Pondering Morals, Values, and Ethics

As a Sunday School teacher and “wannabe” apologist, I have spent a fair amount of time pondering the moral dimension with consideration of many differing worldviews. In doing so, I have ascertained that, as a society, we have been witness to a tremendous amount of moral dilution as the result of moral relativism. While I believe in an absolute, objective moral law as so handed down by God to man, there are many in our society who have no belief in God and thereby attribute whatever moral code that might exist to evolutionary sociology. Therefore, according to the rationale of the atheist or the existentialist, our moral code was created by man to reflect that which was expedient for man. When one attributes the development of a moral code to man, the moral code is no longer objective, it becomes subjective and is malleable to become whatever is expedient for people. Hence, we have moral relativism, and the constancy of an objective moral code is nullified.

Values, as I understand them, are not necessarily founded in objective morality. Therefore, a person has the freedom of will to embrace and value something that by an objective measure is not necessarily moral but by a subjective measure is potentially moral. Beyond that end, people have the freedom of will to value something that is, by all measures, immoral. This is where we find ourselves in a conundrum. Today’s ethics are, too frequently in my opinion, based upon a subjective/relative moral code or upon a societal value system that is subject to the prevailing and always changing winds of popular opinion. The unfortunate side effect is that sometimes the right thing is not the popular thing and the wrong thing is called ethical.

Hope

My grandmother finished her race on February 11, 2009. The last mile was hard. Her body was broken; her spirit was weak. But, I believe, that although weary from her race, that she is now in the midst of a new morning; a morning without end. I will miss her, until I see her again.

Random Thought: February 6, 2009

I have determined in my heart, in my mind, and in my soul that I would rather live the remainder of my life believing in God— a transcendental entity greater and wiser than myself— and to later, in death, be proven wrong than to live the remainder of my life believing in nothing and, in death, to be proven right. Because, for me, I have come to believe that it is far better to be a fool in this life, having hope for a life eternal, rather than to be seen as wise in this world, yet having no hope for a better time in a better place. For if, in death, I find nothing beyond my grave, what have I lost to have lived believing? I have lost nothing. However, if in death, there is a heaven for those who have believed while living, what have I gained? I have gained everything.

Blogging the Bible: I've prepared a place for you.

This past weekend, I had the privilege of leading our church’s devotion for about 40 or so people at a local nursing home. As I read and thought and prayed about the devotion, I was lead to some very familiar text, but this time, I saw the text differently than I had seen it before. I suppose, at some level, I began to see the brevity of my own life in spite of the fact that I was standing before an audience much older than myself.

Man that is born of a woman is of few days, and full
of trouble.--- Job 14:1

Perhaps, something else that made this devotion different was the fact that my own grandmother was in the crowd this day. She is eighty-six years old and has suffered with double pneumonia for the past month or so. She is doing much better now however, she is still very sick.

In the time that I spent studying for this lesson, I began to think about the good times that we have shared over the years. I thought about family reunions, Thanksgiving dinners, and Christmases that we’ve spent together. As much as one would like to focus on the good times and the fun that we have in this life, I was taken by the knowledge that there is more to this life than good times and fun times. We have hard times in this life too. We carry the burdens of the trials of this life. We suffer through afflictions and times wherein we are trapped within a broken body. We know the pain of loss and feel the pain of death. We suffer the pain of death when a mother or father, a brother or sister, a husband or wife, or a friend or child passes from this life to the next. Job was a man familiar with trials, familiar with sickness, and familiar with the pain of loss. Job knew of that which he spoke when he said that our lives of “full of trouble.”

As I spoke to the crowd, I thought about the fact that I will soon have another birthday. I considered the idea that my grandmother remembered the night that I was born. I considered the idea that she could remember the first time that she held me. I thought about the milestones of my own life, each of which seemed like they were just a year or two ago, a month or two ago, or a week or two ago. I guess what I am saying is this, it seems like I got married only a couple of months ago, but this summer I will celebrate my twelfth anniversary. Twelve years came and passed, I blinked twice and here we are— older, wiser, and the parents of two beautiful children. Time really does seem to accelerate the older you get. Job knew what he was talking about when he said, “That man born of a woman is of few days.”

While we do enjoy good times in this life, we also suffer through difficult times in this life; times of trials, times of sickness, and times of loss. Yet, through the good times and through the hard times we can lay hold of the promises of God and have joy through trials, have peace through illnesses, and have hope through times of loss.

Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.--- John 14:1-3

This promise of heaven allows us to have joy, to have peace, and to have hope. To receive this promise, we need only to have faith. In spite of the trials, in spite of the illnesses, and in spite of the pain that we feel when we lose a loved one—we can have joy, peace, and hope—if only we can believe. I do believe. Do you believe?

As I studied these three familiar verses I focused on the simple sentence spoken by Christ when he said, “I go to prepare a place for you.” Over and over in my mind I pondered the phrase and realized that there are many who believe that Christ has gone to prepare a place for them, yet they have never prepared a place for Him. Folks, we cannot receive the promise of a place prepared for us unless we first prepare a place for Christ.

14 For this cause I bow my knees unto the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, 16 That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man; 17 That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love--- Ephesians 3:14-17

Paul prayed that “Christ may dwell in [our] hearts by faith.” Folks, we must lay the foundations of faith and repentance in our hearts. We must construct the pillars of a spoken testimony and an unspoken testimony in our hearts. We must prepare a place for Christ before He prepares a place for us.

In closing, I want to leave you with one last thought. It is one thing, to testify to a friend, or even before the church, about all of the great things that Christ has done for you, but it is an entirely different thing to have to stand before the throne of God to give an account of the things that you have done for Christ. What have you done for the Lord? Have you prepared a place for Him?

Random Thoughts: Why sit we here until we die?

"And there were four leprous men at the entering in of the gate: and they said one to another, Why sit we here until we die? If we say, We will enter into the city, then the famine is in the city, and we shall die there: and if we sit still here, we die also. Now therefore come, and let us fall unto the host of the Syrians: if they save us alive, we shall live; and if they kill us, we shall but die."--- 2Kings 7:3-4

Sometimes, I suppose, all of us have moments of decision, just as I sit here now in the midst of such a moment of decision; a moment that might be better described as a moment of indecision. I hate times like these. In times like these, I wish I was more like some people who I have known in my life. We all know them. People who decide what they want and what they need. People who decide to do something then just go after it. For them, everything just seems to work out. On the other hand, I am the type of person who wrestles with every decision. Unfortunately, every wrestling match that I have against a major life decision ends in a draw. So here I sit, neither a winner nor a loser; my life unchanged but the burden remaining constant.

For me, it is not that I am afraid to make a decision. It is that I am afraid to make the wrong decision. Like everyone, I’ve made bad decisions before. I’ve made the wrong decision to do something. I’ve made the wrong decision to not do something. Even though some things have not always worked out for me as I had hoped they would work out, the Lord has been there for me— even when others weren’t.

The Apostle Paul said, “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” Therefore, I believe that the story of the four lepers in 2Kings chapter seven was given for people like me who find themselves where I find myself, having a desire to stay where I am but also having a desire to do more than I am doing now. I believe this story was given to people like me who want and need to make a decision but are afraid of making the wrong decision.

As the story goes, four lepers had been banished from the camp in the midst of a great famine. They found themselves dying in their position and place while doing what they had always done before. They had only four options. They could stay where they were and die, they could go into the camp of the Syrians and be killed or die of starvation, or they could go into the camp of the Syrians and possibly find sustenance. In other words, they could stay where they were and die, or they could decide to step out and maybe live. In that light, they really had nothing to lose.

Certainly some would start to psychoanalyze me. Perhaps my situation is not as dire as the situation wherein the lepers found themselves. Perhaps my decision is not one of life and death. On the other hand, maybe mine is a decision wherein the reward lies in the challenges that it presents and the security that it could provide.

That being said, the four lepers decided to go into the camp. Upon entering, they realized that the Lord had gone before them and prepared for them a way. All that they had needed was lain before them just inside the gate. Not only were the lepers able to provide for themselves, they were also able to provide for others as well. Had these men decided to continue what they were doing, they would have died where they were.

While it is against my nature to make a difficult decision without being hyper-analytical, I am going to do it, and I am going to trust the Lord. As I said before, while I desire to remain where I am, it is also my desire to do more than I am doing. To that end, I believe that the Lord will use this time and this decision to help me and to help me to help others.

So why would I write such a post? I suppose because I believe that there will be someone like me who will read this post. Someone who is struggling to make a decision who needs a bump or a nudge to stand up and to move forward having faith in God. While I decided to give my life to the Lord many years ago, perhaps someone reading this has not. Maybe this post is for that person more than it is for me. We must never forget that there is nothing more tragic than the thought that some do perish while lying just outside the gate while it is well within their power to enter in.

May God Bless Israel

"The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him."

--- G.K. Chesterton 1911---

Morality in America: The Snare of Existentialism.

In no way, would I consider myself to be a great student of philosophy. But in many ways, I would consider myself to be a somewhat astute observer of modern society. Like some, and unfortunately unlike many others, I am gravely concerned by the fact that the once tightly woven moral fabric of America is coming apart at the seams.

From time to time, and hopefully more frequently throughout the winter, I have had the opportunity to listen to Dr. Ravi Zacharias. Dr. Zacharias is, unlike me, a great student of philosophy. His teachings have allowed me to better understand the philosophical underpinnings of my observations. I want to credit Dr. Zacharias here for his contributions to my fledgling understanding, in relative terms, of various philosophical constructs that shape many of the moral systems that are guiding both, our society and the individuals that comprise it.

Perhaps, no other philosophical construct has been more damaging to the moral fabric of this nation than that of Existentialism. This construct, for our purposes, can be further subdivided into Theistic Existentialism and Atheistic Existentialism. Despite subtleties and nuance, the end result of both is generally the same.

In Theistic Existentialism, there is an outward acknowledgement that God does exist, but there is also a built in presupposition that God cannot be understood, and therefore His doctrines and moral code cannot be rightly divided and applied to our society. The end result of this philosophical mindset is, that while there may be a God, His moral code is not applicable to us because His moral code cannot be deciphered. Therefore, it is up to the individual to devise his own morality.

On the other hand, Atheistic Existentialism is constructed around the ideology that there is no God. In Atheistic Existentialism, because there an assumption that there is no God, there is not, and cannot be, an absolute moral code by which man must live. In other words, whether Theistic or Atheistic, Existentialism ultimately frees the vain and evil imaginations of individuals to devise, revise, or otherwise negatively influence the morality of the individual and the nation.

While both, the Theistic and Atheistic Existentialist might use broadly accepted cultural norms in the development of his or her moral code, the influences of Theism upon accepted cultural norms is diminished by the volume and pervasiveness of Existentialism. This leads to a gross dilution of Godly influences in the establishment of these accepted cultural norms. Therefore, the Existentialist ultimately develops, or measures, his moral system against the moral systems of other individuals who have also arrived at their system of morality in the same way; i.e. by comparison to the cultural norm. That being said, the cultural norms have, over the years, dramatically shifted away from the mandates of the Bible and the consequences thereof are evident.

Among the problems with Existentialism is the fact that cultural norms are constantly in flux. There is no moral constant; no unchanging pole to which one’s moral compass will always point. Can one rely on a moral compass whose needle constantly drifts in pursuit of ever changing cultural norms? Can one better navigate life with a moral compass that points to a singular and constant point of reference; that is, the doctrines and mandates of God? While the construct of Existentialism provides maximum freedom of self-expression and individuality, it fails miserably in providing any sense of direction or guidance for those who follow this methodology, assuming that there is a method to this philosophy. On the other hand, while self-expression and personal liberty are somewhat constrained by submission to divine will, Christianity provides maximum direction and guidance for those who follow the methodologies of the faith.

Unfortunately, a great portion of the American populace rebels against any external moral constraint that may be imposed upon an individual’s freedom of self-expression or their capacities to satisfy personal desires. That being said, many Existentialists, probably more specifically Atheistic Existentialists, are not satisfied to merely not conform with Biblical mandates. Rather, they vehemently defy Biblical mandates and shift the cultural norm further away from the moral code prescribed for us by God. This cycle is perpetual, and because the vain and evil imaginations of men are limitless, we are spiraling toward moral anarchy; a system without constraint wherein the individual is unguided and the nation is without direction.

Blogging the Bible: The Mount of Olives

Recently, I pondered the question, “If I had just one day to visit Israel and could only visit one place, where would I go?” As I thought about the question, one place came to mind over and over again. If I had the opportunity to visit but one place in the Holy Lands, it would be the Mount of Olives.

There are many reasons why I would choose the Mount of Olives. Some of the reasons focus on past events. Other reasons focus on future events. In any case, I find the region purely fascinating.

The Mount of Olives is situated just a few hundred yards to the east of the site of the old Temple Mount. From the western slope of the Mount of Olives, one could look down into the Kidron Valley. This entire region has, since the time of King Josiah, been a cemetery wherein, over the centuries, one hundred and fifty thousand people have been buried. Most of the tombs are marked by small flat stones with Hebrew inscriptions.

The first mention of the Mount of Olives in the Old Testament, as far as I can recall, was when David fled Jerusalem to ascend the Mount of Olives during Absalom’s rebellion. As David fled, he no doubt ran through the region of the Kidron Valley before climbing the face of the Mount of Olives where he wept with his head covered. Realizing that this area was not yet designated to be a burial ground, I have still wondered if David still might have spoken of the Kidron Valley when he said, “Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death.”

In the Books of the Kings, the Mount of Olives becomes a stage whereon Israel’s wisest king did a very unintelligent thing and whereon Israel’s youngest king did a very courageous thing. Solomon, having fallen in the practice of idol worship, built a temple to the false gods on the Mount of Olives. Josiah, just eight years old when he ascended to the throne after the assassination of his father Amon, tore down the altar that Solomon had built. How different would this world be if we, as Christians, had the courage of Josiah?

In the eighth chapter of the Book of Nehemiah, brave men who, returned from exile, withstood criticism and conspiracy to prevent them from building a wall, gathered olive branches from the fruitful trees on the mountain for the Feast of Tabernacles. The Feast of Tabernacles commemorates Israel’s forty-year journey through the wilderness and is a joyous celebration observed at the end of the harvest. How different would this world be if we, as Christians, were that thankful for God’s bountiful blessings that He has bestowed upon us?

In the thirty-seventh chapter of Ezekiel, the old prophet saw a vision of the dead resurrected to be made a great army, and he learned that his hope, and the hope of his people, was in the Lord. The Bible does not say where Ezekiel saw this vision, but I have often wondered to myself if the “valley of dry bones” was the Kidron Valley and the vast cemetery therein. We live in a world today where we have no vision; where we have no hope. How different would this world be if we, as Christians, could see what Ezekiel saw? How different would this world be if we, as Christians, would learn what Ezekiel learned?

The Mount of Olives was prominent in the life of Christ. It was on the Mount of Olives that the Pharisees charged Christ to judge the adulterous woman. It was there that Christ knelt to write in the sand. With just a few words, Christ turned the judgment of the Pharisees inward and they themselves were condemned. How different would this world be if each of us, as Christians, looked introspectively and condemned our own iniquity before condemning another for their iniquity? On the side of that mountain, that woman learned the deeper meaning of grace. How different would this world be if we, as Christians, gave to others the same grace that Christ has given us?

It was on the Mount of Olives that Christ instructed the apostles regarding our present and our future as though it was His past. It was there that Christ warned of wars and rumours of wars, of famines, of pestilences, and of earthquakes in diverse places. It was there also that Christ promised the ingathering of His elect from the four winds and from one end of heaven to the other. How different would our world be if each of us would heed His warnings and holdfast to His promises?

The Garden of Gethsemane is on the Mount of Olives. Gethsemane literally translates to mean “olive press.” It was in the Garden of Gethsemane, where under the weight of our burdens, Christ was pressed from without and within. As He prayed for himself and for us, even His sweat became as drops of blood. How different would this world be if each of us, as Christians, bore some of Christ’s burden?

It was in the Garden of Gethsemane that Christ was betrayed by the kiss of a friend. How different would our world be if we, as Christians, quit betraying Christ with mere lip service to our faith?

The first chapter of the Book of Acts tells us that Christ ascended into heaven from the Mount of Olives. As the crowd looked on, the angels proclaimed, “This same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.” How different would this world be if its people believed the proclamation of the angels?

If this were all that was written of the Mount of Olives, it would still be first on my list of places to go if I could spend just one day in the Holy Land. However, there is more written; not written of times past but rather of times future.

While the Book of Acts records the ascension of Christ from the Mount of Olives, the 14th chapter of the Book of Zechariah prophesizes that “in the day of battle” that the Lord himself will descend from heaven and that “his feet shall stand in that day upon the mount of Olives.” Zechariah details that the presence of the Lord upon the mountain will trigger an earthquake that will open a great valley, running east and west through the Mount of Olives. Zechariah also says, “and it shall be in that day, that living waters shall go out from Jerusalem; half of them toward the former sea (the Dead Sea), and half of them toward the hinder sea (the Mediterranean Sea).” This water will flow through the valley that was created when the Lord descended onto the Mount of Olives. How different would this world be if its people lived their lives as though they believed the prophecy of Zechariah?

In the 47th chapter of the Book of Ezekiel, the prophet expands upon the vision of Zechariah. Ezekiel tells that the water that fills the valley issues out from beneath the altar in the temple. For a thousand cubits, the water is as only ankle deep. Then the water becomes as deep as the knees, then as deep as the loins, and then so deep that one could only swim in the waters. This, to me, is a picture of our spiritual lives. The shallow waters represent our Christian walk. The waters that are knee deep represent our prayer lives. The waters that are as deep as our “loins” represent what it is to be a fruitful Christian. When the waters are so deep that one can only swim in them, it is representative of the idea of allowing the Holy Spirit to have control over our lives. How different would this world be if each of us who profess Christianity would venture into the deeper waters of our faith?

In Support of Israel

And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.--- Genesis 12:3

Folks, I want to take just a moment to state my total support for the people of Israel. One cannot watch the news of the day without seeing reports of the escalation of tensions between Israel and the Palestinian terror group Hamas. Unfortunately, major media outlets are misrepresenting Israel as the aggressor in this conflict. Such reporting is reflective of thinly veiled, if not overt anti-Semitism on the part of the media. Such biased reporting is fanning the flames of anti-Semitism as demonstrated by recent protests in countries such as Iraq, Lebanon, Egypt, Bahrain, Sweden, Switzerland, Spain, Germany, Denmark, and the United States (New York City).

The media have been deceptive in their reporting. The media reports that “Israel has been disproportionate” in its aggression toward the Palestinians. However, they greatly minimize the fact that Hamas has been firing an increasing number of rockets into Israel. These rockets were routinely killing Jewish civilians. When will the media be truthful enough to report that Israel is not the aggressor? When will the media be honest enough to report that Israel is acting in defense of its people?

In 1988, Hamas organized for the purpose of destroying the nation of Israel and the Jewish people. The purpose of Hamas was spelled out in The Charter of Allah: The Platform of the Islamic Resistance Movement. The following excerpt from this charter clearly defines the intentions of Hamas:

"Israel will rise and will remain erect until Islam eliminates it as it had eliminated its predecessors. The Islamic World is burning. It is incumbent upon each one of us to pour some water, little as it may be, with a view of extinguishing as much of the fire as he can, without awaiting action by the others.”--- The Charter of Allah

There is no other interpretation of this excerpt than this, it is the desire of Hamas to exterminate the Jewish people. There is no desire on the part of this faction of the Palestinian people- or on the part of this faction of the Islamic people- to live peaceably with the Jews.

As Christians, I do not believe that we can be silent nor non-committal. We must stand in support of the people of Israel, and we must demand that our own nation’s leaders stand in support of Israel. Thus far, since the beginning of this most recent conflict, President-elect Obama has been deafeningly silent. In short time, he will have to make a decision. Will he support or condemn Hamas? Will he support or condemn Israel? I hope that he will make the right decision, but I am afraid that he will not.

The Misguided Moral-Relativism of Young Evangelicals

First of all, I am a Christian. Secondly, I am a conservative. Thirdly, I am a Republican. This construct is deliberate and is illustrative of the fact that I am, and always will be, primarily influenced by my theology before my political ideology and by my political ideology before my party identification. The fact of this matter allows me to speak, with some amount of authority, regarding the rhetorical, misguided moral-relativism that I have heard emerging from “young evangelicals” who have rose in support of Barack Obama.

With a certain air of over-confidence, these “young evangelicals” have broken with the orthodoxy-of-old to proclaim that they “care” about a wider array of social issues than “just abortion and gay marriage.” Proclaiming enlightenment, these “young evangelicals” have embraced the causes du jour of “poverty, the environment, and AIDS” while liberalizing their stances on abortion and gay marriage. Ultimately, the “young evangelicals” have demonstrated their lack of understanding of the Bible and the fundamental doctrines of Christianity. Furthermore, they have also demonstrated that they do not understand the issues, conservativism, liberalism, the nature of government, or the nature of politics.

In the remainder of this post, I will reconcile each of these issues relative to the “rightly divided” word of God, relative to a variety of ideological stances, and relative to the natures of government and politics.

Number one: Abortion has become, in a familiar sense, a religious ritual for liberalism and the Democratic Party.

A disturbingly large number of self-identified evangelical Christians did cast their vote for the most liberal and most radically pro-choice presidential candidate ever. In doing so, they have helped to set the pro-life movement back more than five years. In 2003, President Bush and an overwhelming majority of Congress voted to enact a ban on the practice of partial birth abortion. President-elect Obama, on the other hand, openly supports radical legislation called the “Freedom of Choice Act” which would significantly ease restrictions on partial birth abortion and will over-ride parental notification laws presently on the books that restrict access to abortion services by minors. Furthermore, this legislation will work to ensure that babies who are born alive following a “botched abortion” will be denied life preserving medical attention, and it will allow doctors and pharmacists to be sanctioned or prosecuted for failing to provide abortion or emergency contraceptive services. It is tragic that evangelicals, of any age, were part and parcel to enabling the consideration and probable passage of this legislation.

“Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Behold, I will bring evil upon this place, the which whosoever heareth, his ears shall tingle. Because they have forsaken me, and have estranged this place, and have burned incense in it unto other gods, whom neither they nor their fathers have known, nor the kings of Judah, and have filled this place with the blood of innocents; They have built also the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings unto Baal, which I commanded not, nor spake it, neither came it into my mind.”--- Jeremiah 19:3-5

This account from the Book of Jeremiah demonstrates the depravity of the world at the time of Jeremiah and can easily be extrapolated to demonstrate the depravity of the world in which we live today. Since Roe v. Wade, the “blood” of forty million “innocents” has been shed in the name of the false gods of liberalism and feminism. At one time, the ballots of voting Christians were the singularly most powerful voice for these “innocents” against this practice; a practice so barbaric that it defied even God’s own imagination. Through it all, I am saddened and greatly troubled that this group of “young evangelicals” have forsaken the cause of the unborn; the most innocent among us. Just as Pilate symbolically washed his hands of the blood of Christ, so too will these “young evangelicals” try to wash their hands of the “blood of [these] innocents.” Just as Pilate’s hands were still yet stained, so too are the hands of any of these supposed “evangelicals” who have voted for a pro-abortion candidate.

Number 2: Gay marriage is a means to an end; it is not the end.

As is the nature of modern politics, Barack Obama is beholden to many special interest groups. The gay lobby is one such special interest group. Certainly, the gay lobby will expect special considerations from the forty-fourth president. High atop the gay agenda is the recognition of same-sex marriages. The implications for the church are numerous. Unfortunately, “evangelicals” who have cast their votes for Mr. Obama have unwittingly aligned themselves with an enemy of the church because they lack understanding of the nature of government.

One cannot debate the simple fact that God ordained the institution of marriage as the union between one man and one woman. Furthermore, no one can debate the fact that homosexuality is condemned throughout the Bible. The Bible gives us the examples of Sodom and Gomorrah, explicit condemnations of the practice in the 18th-20th chapters of Leviticus, and an affirmation of the Old Testament condemnations in the 1st chapter of Romans. The “rightly divided” word of God leaves no room for any other interpretation than this- homosexuality is considered an abomination in the sight of God.

By aligning themselves with the gay lobby to elect Barack Obama, these supposed “evangelicals” have, perhaps, unwittingly created an opening for the greatest assault upon the church and religious freedom ever seen in this country. The fact of the matter is this; the ultimate goal of the gay lobby is not to achieve parity in marriage, its goal is to achieve total acceptance of the lifestyle choice.

Once same sex marriage is legitimized as a civil right, then, by the strength of government, no church will be afforded the right to refuse to perform a same sex marriage ceremony within its doors. Furthermore, any preaching against the practice of homosexuality will be regarded as a “hate crime” and will subject preachers, Sunday school teachers, and congregations from speaking out against the practice of homosexuality.

Number 3: The battle against poverty starts with you.

In the preceding paragraphs, we looked at the issues of abortion and gay marriage; both of which are issues that “young evangelicals” apparently find to be tired and worn-out. The first of the causes du jour that we will consider is the issue of poverty. While these “young evangelicals” have rightly ascertained that God does care for the impoverished, these “young evangelicals” are misguided in their understanding of the appropriate ways and means of looking after the needs of the disadvantaged.

The 19th chapter of Leviticus and the Book of Ruth provides us a Biblical framework pertaining to the issues of poverty and hunger. These Scriptures together give us an understanding of the application of the Law of Gleaning. These Scriptures demonstrate that all of us, as Christians, do have a responsibility to look after the needs of the poor and the widows. God instructs each of us who have prospered to leave a little “on the vine” for the poor. We are not to be as greedy with our harvest as to not allow the poor and the widows to share in our bounty. However, we must also appropriately interpret and understand that even God required the poor to exert themselves to go to gather from the fields that they did not sow- if their bodies were able. Ultimately, you do not combat poverty by the governmental re-distribution of one’s wealth to another.

That being said, the Christian’s responsibility in providing for the poor starts in their own home and their own congregation. This means that each of us, as Christians, should put our faith to work- either through missions work or financial support for missionaries who are on the ground battling poverty where the impoverished live. It is not the responsibility of the government to solve the problems of poverty and hunger. It is the responsibility of Christians and the church to do so, and it is unconsciable that “evangelicals” would forsake the unborn and would liberalize their stances on homosexuality so they can feel good about their own decision to delegate their responsibilities to care for the impoverished to governments. Furthermore, one needs to look at the fact that governments are often the root causes of poverty and hunger. At best, we must also consider the fact that governments are terribly inefficient, if not downright corrupt (ref. Iraqi Oil for Food Program), and are thereby not to be entrusted with the responsibility of combating poverty and hunger.

So, I ask, “Would not the Christian have been better served to hold fast to conservative orthodoxy; to vote to elect officials who will be a voice to the unborn and who will defend the institution of marriage while choosing to do their own part to combat poverty and hunger through personal financial support for faith-based charitable organizations?" I think so.

Number 4: Environmentalism: Worshiping the creation

In the 1st chapter of the Book of Romans, the apostle Paul warned and prophesied of the day wherein people “worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator.” The modern Environmental movement marks the fulfillment of this prophecy.

Modern environmentalism is, in fact, a repackaged, pantheistic worldview that diminishes the transcendental properties of God and relegates god to be present only in the creation. This movement has violated many Biblical mandates, not the least of which is the First Commandment that states that we are to have “no other gods” before the God of creation. The environmental movement has set numerous idols up for worship including, but not limited to, the earth, trees, and the animals. The Seven Deadly sins are no longer lust, gluttony, greed, slothfulness, wrath, envy, or pride. Rather, the post-modern Seven Deadly sins are Overpopulation, Deforestation, Carbon Emission, Carnivorousness, Pollution, Pesticides, and Capitalism.

Why would any God-fearing person put their faith and confidence in any individual who, by application, embraces freer access to abortion as a viable solution to the issues of poverty, hunger, and environment destruction?

Another thing that must be considered is the fact that mandates of the Environmental movement have, directly and indirectly, exacerbated poverty, exacerbated hunger, and increased mortality worldwide. One needs to look no further than the ban on DDT to realize that the Environmental movement is counterintuitive to the solutions necessary to combat poverty, hunger, and mortality. Any group that lauds the re-emergence of mosquito-borne illnesses as a great eco-victory obviously loves the earth more than their fellow man.

That being said, substantially more deleterious effects of the Environmental movement will be noted as the eco-gladiators continue their attacks on carbon emissions and capitalism. More poverty, more hunger, and greater mortality will certainly ensue from their misguided worship of the earth, the trees, and the animals. Therefore, can we agree that caring for the environment is one thing, but choosing to align oneself with a movement that has done far more harm than good is something very different?

Number 5: Real solutions for HIV/AIDS

It is not often that I will praise an atheist for being right about anything however; I am going to make an exception to that rule of thumb. Recently, I read an article by British journalist, and confirmed atheist, Matthew Parris. The byline Mr. Parris’ article reads, “Missionaries, not aid money, are the solution to Africa's biggest problem- the crushing passivity of the people's mindset.” In his article, Mr. Parris says, “I've become convinced of the enormous contribution that Christian evangelism makes in Africa: sharply distinct from the work of secular NGOs, government projects and international aid efforts. These alone will not do. Education and training alone will not do. In Africa, Christianity changes people's hearts. It brings a spiritual transformation. The rebirth is real. The change is good.”

While HIV/AIDS is a global problem, the epicenter of the epidemic is the continent of Africa. Even under President Bush, the American contribution, in terms of dollars spent, has been substantial, yet the problem persists. However, it is not surprising that the problem persists given the fact that big spending, liberal solutions to combating problems have never demonstrated efficacy. Let us consider that the liberal solution to the HIV/AIDS issue is to spend money to treat infected individuals with retroviral medications and to distribute condoms. The liberal solutions do not address a very significant underlying cause that perpetuates the spread of HIV; that is the mindset of the people and their views on sex and sexuality. Mr. Parris realizes that Christianity is making real changes in the hearts of millions of people in Africa, and he believes that this change is real and it is good. Applying logic to the observations of Mr. Parris leads me to believe that nothing will do more to slow the propagation of HIV/AIDS in Africa than the propagation of Christianity in Africa. Think about it, if societies in Africa were built upon the Christian construct of monogamous (one man: one woman) relationships, how far would that go toward stopping the spread of this virus? Folks, monogamy will always work better than retroviral medications or condoms.

Therefore, in my opinion, Christian charities are a far better investment for conscientious evangelicals who desire to address the death and destruction caused by HIV. Imagine for a moment what a Christian charity could do with the countless millions of dollars that will be wasted by governments who never address the real underlying cause that propagates the virus- human behavior.

Conclusion

Insomuch as I had hoped to conclude this post with something profound or paradigm altering, I believe it is best to conclude this post with this simple thought, the world needs more Christians more than it needs more government. As a Christian, we must always do our best to protect the unborn and to protect the institution of marriage. As Christians, we must do our part to combat hunger and poverty; we must not delegate that responsibility to governments who will politicize and exploit that cause. As Christians, we can do our part to be good stewards of the earth without worshiping it. As Christians, we can do our part to combat HIV/AIDS by doing our part to spread the Gospel of Christ. Aligning ourselves, as Christians, with parties who are inherently against the majority of our sacred doctrines is not in our best interest, nor is it in the best interest of the nation or the world.

Saving the Life of a Mother

How many times in my life have I heard the old, worn-out, and tired argument made by liberals regarding all of the reasons that we must preserve a woman’s right to choose to murder her unborn child? At least a thousand times, I have heard the mantra repeated… “What about rape, incest, and life of the mother?” They say this as though the only women having abortions are the victims of rape, are the victims of incest, or are severely compromised by being pregnant. The fact of the matter, however, is that most abortions are performed electively as a form of “after-the-act” birth control.

I have always known that the “life of the mother” argument was intellectually dishonest. I have always believed that the babies could be delivered alive perhaps as early as twenty-one weeks and six days gestation. While this may be ambitious and might press the limits of even the advances that have been made in medicine, this is America; we have always redefined the borders of possibility. Yet, pro-abortion advocates argue that bans on late-term abortions cause, or could cause, thousands of women to die each year. Essentially, this is a thinly veiled attempt to allow a woman to opt to terminate her pregnancy well beyond the accepted fetal viability estimates. There have been many unethical abortionists who have cited conditions such as depression as being a life-threatening condition to manipulate this exclusion which is written into most late term abortion bans.

This evening, I read a story that would make all but the most ardent supporters of abortion to take a moment to look introspectively and to reconsider their views on mid and late term abortions. In Sacramento, California, a forty-year old woman, pregnant with twins, was rushed to a hospital with the signs and symptoms of a heart attack. Unfortunately, the doctors failed to save the woman and she lay lifeless on an operating table. In a last ditch effort to save the babies from their dead mother, doctors performed an emergency Caesarean delivery. The babies survived. Amazingly, as doctors sutured the dead woman, by the grace of God, her heart began to beat and she opened her eyes. Today, the mother and her daughters, Marley and Myracle, are doing well.

I shudder to think what would have happened had the doctors marched to the drumbeats of the pro-abortion lobby. I believe that the results would have been predictable. I believe that today, a father would be mourning the losses of his wife and his daughters. Instead, together, they celebrate a Christmas miracle.

Perhaps this case should be, for us, another border redefined. Rather than aborting viable children in the instances wherein the “life of the mother” argument can be made with validity, shouldn’t we deliver the children alive instead of terminating them just to deliver them dead? To me, the former seems more humane than the latter.

Sensible Science

Over the course of the past few days, I have spent considerable time challenging others, and being challenged by others, regarding the debates pertaining to evolution versus creation. There are passionate people on both sides of the debate. Evolutionists chant the mantra of science and attempt to portray people, like myself, as too unsophisticated to appreciate science. Yet, it is the evolutionists who are too unsophisticated to understand that conjecture and theory within science does not yield fact and law.

Too many times, we hear atheists and agnostics describe faith and religion as a “crutch for weak people.” However, the fact of the matter is this; scientific theory is merely “a crutch” for atheists and agnostics. While I use the Bible to explain the unexplainable, evolutionists put their faith in scientific theories that are statistically improbable at the very least- if not statistically impossible.

In some manner or form, the agenda of the scientists tends to supersede the reasonable interpretation of the data. Therefore, many scientists will always interpret data with an underlying prejudice to validate their own worldview. At that point, science ceases to be science, and science becomes political activism. This is no more prevalent than in debates pertaining to evolution, abortion, and global warming.

Disguised as science, atheism and agnosticism set forth as “fact” the idea that an organized, living structure emerged from a "primordial soup" of random and disorganized chemicals to give all living beings a common ancestor from which all other life evolved. Evolutionists believe that, by happenstance, all of the chemicals required for life came together in just the right concentrations, at just the right temperatures, at just the right pressures, and with just the right catalysts to make the reactions occur. Folks, that takes faith.

In a similar vein, scientists purport that a fetus cannot feel pain in spite of incontrovertible evidence that a fetus in utero is responsive to the vibrations induced by ultrasound waves travelling through the amniotic fluid. When we consider the fact that the nerve fibers that convey vibratory sense are more developed than the nerve fibers that convey pain, I believe that it is intellectually dishonest to advance the idea that a fetus does not feel pain. Yet, scientists must hold fast to the narrative required to preserve and perpetuate the liberal ideologies that underpin their stances on abortion.

Global warming is yet another instance wherein liberal academia and institutions of science are perverting reality to advance an agenda. I suppose it takes a mind far more brilliant than my own to interpret decreasing global temperatures as a sign of accelerated global warming. Will global warming cause me to spontaneously combust or to freeze to death? If it is hotter than normal, they blame global warming. If it is colder than normal, they blame global warming. Can anyone define the word propaganda?

Because I have chosen to believe that all things were created by God, because I have chosen to believe that a fetus in utero does feel pain, and because I have chosen to believe that global cooling does not equal global warming does not mean that I am anti-science; I am just against intellectually dishonest scientists and those who follow them blindly without any critical thought of their own. It is time for scientists to get out of the business of political activism and propaganda. It is time for scientists to get into the business of intellectually honest science, and it is time for people to challenge the conventional wisdom of the institutional propagandists with some critical thinking of their own.

All of the evidence that I need...

“I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well.”--- Psalm 139:14

Over the years- through a doctoral program, through my professional life, and through hours of continuing education courses- I have studied the anatomy and physiology of the human body in significant detail. The complexity of the interactions between organ systems is amazing in and of itself, but it is even more impressive when we consider the intricacy of the complicated interactions of the component parts of each organ system individually.

In my opinion, specialization in healthcare has caused too many of us to lose sight of the wonder of life. On the one hand, the generalist appreciates the big picture but is too often unable to any longer discern the pixels that comprise it. On the other hand, the specialist discerns the pixels but is too often unable to any longer appreciate the big picture that the pixels comprise. It is only in quiet moments like I am having now that one can reflect and remember that without the pixels we would have no picture; without a photographer, we would have neither the pixels nor the picture. This, I suppose, is my way of saying that God’s fingerprints are all over the big picture of life and the evidence is imprinted in the pixels.

Over the past couple of days, I have been taking an online continuing education course covering the neurology of eye movements. This seems like a simple thing to most, but when one considers the intricacy of the component parts and the complexity of the interaction between component parts, design becomes evident. The neural processes that invoke and govern saccades and pursuits, the networks that underlie vestibulo-ocular and optokinetic reflexes, and the integration of eye movements with the cerebellum, semicircular canals, and otolithic system in the maintenance of balance are absolutely amazing.

In my humble opinion, there is no way that these parts and processes could occur without the intervention and wisdom of a brilliant designer. Evolutionists would argue the point, and ultimately, it is their right to be wrong. Evolutionists would say that a random series of genetic mutations resulted in the development of the complex neural networks between the frontal eye fields and the basal ganglia, the superior colliculus, the thalamus, the pretectal region, and the small nuclei of specialized neurons situated in the pons. According to this line of thinking, I suppose that in 65 million years that the 1977 penny in my ashtray will eventually evolve into an iPod. I concede that I’ll not be around in 65 million years to say “I told you so,” but I don’t expect that my penny will be playing 5000 hours of someone’s favorite iTunes either. Unless, that penny would happen to fall into the hands of a person intelligent enough to design an iPod.

Urgent: Global Warming Update

Who needs more evidence that global warming is real? We have all seen the video images of polar bears clinging to the ice cube sized remnants of once great glaciers that are melting like butter on a griddle because evil Americans drive gas-guzzling SUV’s. We have all seen the pictures of salmon boiling in the once frigid waters off the coast of Alaska because evil Americans burn coal to heat their homes. We have even heard reports of hundreds, if not thousands, of children in the southwestern United States, Arizona and New Mexico to be specific, who spontaneously combusted and burned to tiny heaps of ashes while playing soccer on fields of scorched earth because evil Americans continue to eat the meat of methane producing cows. Yet we have done nothing to change our carbon emitting ways. We have ignored the prophetic voice of Al Gore, the Grand Poobah of Planetary Preservation.

I have to admit that there was a time that I was a little cold to the concept of manmade global warming. The videos of the polar bears, the pictures of the salmon, and the reports about kids erupting into balls of fire did little to convince me. Each of these things seemed so distant to me. There are no polar bears where I live. There are no salmon where I live, and there were only three confirmed and two expected cases of spontaneously combusted kids in my county. I thought the whole thing was a hoax, but now my opinion is changed. Now, my heart burns within me to do what I can to reverse the deleterious effects of the glacier melting, polar bear killing, salmon boiling, kid combusting policies of the Bush Administration.

In any case, this is the image that is now seared into my consciousness. I cannot stop thinking about the atrocious consequences of my (our) sinful, hydrocarbon emitting lifestyle(s). This picture speaks for itself.

Fellow Americans, if you are like me; if your conscience now tugs at your heart strings to save a snowman, you can do something about it now. Do not hesitate; send your tax deductible environmental do-gooder donation of $1,500.00 to me, Fundamental Fred. In your name, I will plant a carbon-offsetting dogwood tree in my backyard and will send you a certificate, printed on environmentally friendly 100% recycled paper, to acknowledge your dedication to being a good steward of the environment. If you are truly dedicated to the preservation of the planet, for a donation of $2,500.00, I will plant two carbon-eating dogwood trees in my backyard in your name. Yes folks, that is a savings of $500.oo. Please act now, before it is too late.

Thank you Sarah Palin!!!

I could not say it better myself!!!

Materialism, an Integrity Gap, and the Financial Collapse

Integral to the foundation of any great economy is the integrity of the people who comprise the society upon which it is built. When the integrity of even a small segment of the society is compromised, the entire nation and its economy are also compromised. Perhaps no other force jeopardizes the integrity of a society more than the compulsions that are driven by materialism. Rational reasoning then allows us to draw this conclusion- our economy has collapsed because the deleterious effects of materialism has diminished the integrity of many within our society.

There was a time in this nation that a man’s word was worth something. Honor was beloved and dishonor was disdained. However, somewhere, these concepts were lost and the obituary for integrity was penned. Today, many of the people who claim to be the biggest victims of this mess are the biggest culprits in causing it. Everybody wants to pass the proverbial “buck.” No one wants to take responsibility for their own liability in this disaster. No one says, “The buck stops here.” They are all saying, “The buck stops there or there or over there- not here.” People used to be responsible, even for their missteps. Now, the pathetic consequence is that the people who were least culpable in causing this financial meltdown, those who maintained their integrity, are now left to bear the burden for those who failed their moral obligations to be responsible citizens. Sadly, this has become the American way.

Over the course of many years, a vicious cycle emerged to satisfy the material wants of a large segment of our populace. Many people grew discontent with the things that they had and decided that they needed more of something bigger and something better. The federal government, armed with the Community Reinvestment Act, joined forces with unscrupulous civic organizations such as ACORN to pressure lenders into making poorly advised loans to people who lacked the financial means to repay the loans. However, the corporate lenders were able to satisfy their materialistic desires by packaging the loans and selling them to an unregulated insurance industry in the form of credit default swaps. When this failed to reach thresholds for the triggering of exorbitant bonuses, CEO’s like Franklin Raines were more than willing to break ethical restraints and falsified financial records to collect upwards of 30 million dollars in undeserved bonus money. This practice was aided and abetted by a large number of Democrat elected officials (namely Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Maxine Waters, and the Congressional Black Caucus) along with government sponsored enterprises like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In return for their blatant disregard for sound financial and economic principles, these elected Democrats received votes, power, and campaign contributions which satisfied their materialistic wants and desires.

Economic commentator Neil Cavuto observed that people were borrowing money that they did not have to buy things that they did not need. Brought to its next logical conclusion, we see that the lenders were enabling this practice by the consumer, and the government was enabling this practice by the lenders.

So, whose greed was the ultimately the linchpin in this grenade? Was it the greed of the CEO’s of the lending institutions who sought material gain? Was it the greed of the politicians who sought votes, power, campaign contributions, and material gain? Was it the borrowers who borrowed money that they did not have to buy things that they did not need? I’ll pass a buck to the CEO’s, the politicians, and the people who wanted more than they needed, who borrowed more than they could repay, and who lacked the integrity to keep their word regardless of their missteps.

The politicians had a moral obligation to look after the common good. They failed because they were more interested in their own good and goodly gain. They are devoid of integrity.

The corporate executives had a moral obligation to look after the good of their shareholders and institutions. They failed because they were more interested in their own good and goodly gain. They too are devoid of integrity.

Those who borrowed above their means had a moral obligation to live within their means. They failed because their desire for material gain overwhelmed their common sense and sense of common decency. They too are devoid of integrity.

Until the sacred, old institutions of personal responsibility and integrity are woven back into the moral fabric of this nation, more than the economy will collapse—the society and the nation as a whole will continue to deteriorate and crumble.

Random Thought: November 17, 2008

Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.---Matthew 25:40

The concept of a pro-choice Christian to me is something like Sasquatch or Yeti, i.e. a mythical creature that is not proven to truly exist; a creature that cannot exist because while such a person might rightly consider themselves to be pro-choice they certainly wrongly consider themselves to be Christian.

Random Thought: November 16, 2008

Whatever virtue that might exist in the condition of being poor is automatically negated and turned to vice when the poor man covets the possessions and wealth of the affluent.

Sweet is sweet, bitter is bitter, and that which is not right is wrong.

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!--- Isaiah 5:20

As hard as I have tried, at various and sundry times throughout my life, to understand what motivates someone to be a liberal or a Democrat, I cannot. My worldview does not permit me to understand the thought processes by which liberals arrive at their personal conclusions of what is right and what is wrong; what is good and what is evil. Quite honestly, I have a rather visceral reaction- likened unto the life-saving, inborn mechanism of retroperistalsis- when I attempt to perceive the world through a liberal’s mindset.

I have had conversations with liberals. I have tried to understand them, but each time I find myself baffled by the fact that these people and I actually live in the same world. From top to bottom, the things that I consider good-they consider evil. The things that I consider evil- they consider good. Likewise, the things that liberals consider good-I consider evil, and the things that liberals consider evil-I consider good.

So, who is the final arbiter of determining what is right and what is wrong; what is good and what is evil? Because my perception of reality tells me that there is a God, I stand under the assumption, and with the conviction, that God will ultimately determine what is right and what is wrong; what is good and what is evil. Certainly, a dyed in the wool liberal would argue that there is no God and that the final arbiter of right and wrong; good and evil is the individual. This atheistic existentialist worldview demonstrates the dichotomy of our perceptions of reality. They consider their existence but deny the possibility that they were created by God. They consider their existence to be the result of the coincidental cohabitation of chemicals that resulted in a reaction yielding increasing levels of complexity and organization, all of this, in spite of the fact that this contradicts the Second Law of Thermodynamics. On the other hand, I consider my own existence as a demonstration of the fact that there is a God. The fact that I exist is proof positive for me that there is a God who designed and created all of humanity.

So, let us consider the implications of conservative and liberal ideologies regarding some of the most divisive issues of the day.

Perhaps there is no more divisive issue than that of abortion. The conservative considers the murder of an unborn child as evil. The liberal considers the disposal of an unwanted fetus as good. I cannot understand how someone looks at the miracle of life and finds virtue in destroying it.

In the abortion debate, liberals claim that the fetus is not a living being. Liberals disregard the fact that the union of sperm and ova yields an organism that is in a perpetual state of development and is continuously becoming more organized and more complex. When an organism is not living, it is in a perpetual state of decay- not development. When an organism is not living, it becomes less organized until such point that it is broken down into its simplest substrates. Doesn’t logic then dictate that conception results in the beginning of life?

So then, is it really evil that one would decry the act of abortion as evil? Is it really good that one would laud the act abortion as good? The answer to both questions is no. It is in fact good to decry the act of abortion as evil, and it is evil to laud the act of abortion as good.

In the 19th chapter of Jeremiah, God himself condemned the practice of sacrificing children as a religious rite in the worship of the Canaanite god Baal. God spoke of the “blood of the innocents” and declared the act unfathomable to Him. Yet, to the American left and the Democratic Party- abortion has become a religious ritual.

Abortion becomes a perfect segue into another issue that divides us- Poverty. Liberals say that it is better to abort a fetus than it is to allow the child to be born into, and raised in, the misery of poverty. Should we then extend that thought process to its next logical conclusion? Would it be better to murder the poor to help them to escape the misery of poverty? God forbid- but that should be the next logical conclusion of that liberal justification for the continuance of unhindered abortion rights. On the other hand, I perceive that great people have done great deeds rising out of poverty, and I perceive that no great person has ever arisen out of a medical waste dump.

But, let us lay that aside for a moment. The conservative says that making the able-bodied to work is good and that sending them a check on a monthly basis is evil. The liberal says that making the able-bodied to work is evil and that sending them a check on a monthly basis is good. Conservative and liberal alike agree that we must provide for those who are truly needy and unable to work. But, how do we provide for the able-bodied who are poor? The conservative wants to provide the able-bodied poor an opportunity to defeat poverty. The liberal wants to provide the able-bodied poor with minimal sustenance to merely survive in poverty.

As a conservative, I say there is virtue in one’s work. There is virtue in doing one’s part to add to the common good through one’s labors. There is virtue in reaping the fruits of one’s labor as well. Our labor is part of what defines us and it contributes to our own sense of our own self worth. Liberal ideology diminishes the virtue of one’s work and either erodes or perverts one’s sense of self worth.

The 19th chapter of Leviticus and the Book of Ruth provides me understanding pertaining to the issue of poverty. These Scriptures together give us an understanding of the application of the Law of Gleaning. These Scriptures demonstrate that all of us do have a responsibility to look after the needs of the poor and the widows. God instructs each of us who have prospered to leave a little on the vine for the poor. We are not to be as greedy with our harvest as to not allow the poor and the widows to share in our bounty. However, we must also appropriately interpret and understand that even God required the poor to exert themselves to go to gather from the fields that they did not sow- if their bodies were able.

Is it then evil to decry the concept of requiring the able-bodied to work as evil? Is it good to laud the concept of taking from those who work to give to those who don't work as good? The answer to both questions is no. It is in fact good to require the able-bodied to work to escape poverty, and it is evil to laud the transfer of wealth from those who do work to those who are able-bodied but unwilling to work as good. If we do not forsake these failures of liberal policy toward combating poverty, this nation will be home to yet another generation of people who perceive their own self worth as nothing more than the 637 dollars per month that they receive as a government subsidy for merely existing.

There are so many more issues that can be parsed and so many more questions that can be asked. As I ponder the liberal perspectives on each, whether it is the issue of the role of government in society, the issue of the environment, or the issue of allowing homosexuals to enter into the God-ordained institution of marriage, I am beginning to feel that uneasy visceral reflex of retroperistalsis that one experiences when something bitter ferments in their gut.

Someday, I will learn that I should not try to understand the liberal mindset. I'll call my doctor in the morning for an antiemetic.

It seems that everybody loves Obama.

Earlier this week, sixty-three million people went to the ballot box to cast their vote for “Change.” I was amazed by the wide array of people who turned out to exercise their right to vote. Senator Obama transcended race and attracted votes from black people, white people, brown people, and yellow people. Senator Obama transcended gender and garnered votes from women, from men, from men who were once women, and from women who were once men. Senator Obama transcended religion and attracted votes from Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, Gnostics, Agnostics, Mystics, Atheists, Polytheists, Environmentalists, Existentialists, as well as backslidden Christians. Moreover, hundreds of thousands of Catholics broke with once sacred orthodoxy and cast their vote for the Archbishop of Abortion.

It seems that everybody loves Obama.

Also among the throng of the 63 million were people who were fat, people who were skinny, fat people who used to be skinny, and skinny people who used to be fat. At the time of this writing, I am still trying to figure out which group Oprah should be counted among this week.

At polling stations around the country people with short hair, long hair, no hair, combovers, and hair plugs came together to voice their vote for Senator Obama.

Senator Obama attracted votes from the smart, from the ignorant, and from people who think they are smart but who are really ignorant. Poll workers in one Delaware polling station report that they even encountered one man with hair plugs from the latter category who was spouting off about his high IQ.

A bloated blowhard media-type with a tingling thigh and a man-crush on Obama anxiously waited to pull the lever for the eloquent teleprompter reader.

It seems that everybody loves Obama.

From the 1960’s peacenik that strummed a guitar and sang a semi-lucid rendition of Dylan’s Blowing in the Wind to the 1960’s anarchist bomb-thrower, they all turned out-- kindred spirits in unification behind the glib Obama.

Senator Obama’s campaign spoke to the hearts of all, i.e. the rich, the poor, the citizen, the non-citizen, the living, and the dead. The all too often forgotten class of the recently embalmed turned out in record numbers with the help of the honorable civic organization sometimes called ACORN.

Millions upon millions voted in eager anticipation of January 20, 2009 believing that Mr. Obama will feed them all with 5 loaves and 2 small fishes.

It seems that everybody loves Obama.

Yet, strangely absent from the crush of the 63 million were those (56,000,000 Americans like me) who hopelessly held to insane ideologies that were put forth by supposed heretics like Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, and Jay. These people are slaves to the dogma of the Bible, the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution. These people hold fast to an antiquated thought that there is actually something exceptional about the United States among the nations past, present, and future. If they would just open their ears for a few moments, President Elect Obama could show them the errors of their way. Obama could free them from the bondage of the Bible and of the Constitution if they would just submit to him.

These bitter people who cling to their God and their guns fear for the future of the nation that they love. They are afraid that Obama has campaigned as a centrist but will govern like a Socialist/Marxist leftist radical. Yet, I have come to believe that he will in fact govern as a centrist. Obama will govern somewhere to the left of Karl Marx and to the right of Joseph Stalin. That seems to be the middle to which he is headed.

And so, 2008 shall be marked as a year wherein the entire electorate was asleep. Some were dreaming happy dreams about happy places, happy people, and pink puppies while others were trapped in a nightmare from which they could not wake up. Reality is going to slap us all right in the mouth when we wake from our slumber. Fifty-six million of us will have at least seen it coming.

Nebuchadnezzar 2½

And whoso falleth not down and worshippeth shall the same hour be cast into the midst of a burning fiery furnace. -----Daniel 3:6-----

It is 3:14 pm, on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in the month of November, and I sit here wondering what kind of country I will be living in the morning. It is Election Day in the United States of America, I have taken a vacation day, and my oldest daughter is sick and home from school. It has been a good time for introspection but not much else.

As I sat here watching my daughter sleep on the couch, I picked up my Bible to do just a little devotional reading. I was looking for something, but I did not know what it was, so I just allowed the Bible to fall open. Staring me right back in the eyes was the third chapter of Daniel. I thought to myself, this is appropriate.

As I scanned the chapter, I was struck by an odd sense of familiarity. Not necessarily familiar from the perspective of having read it before, rather oddly familiar from the perspective that I could see myself living through such a time as that in my not too distant future.

Many have heard the story at some time in their life; some have heard the story many times in their life. The Jews has been conquered and exiled to Babylon. The Jews were robbed of their freedom, their land, and their identities. They were made subjects of the king; the king was Nebuchadnezzar and the king had an on again-off again god-complex. Perhaps, this, in part, contributes to my odd familiarity with the story. At some strange visceral level, Mr. Obama seems to me to have a similar god-complex. Obama is Nebuchadnezzar 2½.

As history tells, Nebuchadnezzar and his healthy ego set up an image of himself for the people to worship. Some knelt by their own free will, others fell by the weight of fear of the fiery furnace, but three stood by their own integrity. The courage of but three inspires me. Three young men stood for what was right because it was the right thing to do. Three young men subdued their fear with faith. Three young men stepped bravely into the fiery furnace, choosing rather to die with their integrity than to live without it. As of now and forevermore, I feel both affirmed and confirmed. I am taken by a sense of comfort about the unknown things of tomorrow.

From here, we know the rest of the story. In the fiery furnace waited for the three another; another that even Nebuchadnezzar recognized to be likened unto the Son of God. As it went, Nebuchadnezzar himself was humbled by God, and so too will Nebuchadnezzar 2½ be humbled by God. The three young men were redeemed by God out of the fiery furnace, and so too will I be redeemed by God out of whatever fiery furnace awaits me because: I am resolved to do what is right just because it is right, I am resolved to subdue my fear with faith, and I am resolved rather to die with integrity than to live then die without it.

So how many will stand like a modern day Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah? I know of one for certain.

What is wisdom worth?

One of the great learning moments of my life came when I was about twelve or thirteen years old. I remember the exact words that my father uttered that day. I did not appreciate the wisdom in them at that moment, but now, in my own life, as my own hair has begun to grey, I have come to understand the depth of my Dad’s simple statement.

As the story goes, I used to collect baseball cards. The pride and joy cards of my collection were a 1957 Brooks Robinson rookie card and a 1969 Reggie Jackson rookie card. These cards were in exceptionally good shape. The corners were crisp. There were no abrasions or creases. They may not have been gem-mint ten, but they were in prime condition none the less.

At the time, Beckett’s was the price guide of record. The Robinson rookie card was worth ninety dollars. The Jackson rookie card was worth seventy-five dollars. For a twelve year-old kid, this was big time. This was the adolescent equivalent of 1000 shares of Google stock.

In any case, I remember one day opening my portfolio of sports memorabilia to show my Dad. That day, Dad shattered my very high-minded view of my own collection of wealth-building photographs of a slick-fielding third baseman and power-hitting outfielder.

I showed Dad the Beckett’s price guide to prove the worth and value of my cards- 90 bucks for the Robinson card and 75 bucks for the Jackson card. It was right there before him in black and white, but Dad looked at me and said, “These cards are only worth whatever someone else is willing to give you for them.”

Three years later, when I was sixteen years old, I sold my whole collection- Robinson, Jackson, et al- for one hundred and five dollars. The proceeds of my liquidation were spent to buy a slightly used, mid-level car stereo.

These days, I am thirty-seven years old, myself a father of two, and I am living through a worldwide financial crisis that has become for me an awakening to the wisdom of my own father.

I have come to realize that worth and value are entirely intrinsic or extrinsic. Nothing has both intrinsic and extrinsic worth and value. The things in life that are intrinsically valuable are valuable in and of themselves. The worth of the things in life that are extrinsically valuable is dictated by what I and someone else, by negotiation, determine it to be. Perspective is everything.

Dad realized that the cards were merely pieces of paper with the image of a baseball player upon it. There was no intrinsic value in the baseball card. Dad was right; they were only worth what someone was willing to pay me for them. My own choice to sell the collection at a bargain basement price was not an ill-advised business decision. It was a reflection of my own changed perspective regarding the worth and value of the cards versus the worth and value of the money versus the worth and value of the car stereo.

It does not matter if it is baseball cards or bread, the concept and truth are the same. For instance, the baker looks at his loaf of bread and asks himself, “How many dollars can I get for my loaf of bread?” A man in the bakery looks at the loaf of bread and asks himself, “How many slices of bread can I get for my dollar?” Therefore, the worth and value of the loaf of bread is ultimately determined by how hungry the man is. If he is hungry, he would pay any price. If he is not hungry, the bread is not worth quite as much.

It has been 20 years since I owned a baseball card. By my own wisdom and by the wisdom passed on to me by my father, I have come to realize that, at one time in my life, I traded one piece of paper with a picture of a baseball player on it for another piece of paper with a picture of a dead president on it. The intrinsic values of both were the same. The cards were worth no more or less than the dollars I received for them, and the dollars were worth no more or less than the cards that I sold. The extrinsic value of the cards to the buyer was the same as the extrinsic value of the dollars to me, and neither the cards nor the dollars held any intrinsic value. The common denominator is this, the cards and the dollars are both just mere pieces of paper. Today, I asked myself, if I were truly starving, how many Reggie Jackson rookie cards would I give for even a single slice of bread? I suppose that the answer would be, as many as it takes.

Baseball cards, money, car stereos, and bread are all things of extrinsic worth and value. They are only worth what someone else is willing to give you for them or what you yourself are willing to give or take for them. With that being said, why do we place so much worth on things without intrinsic value?

We no longer stop to consider and appreciate those things that do have intrinsic value. We focus on the worthless and take for granted the valuable. We don’t consider the intrinsic worth and value of freedom, or family, or fellowship with God. We don’t consider the worth and value of life, or love, or the love of life, or the love of God, or our love of God, i.e. the same God who loves us and gives us life.

So it needs to be asked, who values freedom more, a man who is free or a man who is in bondage? When will we begin to cherish the worth and value of our freedom? I suppose, when we are in bondage.

Who values life more, one who is sick and dying or one who is well? We value life like we are well, will always be well, and will never die. BUT- guess what… we are all dying. Shouldn’t we then all love the intrinsic value of life as much as the person who is sick and dying because we, ourselves, are sick and dying?

As a nation, we have become miserable because we have allowed ourselves to become vested in the things of life that have no intrinsic value. Because those things that have intrinsic worth and value cannot be bought by things without intrinsic worth and value, the people of this nation will remain miserable until others, like me, are awakened by the wisdom of my Father.

DICHOTOMY

The dichotomy of the past eight years is striking. On the one hand, we have George W. Bush who has been widely criticized for a seemingly compulsive desire to spread democracy and freedom to some of the most oppressed people on the face of the earth. On the other hand, we have Barack Obama who has been widely embraced in spite of his thinly veiled, obsessive plan to bring socialism and oppression home to us, the freest people on the face of the earth.

Truly, I struggle to understand.

I suppose the concepts of freedom and fairness have been pitted one against the other. People seem to be opting to choose a “fair society” rather than a “free society.”

As I see it, God-given freedom and State-mandated fairness cannot coexist. God-given and Constitutionally protected freedom gives people the freedom to succeed, the freedom to fail, and the freedom to achieve to any level in between. State-mandated fairness restricts one’s God-given freedom to succeed, restricts one’s God-given freedom to fail, and assigns to each their “lot in life” as determined by the government.

It is immoral for the government to restrict the freedom of one to promote fairness for another. It is only fair to afford all individuals the freedom to determine and strive for their own “lot in life.” Self determination has, unfortunately, become a curse in a land where it was, at one time, a blessing. Self determination used to be held sacred because brave men bled and died to obtain it. Brave men and women bled and died to preserve it.

Personally, I believe in God. Furthermore, I believe God created us with an inherent free will. God gave us the freedom to succeed by whatever measure we so choose. God also gave us the freedom to fail by whatever measure we choose.

The Declaration of Independence says, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” According to our wise Founding Fathers, God grants us the right to Life, the right to Liberty, and the right to pursue (but not necessarily obtain) Happiness. To keep the simple things simple, fairness then should really mean that one free person cannot use their freedom to restrict the freedom of another. In other words, it is not fair for one free person to abuse their freedom to restrict another’s God-given rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

For those who don’t believe in God I ask, “What is inherently fair about nature?” Is it fair that the sickliest gazelle will always be run-down, killed, consumed, and excreted by the fastest cheetah? The fact is, in nature, the freedom of every creature is necessarily bound by its own proximity to the nearest beast that is just one rung higher on the food chain.

God’s way seems much better to me.

I suppose that it is time for Americans to wake up and start to appreciate what the have before it is gone. Freedom is lost without ruckus. Freedom is easy to lose but difficult to win. Freedom is lost in the voting booth, with the effortless glide of a pen upon paper, and with the quiet tap of a wooden gavel in a hollow chamber. Freedom is only won by the shedding of blood.

As the scroll of world history is written, America, as we knew it, may end up being but a blurb… A once great nation that fought for the freedom others, bled for the freedom of others, and died for the freedom of others all the while giving away their own freedom to an enemy within; an enemy that did not fire a shot.

Obama Secures Major Endorsement

Unrepentant terrorist Osama bin Laden emerged from his cave along the Afghan/Pakistan border to declare his support for U.S. Presidential candidate, Barack H. Obama.

In a brief statement, Mr. bin Laden noted, "Mr. Obama and the Democratic Party share my values, as well as my thoughts and feelings about the United States. In making my decision, I felt that Mr. Obama was cool and articulate. When Mr. Obama speaks, a thrill shoots up my leg. Mr. McCain, on the other hand, seems somewhat erratic. Mr. McCain seems to pose a threat to my overall agenda of destroying the Great Satan."

When asked for his opinions about Republican Vice-Presidential nominee, Alaska governor Sarah Palin, Mr. bin Laden said, "It would be a curse on the head of any self respecting Jihadist to be killed by a woman. I have had a recurring nightmare about this woman poaching the likes of me and my fellow cave dwellers from the back of a helicopter. I will not sleep until Obama is inaugurated."

Mr. bin Laden did have one reservation before making his endorsement of Obama official. Mr. bin Laden said, "I was somewhat concerned that the Obama tax plan would take needed money from the sleeper-cells that I fund in the United States." Fortunately for the global terrorist, the Obama tax plan gives terrorists a 500 dollar tax credit for each of the 72 virgins promised them for dying a martyr's death.

The Obama campaign reports that the 36,000 dollar tax credit given to terrorists is "paid for" by a corresponding tax increase on the owners of small to medium size plumbing businesses.

Mr. Obama said in a wonderfully articulated and fluently delivered press conference this morning, "There is power in words. There is passion in words. There is meaning in words. Words mean things. If it were not for words, I would not be saying anything. That being said, I would like to thank Mr. bin Laden for his kind words. I look forward to meeting with Mr. bin Laden within the first year of my presidency."

As of the time of this printing, Democratic Vice-Presidential nominee Joe Biden could not be reached for comment.