warming is overwhelming), then how should we think about this whole global warming gig?
Like many issues, the answers are simple, though not necessarily easy.
1. Examine the scientific evidence. Determine for yourself if global warming is something caused by man. The vast weight of the evidence contradicts the thesis, everything from the article quoted here, to the impossible physics of the thesis, to the failure of the computer models.
2. Examine the political evidence. Who stands to gain as a result of perpetrating lies about global warming? It appears to me that the same crowd that does not trust you with with your own guns, your own money or your own body also want to prohibit the use of hairspray and refrigerants.
3. Compare the beliefs of the global warming-niks with the Law of God. As best as I can tell, the people who tell me that I shouldn't have a refrigerator or a car because it's making the polar ice cap melt are lying about the evidence. That all by itself is not necessarily a violation of God's Law, but when they use those lies as a means of stealing my property, they are violating both the 8th and the 9th commandments. And make no mistake, regardless of whether or not man-made global warming is actually happening, the global-warming crowd want to deprive you of the use of your own property.
I suspect they also covet the fruits of western civilisation - better standard of living, more personal freedom and greater opportunity - and are too lazy to earn their own bread. If true, they also violate the 10th commandment. But I'll give them the benefit of the doubt on this one.
Friday, March 15
Today we take up the question of school vouchers. Ilena Mercer makes a cogent argument against them, an argument which I believe will hold up nicely in light of the Law of God.
To whit: School vouchers use tax-money. Tax-money is forcibly extracted not only from people who have school-age children, but from people who do not. Therefore, school voucher programs are only possible because the government takes money from those who do not willingly give it.
In economic terms this is called "coercion".
In biblical terms you call it "theft".
School vouchers are a clear violation of the 7th commandment.
Sometimes it hurts to be principled, doesn't it?
To whit: School vouchers use tax-money. Tax-money is forcibly extracted not only from people who have school-age children, but from people who do not. Therefore, school voucher programs are only possible because the government takes money from those who do not willingly give it.
In economic terms this is called "coercion".
In biblical terms you call it "theft".
School vouchers are a clear violation of the 7th commandment.
Sometimes it hurts to be principled, doesn't it?
Thursday, March 14
There He Goes Again
Doug Dahl gets out a big ole' can of whup-ass and goes after Hal Lindsey, Tim LaHaye and that gang of sincere but foolish evangelicals who hold to that silly doctrine known as "The Rapture".
This heresy originated about 160 years ago in either northern England or Scotland, (I don't remember which right now), when some poor woman began "receiving" ecstatic messages during a home Bible study. John Darby - one of the leaders of the home church - picked it up and began propogating it. When Mr. Scofield decided to incorporate it into the study notes of the Bible he published around the start of the 20th century, it entered into mainstream western evangelical thought.
Aside from the fact that the doctrine is patently unbiblical, it also engenders a kind of pathological fatalism in those Christians who adhere to it. Instead of boldly proclaiming that the whole earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the Glory of the Lord, they instead preach that Christians need to hunker down and "hang in there" because it is God's will for the world to go to hell in a hand-basket.
Kudos, Doug!
Doug Dahl gets out a big ole' can of whup-ass and goes after Hal Lindsey, Tim LaHaye and that gang of sincere but foolish evangelicals who hold to that silly doctrine known as "The Rapture".
This heresy originated about 160 years ago in either northern England or Scotland, (I don't remember which right now), when some poor woman began "receiving" ecstatic messages during a home Bible study. John Darby - one of the leaders of the home church - picked it up and began propogating it. When Mr. Scofield decided to incorporate it into the study notes of the Bible he published around the start of the 20th century, it entered into mainstream western evangelical thought.
Aside from the fact that the doctrine is patently unbiblical, it also engenders a kind of pathological fatalism in those Christians who adhere to it. Instead of boldly proclaiming that the whole earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the Glory of the Lord, they instead preach that Christians need to hunker down and "hang in there" because it is God's will for the world to go to hell in a hand-basket.
Kudos, Doug!
Wednesday, March 13
Another Presidency. Another Bombing of Iraq
According to this journalist, Saddam needs to be punished, but does that give us the right to punish every Iraqi citizen, including those who weren’t even born during the Gulf War?
Good question.
According to this journalist, Saddam needs to be punished, but does that give us the right to punish every Iraqi citizen, including those who weren’t even born during the Gulf War?
Good question.
Those who planned and executed the destruction of the WTC are guilty of violating both the 5th and the 7th commandments. The 5th commandment prohibits murder - that violation is fairly obvious. The 7th prohibits stealing and is not so obvious. However, if theft is defined as the act of preventing an individual from the free use of his own proprty, then it is fairly easy to see that the bombers stole the free use of individual lives and property.
In the same vein, the USGovernment has engaged in a 10 year-long bombing campaign against Iraq that has resulted, directly or indirectly, in the deaths of 1.5 million Iraqi citizens. How is this action of the USGovernment different from that of Al Qaeda?
When God judges the terrorists who violated his commandments by destroying the WTC and murdering 3000 non-combatants, will He not also judge the terrorists who have violated His commandments by bombing Iraq and murdering 1.5 million non-combatants?
In the same vein, the USGovernment has engaged in a 10 year-long bombing campaign against Iraq that has resulted, directly or indirectly, in the deaths of 1.5 million Iraqi citizens. How is this action of the USGovernment different from that of Al Qaeda?
When God judges the terrorists who violated his commandments by destroying the WTC and murdering 3000 non-combatants, will He not also judge the terrorists who have violated His commandments by bombing Iraq and murdering 1.5 million non-combatants?
If the idea of limited government is no longer a valid one, then Joe Sobran is certainly 'Anti-American'. However, all governments of this world are under the authority of the government of God. And any government that exceeds the authority delegated to it by God is necessarily out of line.
I am firmly convinced that the American Ideal as expressed by the Declaration of Independence is worthy or defending. I am equally convinced that USGovernment is exactly that kind of government the early patriots fought to resist, not to establish.
I am firmly convinced that the American Ideal as expressed by the Declaration of Independence is worthy or defending. I am equally convinced that USGovernment is exactly that kind of government the early patriots fought to resist, not to establish.
GWBush issued an ultimatum to the Taliban prior to commencing the bombing - turn over Bin Laden or the bombs will fall.
Does Iraq have the same opportunity to avoid becoming the next victim of American aggression, or will that sovereign country inevitably be bombed back to the stone ages, regardless if what they do?
Does Iraq have the same opportunity to avoid becoming the next victim of American aggression, or will that sovereign country inevitably be bombed back to the stone ages, regardless if what they do?
Monday, March 11
An excellent article over on Antithesis called Where was God on September 11th? At home, my 14-year-old son has really struggled with the implications of a Sovereign God and the problem of evil. This article really helped him over the hump. I suspect it will help many others as well.
A single line from this column by Joel Miller at RazorMouth put me in mind of something Hans-Herman Hoppe wrote in Democracy, the God that Failed regarding the tendency of democracies to devolve to the lowest common denominator.
Miller posits that the degeneration of the language is both a symptom and a cause of social and moral decay. (Or maybe I'm reading my own beliefs into his words.) Though I would seldom dare to contradict Sir Winston Churchill, democracy really is the worst form of government imaginable. The "ghetto-isation" of the language dramatically illustrates that thesis.
Miller posits that the degeneration of the language is both a symptom and a cause of social and moral decay. (Or maybe I'm reading my own beliefs into his words.) Though I would seldom dare to contradict Sir Winston Churchill, democracy really is the worst form of government imaginable. The "ghetto-isation" of the language dramatically illustrates that thesis.
Thursday, March 7
All of life is subject to the Lordship of Christ.
All of life is to reflect His character and radiate His glory.
WIth that in mind, how should we think about situations such as the Enron collapse. Russ Stein has some good ideas, but fails to point out that goofy government regulations - by their very nature - violate the 8th commandment, and usually the 9th and the 10th.
All of life is to reflect His character and radiate His glory.
WIth that in mind, how should we think about situations such as the Enron collapse. Russ Stein has some good ideas, but fails to point out that goofy government regulations - by their very nature - violate the 8th commandment, and usually the 9th and the 10th.
In our attempt to live as free men, we must recognise that what we believe about ourselves is of secondary importance to what we believe about our relationship to our Maker. Butler Shaffer has some very clear ideas about reclaiming self-ownership, ideas that deserve consideration. But he utterly fails to ackowledge that it is impossible for a man to be free if he worships any God other than the one who has revealed Himself to us in the Scriptures.
How can this be?
Because we are creations whereas He is the Creator. We cannot understand our role in the universe apart from this central fact. We do not belong to ourselves, we belong to Him who created us.
In spite of these criticisms, Shaffer makes some powerful points. I quote here two paragraphs that illustrate both the weakness and the strength of his position:
All of this is a way of reminding ourselves that our claims to individual autonomy – or self-ownership – must, by their very nature, find their roots deep within that realm of existential loneliness that defines the human spirit. You will make your claim – or not – on the strength of the inner resources you find therein.
Not strictly true. Self-autonomy is the single biggest lie humans believe. But otherwise, this next bit is very good....
Neither I, nor anyone else, can tell you "how" or even "whether" to assert such a claim, anymore than one can direct another to "be spontaneous."
We can, however, offer one another that which our divisive, politicized thinking has long caused us to disregard: mutual support for the protection of our sense of humanity. We have conditioned our minds to regard as transgressions either violations of our group’s interests, or those directed against identifiable minority groups. We have, in other words, so thoroughly collectivized our sense of "rights" that, if an individual who has been brutalized by the state doesn’t happen to be a member of some recognized collective, it scarcely attracts our attention.
One of the most profound fruits of the reformation was the certain knowledge that all men were creatures, and therefore made in the image of God. Even though not all willingly acknowledge Him as the Creator, each is still worthy of respect simply by virtue of being an expression of the Creator's genius.
How can this be?
Because we are creations whereas He is the Creator. We cannot understand our role in the universe apart from this central fact. We do not belong to ourselves, we belong to Him who created us.
In spite of these criticisms, Shaffer makes some powerful points. I quote here two paragraphs that illustrate both the weakness and the strength of his position:
All of this is a way of reminding ourselves that our claims to individual autonomy – or self-ownership – must, by their very nature, find their roots deep within that realm of existential loneliness that defines the human spirit. You will make your claim – or not – on the strength of the inner resources you find therein.
Not strictly true. Self-autonomy is the single biggest lie humans believe. But otherwise, this next bit is very good....
Neither I, nor anyone else, can tell you "how" or even "whether" to assert such a claim, anymore than one can direct another to "be spontaneous."
We can, however, offer one another that which our divisive, politicized thinking has long caused us to disregard: mutual support for the protection of our sense of humanity. We have conditioned our minds to regard as transgressions either violations of our group’s interests, or those directed against identifiable minority groups. We have, in other words, so thoroughly collectivized our sense of "rights" that, if an individual who has been brutalized by the state doesn’t happen to be a member of some recognized collective, it scarcely attracts our attention.
One of the most profound fruits of the reformation was the certain knowledge that all men were creatures, and therefore made in the image of God. Even though not all willingly acknowledge Him as the Creator, each is still worthy of respect simply by virtue of being an expression of the Creator's genius.
What's the deal with the Ten Commandments?
I've decided to start a new game with the family. In fact, we started today. I sent the kids out along the high street to take note of advertising billboards, magazines and posters for us to discuss this evening. The focus of the discussion will be - how does the message of this ad fit or not fit into a world governed by God's Law?
There is one particularly obnoxious ad by some italian clothing company whose name currently escapes me that features a couple in the last stages of complete undress prior to coitus. It manages to appeal to the prurient response of both hetero- and homo-sexuals.
Calvin Klein last week managed to place hideous graphic homo-erotic images on the back cover of the city's largest-circulation weekly entertainment guide.
Both companies are obstensibly selling underwear. But I think it is obvious that what they are selling is a worldview that embraces all forms of adult-consensual sex.
(For those of you in countries still graced with some sense of public modesty, consider yourselves blessed. In fact, as I think about it now, plain-ole' hetero-sexual pornography is practically a relief after the homo-erotic bombarment we suffer daily in London.)
So, the question for you my readers and my children this evening is this:
How do these images and the message they deliver either comply with or rebel against God's command?
There will be a test.
I've decided to start a new game with the family. In fact, we started today. I sent the kids out along the high street to take note of advertising billboards, magazines and posters for us to discuss this evening. The focus of the discussion will be - how does the message of this ad fit or not fit into a world governed by God's Law?
There is one particularly obnoxious ad by some italian clothing company whose name currently escapes me that features a couple in the last stages of complete undress prior to coitus. It manages to appeal to the prurient response of both hetero- and homo-sexuals.
Calvin Klein last week managed to place hideous graphic homo-erotic images on the back cover of the city's largest-circulation weekly entertainment guide.
Both companies are obstensibly selling underwear. But I think it is obvious that what they are selling is a worldview that embraces all forms of adult-consensual sex.
(For those of you in countries still graced with some sense of public modesty, consider yourselves blessed. In fact, as I think about it now, plain-ole' hetero-sexual pornography is practically a relief after the homo-erotic bombarment we suffer daily in London.)
So, the question for you my readers and my children this evening is this:
How do these images and the message they deliver either comply with or rebel against God's command?
There will be a test.
New Skin today, thanks to the folks at Blog Skins.
Parenthetically, it blows my mind to consider that a word like blog has so quickly entered the lexicon of the English-speaking world.
Parenthetically, it blows my mind to consider that a word like blog has so quickly entered the lexicon of the English-speaking world.
Friday, March 1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
