If this is news to you, see the post Simplifying. Although this blog will remain accessible until mid-2018, I will not be doing any more posting to it. All my writing is now focused on books which you can find here.
The glory and greatness of a woman is not in being able to do what a man can do, but in being able to do what a man cannot.
Why then does “Women’s History Month” celebrate the sort of accomplishments that men are equally capable of achieving?
Are women and men in competition with each other? Does either the apple or the orange have to justify itself? Do we want apples to be more like oranges?
Can the equal worth of apples and oranges only be established if we can make an apple pie from oranges, or orange marmalade from apples?
Why is it that the quest for diversity seems to be a quest for making everything the same? Are not apples and oranges already diverse?
Both apples and oranges are glorious…but each in its own way.
You would think that the secularists in America would resist Islam as much as they do Christianity since secularism is opposed to religious values having currency in the public square…and both Islam and Christianity are religions. Nevertheless, it’s far easier to find a secularist who expresses outrage at “Islamophobia” than it is to find one who is outraged about “Christophobia.” (Do they even admit that there is such a thing as the latter?)
The explanation for the alliance between secularism and Islam can be found in what these two ideologies have in common: opposition to the lordship of Christ.
The Bible calls such a spirit “antichrist.”
(1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 1:7)
If all the information I had about the U.S. president was what I read and heard from our nation’s major media outlets in the last six months, I would think that our former president could do no wrong and that our current one can do no right – that our former president was a decent man, worthy of the utmost respect, and that our current president lacks decency, and is worthy of little respect and perhaps even contempt. This is the sense I would have from major news sources.
When I reflect on what I’m being told about these two presidents, I have to ask myself, “Is it reasonable to believe that the two men are being judged objectively? As a person keenly interested in truth, I cannot help but conclude that those who are reporting to me on the activities of these two men are not objective observers. They are taking sides in the battle. If the differences between the two men were as stark – as night and day different – as the news providers are suggesting, the same country could not have elected both men.
No one wants to watch a football game in which the referees make their calls based on their own personal team loyalties. No one wants to watch baseball if the umpires are “homers” – that is, giving the benefit of every call to the home team. It’s not edifying to keep up with current events if the selected facts are alternately emphasized or deemphasized in order to consistently favor one side of the argument.
Alas, as someone recently said, “If we don’t keep up with the news, we’re uninformed; but if we do keep up with the news, we’re misinformed.” When is the news not news? When those providing it to you shape it according to their biases.
Yes, I am aware that in this day and age there are alternative news sources, but that takes time that one often doesn’t have, and even when you find an alternative source you’re sometimes just exchanging one set of reporting biases for another.
The point is that we live in a mendacious world, and in an increasingly mendacious time. If you are a person who cares about truth, be careful what information you consume and the sources from which it comes. Better to have a little information and know that it’s true than to have a lot of information that suppresses and distorts truth.
This is just one more reason I love the Bible: it is…good…news…that is 100% reliable.
I’ve been reflecting on the “women’s march,” held Saturday primarily in Washington D.C., but in other cities as well. It’s not so much that I’ve chosen to reflect on this march; it’s just that the sights and sounds of it won’t go away.
I have found these sights and sounds quite disturbing. By “sights and sounds,” I mean the snapshots and video clips that have been plastered across so many media outlets. Disturbing enough on their own, they are made even more disturbing by the fact that so many children were brought to the event, and that so many other children have been exposed to its images and speeches as I have been.
How do children mentally process such an event? What do they think of the strange hats so many of the participants were wearing? Who is explaining to the children what those hats represent? What do the children think of the foul language used by so many of the speakers? Are children familiar with these words? And what do the children think of the tone in which most of the speakers addressed the crowd? Are children comforted by the sort of bitter invective and taunting mockery that spewed from the microphones?
Apparently, there were anti-abortion women’s organizations who wanted to help sponsor the march, but the pro-abortion women’s organizations would not let them. Thus the march’s focus on women’s rights stopped at a woman’s womb. Only after a female escapes her mother’s womb will she have any rights. Until then, she’d better watch out. (Only she can’t watch out because she’s completely defenseless.)
I have heard repeatedly from supporters of this march that it was about the protection of women’s rights, but I have to conclude that it was just as much about the destruction of children’s rights. These include the right of a child to be protected from profane and vulgar speech, the right to be shielded from discussion of sexual matters until an appropriate age, and even the right to be born once he or she has been conceived.
Thus the march was more anti-children than it was pro-women.
And while I don’t excuse the crude and vile speeches, signs, and props used by the women at this event, I grieve deeply for the sins of men who, instead of being proper fathers and husbands, have so mistreated women in the past that some of them have been driven to such displays of anger and bitterness in the present.
May God forgive our sins and grant us repentance.
Someone named John Noble has been interacting with me beginning here. I have been responding to him there, but his latest comment had a number of points. So, I thought it best to break down those points and deal with them one by one.
I’m going to copy what he wrote, put it in italics, and then respond one point at a time.
Mike you seem to contradict yourself. You want people to believe you when you have said in the beginning that you want all to believe in Jesus and not you.
John the Baptist wanted his hearers to believe in Jesus, not him. The apostle Paul wanted his listeners to believe in Jesus, not him. When you tell your neighbor about Jesus, you want your neighbor to believe in Jesus, not you. Yes, people had to believe what John was saying in order to get to believe in Jesus. Same for Paul. Same for you. Same for me. We all hope to be bridges to Jesus, but He is the destination.
Don’t hold views about him just live in him to experience the kingdom within.
It is indeed possible to hold views about Jesus without experiencing His kingdom, but it is not possible to experience His kingdom without holding views about Him. Faith is viewing Him with our hearts (“fixing our eyes on Jesus” – Hebrews 12:1-2).
You also said you were once a Pastor in that case you had an anointing for those you were pastoring but you are now saying you are just a disciple. The lord relationship with you on these are different. In the latter you have equipment for your growth and development whiles in the former you get the equipment for the commission of ,the church for which you have been anointed.
In the kingdom of God, no human being has pastoral authority over another. The Lord is the pastor. We are all disciples. Yes, we each try to share what we have learned with others, especially with those who lack the knowledge we have been graced to learn. But none of us is set over others of us. We are all brothers and sisters in the Lord.
Jesus is more that our lord. He is God, our savior, our master, our lord, our brother, our father, our king and our life. He desires us to relate to him in all these forms.
The bible is the Word of God written down. But Jesus is the Word personality and we commune with him to receive the Word substance of the Spirit, which transforms us unto his likeness. I am not saying don’t read the bible but Christ said the scripture talks about him. The scripture was there when he came but they refuse and did not recognize him. The scripture is fulfilled in Jesus Christ on his coming and in him is the kingdom in all creations.
Yes, the Bible testifies of Jesus – and it is Jesus who is Lord, not the Bible. But the Bible does not become obsolete once we recognize Jesus for who He is. Even Jesus used the Scripture to resist the temptations of the devil after He had been filled with the Holy Spirit.
We have the Bible – which was written by prophets and apostles by the inspiration of the Spirit – and we have the Spirit, too. Thus by two witnesses our conscience is assured of the things we learn. The Bible is a safeguard to help us be sure that we are not misunderstanding things that the Holy Spirit is telling us. And the Holy Spirit is a safeguard because our own minds are insufficient to assimilate all that is in the Bible and apply it to any and every situation we face.
In 2 Corinthians 13:1, Paul writes (alluding to Deuteronomy 19:15) “…EVERY FACT IS TO BE CONFIRMED BY THE TESTIMONY OF TWO OR THREE WITNESSES. In this age, therefore, God has given us three witnesses by which we can discern His will each day in order that we might do it: 1) the Scriptures, 2) the Holy Spirit, 3) conscience. When they are in agreement, we have strong assurance about His will for us…and His will is always righteousness. That is, He always wants us to do right, to do good. We are not wise to reject any of these three witnesses. They are all important.
By these witnesses, we actualize the lordship of Christ in our daily lives. By them, we experience and demonstrate the kingdom of God.
This concludes the series of historic quotes, assembled and published by Hobby Lobby, indicating that Christianity was prized by the early leaders of this country to the same degree that Secularism is prized by its current leaders.
I put “hidden in plain view” in the title because such quotes as those I’ve given are found easily enough – it’s just that today’s secular media won’t publish them. Therefore, young people grow up ignorant of this critical aspect of our history as a nation.
Only by contrasting the words of America’s original leaders with the words of its current leaders can you see so clearly the distance we have fallen. Here again is one of the quotes I gave you:
And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my county when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever.
– Thomas Jefferson
If the early leaders were thus concerned about God’s judgment on them, then how much more we ought to be concerned about it.
If I shut up the heavens so that there is no rain, or if I command the locust to devour the land, or if I send pestilence among My people, and My people who are called by My name humble themselves and pray and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
– 2 Chronicles 7:13-14
It wasn’t just that early America saw itself as Christian – outsiders agreed!
The Americans combine the notions of Christianity and of liberty so intimately in their minds that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other.
– Alexis de Tocqueville, French observer of America in 1831, author of Democracy in America
There is no country in which the people are so religious as in the United States. …The great number of religious societies existing in the United States is truly surprising: there are some of them for everything; for instance, societies to distribute the Bible; to distribute tracts; to encourage religious journals; to convert, civilize, educate…to take care of their widows and orphans; to preach, extend, purify, preserve, reform the faith; to build chapels, endow congregations, support seminaries…to establish Sunday schools…to prevent drunkenness, etc.
– Achille Murat, French observer of America in 1832
What French observers would say such things about us today?
Source: Hobby Lobby full-page newspaper advertisement July 4, 2016
Here’s the way Harvard and Yale used to direct their students. Wish they still did.
Let every student be plainly instructed and earnestly pressed to consider well the main end of his life and studies is to know God and Jesus Christ which is eternal life (John 17:3) and therefore to lay Christ in the bottom as the only foundation of all sound knowledge and learning. And seeing the Lord only giveth wisdom, let every one seriously set himself by prayer in secret to seek it of Him (Proverbs 2, 3). Every one shall so exercise himself in reading the Scriptures twice a day that he shall be ready to give such an account of his proficiency therein.
– Harvard 1636 Student Guidelines
All the scholars are required to live a religious and blameless life according to the rules of God’s word, diligently reading the Holy Scriptures, that fountain of Divine light and truth, and constantly attending all the duties of religion.
– Yale 1787 Student Guidelines
It is possible for any institution to depart as far from its original values as these have?
Source: Hobby Lobby full-page newspaper advertisement July 4, 2016
This is the way the U. S. Congress used to talk. Can’t it talk that way again…if voters want it to?
We are a Christian people…not because the law demands it, not to gain exclusive benefits or to avoid legal disabilities but from choice and education; and in a land thus universally Christian, what is to be expected, what desired, but that we shall pay due regard to Christianity?”
– Senate Judiciary Committee Report, January 19, 1853
At the time of the adoption of the Constitution and the amendments, the universal sentiment was that Christianity should be encouraged. …In this age there can be no substitute for Christianity. …That was the religion of the founders of the republic and they expected it to remain the religion of their descendants.
– House Judiciary Committee Report, March 27, 1854
When was the U. S. government shorn of its Christian orientation? Who voted to change America from a Christian nation to a secular nation? Since the founders of this republic expected Christianity to remain the religion of their descendants, can’t we go back to it?
Source: Hobby Lobby full-page newspaper advertisement July 4, 2016