Archive for the For God Category
I highly recommend Blair Ridge Baptist Church. The pastor’s teaching is sound and the congregation is loving, gracious, and hospitable. Blair Ridge is definitely what we will miss most about Cedar Rapids.
This was done by the History Channel (it’s part one of a two-part documentary). There’s no editorial commentary; it’s almost straight news footage from the day of the assassination and the two or three days afterward. Part two deals with the Warren Commission and the various conspiracy theories.
A movie was released for a one-night showing last night (Jan 19, 2015). Unfortunately, I was unable to attend, but Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis talks about it here (there is also a link in that article to a review of the movie that’s quite good).
It is important for the secularist to tear down the truth of the Bible, even to the point of denying that it actually records history. Many secular (and, unfortunately, quite a few Christian) scholars say that the Exodus never happened as described in the Bible; it’s just a collection of myths developed over the centuries to justify the Hebrews’ taking over the Land of Canaan. They claim that no archaeological evidence supports the narrative recorded in the Book of Exodus.
They say this because they assume a date for the Exodus that is quite late (they say it happened in 1290 B.C.), and when archaeologists search around for evidence of a mass migration of Hebrews from Egypt to Canaan, they find none.
They’re problem is that they assign too late a date to the Exodus, based on presuppostions concerning Egyptian history. Here is an article that sums up the situation. See the movie, and AiG’s review of it, too, for more information.
One of the arguments (which isn’t really an argument) that proponents of “same-sex marriage” put forth is an emotional appeal that follows along the lines of: “So, you don’t support marriage equality for homosexuals; I bet you would have opposed the repeal of the miscegenation laws, that prevented mixed-race couples from marrying”. The assertion is usually some variation of that statement.
It is an invalid comparison, however, because the situation is different. With the miscegenation laws, a white man could marry a white woman, but a black man could not marry a white woman. In the same way, a black man could marry a black woman, but a white man could not marry a black woman. The white man was granted a privelege by the government that the government then denied to the black man, and vice versa.
With regard to same-sex marriage, heterosexuals do not have a right to marry someone of the same sex that is then denied to homosexuals. However, homosexuals are not prohibited from marrying someone of the opposite sex. The situation we have at present is “marriage equality”.
What the proponents of same-sex marriage wish for is an expantion of the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples. If they succeed*, then the situation will still be “marriage equality”, since there would be no reason to deny heterosexual partners the “right” to have a government-licensed marriage (to add legal advantages to a business partnership, for example).
The problem is that “marriage” has a certain definition: it is a heterosexual union for the purposes of companionship and procreation. That’s clear from Scripture. But even for someone who rejects Truth, the definition of marriage still holds. Marriage is how society manages the bearing and rearing of children. It works pretty well, overall.
In addition, relinquishing to the government the authority to redefine words is unwise. The government always seeks to increase its power over those living within its borders, and the ability to control the language is a key component to its agenda. When people can no longer communicate effectively, then they are more easily divided and suppressed.
*which they apparently will, through the courts; the “debate” over same-sex marriage ended with the defenders of definitional marriage–as a heterosexual union–winning at the ballot box. Their democratic victory has since been overturned in various places by the intervention of Federal judges
Dr. Robert Murphy has a blog called “Free Advice”. The content usually concerns economic issues, but he recently posted about God’s Salvation.
If you believe in God, but have a vague sense that as long as you’re not a really awful person and usually try to do the right thing you’ll make the cut…I empathize with that perspective because it’s a natural, earthly way to look at it. But it’s not what the New Testament says. I would encourage people who think Jesus was a wise teacher to read the above passages in context to understand this radical and initially counterintuitive perspective.
Of course, certain folks have to be snotty in the comments, based on their delusional belief in self-creating infinite universes and self-organizing information.