Category Archives: Culture

Apologetics, Culture, History, Law and Faith, Politics, Science

Abortion: The NEW kind of slavery

8-week-unborn-baby

If you stop to think about the past, sometimes you can gain really great insight. Now, this is not my idea, but Craig Carter has thought about something very significant in this whole debate about abortion.

In the past, you might recall that pro-slavery legislation ultimately defined a “person” based upon societies decision/will that slaves were not persons, they were more like cattle. The same thing applies to pro-abortionist legislation and thinking today. The only reason that someone can say that a baby in the womb is not a person is through an “act of will” that denies the reality that the baby in the womb IS a person in and of themselves! In other words, it’s the 19th century all over again!

Or, as someone once told me, “post”-modernism is the drunk after he’s wrecked his car into a telephone pole and the resultant fire is about to burn him to death while he waves his last, shiny bottle in the air thinking nothing about his impending death… The lesson? Today is not a new mindset, it’s just the fulfillment of and, at the same time, a denial of what has come before!

So, here is what Mr. Craig Carter had to say:

“The Globe and Mail tiptoes carefully through the semantic minefield in this story on an unborn baby having heart surgery in utero. Notice the terms used [my bolding]:”

“TORONTO — In what’s being called a Canadian first, Toronto doctors have successfully performed a heart procedure on a fetus inside the womb.

A team of doctors at the Hospital for Sick Children and Mount Sinai Hospital expanded one of the baby’s heart valves using a balloon catheter. The device was inserted through the mother’s abdomen and then into the fetus to reverse heart failure before delivery.

Sick Kids Hospital says the procedure allowed the baby to remain safely in utero for a crucial extra month before her birth on April 15.

Within an hour of Oceane McKenzie’s birth, she had another procedure, and a third followed a few weeks later. Doctors say Oceane is well on the road to recovery and will soon be going home.”

Carter concludes:

Now the pro-abortion types are going to hate this article. It refers to this little girl as “fetus-baby-fetus-baby-Oceane McKenzie.” This is clearly a fetus, which is also a baby, who also has a name.

But under Canadian law her mother could have changed her mind after the heart operation and had Oceane killed by an abortionist at any moment up to the moment the baby emerged from the birth canal. So how can the pro-abortionists say that abortion is not killing a person? There is only one way to do it: Oceane was a person because her mother wanted her. So one human being can bestow and remove personhood from another by an act of will. The last time that sort of thing was legal was in the days of slavery. How “progressive” we are – not!

[HT: James Grant]

Culture, Current Events, Politics

Obamanomics: GE, The Corporate Sponsor

obama_ge

Below is an excerpt from a fascinating article on General Electric’s plans to profit from President Obama’s healthcare reform, assuming it is passed and conforms to Tom Daschle’s standards. The article was written by Andrew Wilkow and Nick Rizzuto for The Washington Times:

For all of the carping liberals did for eight years about the corporate cronyism in George W. Bush’s White House, they seem to turn a blind eye to the same behavior in President Obama’s. With plans in place for a major overhaul in the health-care industry, General Electric is positioning itself to become a major beneficiary of these health care reforms.

Recently at the Business and Social Responsibility Conference, General Electric Chief Executive Officer Jeff Immelt referred to America’s current economic crisis as part of a “reset” rather than part of an economic cycle, saying, “People who understand that will prosper in the future, and people who don’t understand that will get left behind.”

In the same address, Mr. Immelt, who is also a member of Mr. Obama’s economic recovery advisory board, added, “The intersection of government and business will be changed, maybe for a generation.” In other words, companies should be prepared to beg for a seat at the government’s table if they plan on remaining lucrative.

…

Mr. Immelt’s words betray GE’s willingness to partner with the Obama government in order to turn a profit. To this end, GE has appointed Mr. Obama’s former nominee for secretary of health and human services, Tom Daschle, to the board of advisers for Healthymagination, an initiative launched by General Electric in partnership along with Intel, which will invest $6 billion over the next six years on “health care innovation that will help deliver better care to more people at lower cost.”

Mr. Daschle said, “We can only find real solutions in health care when business, government and their partners work together.”

In 2008, Mr. Daschle wrote the book “Critical: What We Can Do About the Health-Care Crisis” in which he explains his radical solutions to the problems in American health care. In the book, Mr. Daschle calls for a British-style Federal Council on health care.

The profitability of GE’s new venture will depend heavily on the nationalization of the health care industry. The standardization and streamlining of health care recordkeeping, something on which Mr. Obama ran in 2008, would require a massive government contract for the technology to achieve such standardization.

[Read the whole article]

Culture, Eschatology, History, New Testament Theology, SBL, Theology

Did Johnny Cash write a better Apocalypse than John of Patmos?

Here is a fascinating article by William John Lyons, at the University of Bristol, on the details of Johnny Cash’s life and how Cash was able to do one of his greatest recordings in 2002, “The Man Comes Around.” (BTW, I have this CD and have fully enjoyed it over the years.) The full title of the article is The Apocalypse of John and Its Mediators, or Why Johnny Cash Wrote a Better Apocalypse than John of Patmos!.

Now, mind you that some of his conclusions and discussions are not always that ‘conservative’, but his analysis of Cash’s like and the resulting “apocalypse” revealed at the end of his life is quite stirring and powerful. I encourage you to read the whole article, but – for time’s sake – below are a couple of good excerpts:

A Life

Johnny Cash was born into a Southern Baptist family in Arkansas in 1932. A traumatic childhood was followed by a brief army career before he married, started a family, and began his recording career at Sun Records in 1955.[2] His music combined seemingly contradictory strands from the start. On the one hand, he quickly moved to Columbia Records because they allowed him to record Gospel, while, on the other, he was also penning darker lyrics: “I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die” (Folsom Prison Blues). The three albums, “Love,” “God,” and “Murder,” released in 2000, showcase the tensions of Cash’s songbook.

Touring, amphetamine abuse, and divorce took their toll, however. In 1967, Cash had a religious experience. Though he would claim that he had always been a Christian, his persona was increasingly marked by an evangelical tinge. In 1970, he declared his faith on national TV, in May 1971, he made a public profession at Evangel Temple in Nashville.[3]

Gospel songs and family members were already important avenues of biblical influence on Cash. In the early 1970s, however, Bible study became “an important part” of his life.[4] Cash befriended, among others, Billy Graham. According to Steve Turner, “Graham … was intrigued by Cash’s ability to be candid about his faith and yet find acceptance with sections of society that traditionally were cynical about Christianity.”[5] His view of the Bible was deeply influenced by the Dispensational Evangelicalism that Graham represented. In 1986, the man whose stage attire had gained him the name, “The Man in Black,” wrote a novel about St Paul, The Man in White. In the introduction, Cash writes: “I believe the Bible, the whole Bible, to be the infallible, indisputable Word of God.”[6] Such a statement, however, does not do justice to his Bible. As we shall see, his ability to hold disparate elements together—gospel/murder, candid faith/popularity—is also clearly evident in his statements about his Bible.[7]

…

John’s Apocalypse

Turning to Revelation, we find that our second author left no account of his work’s origins. Indeed, Leonard Thompson suggests that our interest would have puzzled him.[36] So how do scholars reconstruct him? How is his method evaluated? (The Apocalypse’s impact is taken as read here.)

Despite speculation about its coherence, Revelation’s unity is usually assumed. Our author calls himself “John.” As context, he offers a place, “Patmos” (1:9); a time, “the lord’s day” (1:10); and a social location, he is an exiled Christian (1:9). Chapters 2 and 3 appear to describe actual situations, suggesting an intimate knowledge of the seven churches. John’s remonstrations show a pastoral interest in, and an authority to speak to, their circumstances. The former suggests that his text would have been tailored to his audience(s). The latter is implicit, but whatever his authority, it had not gone unchallenged; the Thyatiran church tolerated the prophetess, Jezebel (2:20-21). Though John never calls himself a prophet, his words are “words of prophecy” (1:3). Underlying his text is an ideology that sees assimilation to the imperial world as embracing another gospel. He also assumes that persecution is what his gospel entails.

Judith Kovacs and Christopher Rowland note:

“Given the many references to visions in early Christian texts, it would be an excessively suspicious person who would deny that authentic visions lie behind some or all of these literary records. This is especially true of the Apocalypse itself. It is likely that actual visions, rather than literary artifice alone have prompted the words we now read.” [37]

Revelation is not simply transcribed visionary experience, however. As conservative an exegete as Leon Morris has suggested that the visions took place over several years[38] and that behind the text lies “much apocalyptic reading.”[39] Others have pointed out the allusions to Ezekiel and Daniel and suggested that John meditated upon these works.[40] John Sweet speaks for many when he writes that John was an author “in general control of his materials.”[41] On his use of Ezekiel, for example, Sweet writes:

[a] study of the references … shows that [John] had a creative grasp of that diffuse and obscure book; he has clarified and concentrated its message and enlarged its vision.[42]

That John would have admitted “interpretive inadequacy” seems unlikely. In comparing the two, it is clear that similar processes occurred. Originating texts—John’s scriptures (and any available apocalyptic texts) and Cash’s dream book—initiate the process. A dream/visions provide “words.” These tap into specific scriptures, interacting with them over time to produce the final texts. These generate a reception history.

Conclusion: The Better Apocalypse!?

[Continue Reading…]

Culture, Culture News, Current Events, Law and Faith, Politics, Promotionals, Testimonies

Miss California Shares Untold Story

Miss California Carrie Prejean

Miss California Shares Untold Stories with Her San Diego Megachurch

By Eric Young
Christian Post Reporter
Mon, Apr. 27 2009 04:29 PM EDT

Miss California Carrie Prejean appeared onstage Sunday at the San Diego megachurch where she is a member to share about the events of this past week.

Since the Miss USA competition on April 19, Prejean has gone from interview to interview discussing her highly publicized comments on same-sex marriage – comments that many agree likely cost her the crown.

During the pageant in Las Vegas, openly gay gossip blogger Perez Hilton had asked Prejean whether every state should follow Vermont’s recent move to legalize same-sex marriage.

In her response, 21-year-old Prejean said she thinks “it’s great that Americans are able to … choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage.”

“And you know what, in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman,” she continued. “No offense to anybody out there, but that’s how I was raised and that’s how I think it should be between a man and a woman.”

Since then, Prejean has experienced a huge backlash from some liberal media outlets and some within the gay community, including Hilton, who fired back with a malicious video posting in his blog.

But more than criticism, Prejean has received a great deal of support, some of which has also come from members of the gay community, who told Prejean that people like Hilton are not a representation of who they are.

“I just want to thank everybody so much for your support, for the letters, e-mail, messages I’ve gotten,” Prejean said Sunday in front of her home church, The Rock Church in San Diego. “[And] I want to thank the gay community for their support, for apologizing to me on behalf of this man (Hilton) that said this to me and the personal attacks that he has on me.”

During her appearance Sunday, Prejean shared about her experiences from the time the politically charged question was asked to the several interviews that she went on to give, which included those on Fox News and NBC’s Today Show, among others.

[Continue Reading…]

Culture, Pop Christianity, Prayer Requests, Theology, Videos

Osteen on Larry King Live

This is a very interesting interview. I encourage you to watch it and consider what the Osteens are saying. I think this interview goes to show that Joel Osteen is such a simple person and that he really does need to be trained better in the ways of God. I just do not understand why he will not take the time to learn more and to be more articulate about doctrinal and theological issues. I encourage all of you to pray for he and his wife. They have such a large influence. It would be amazing to see them change and begin influencing their own audience towards a more faithfully doctrinal Christianity.

The video below shows the Osteens addressing issue ranging from the Obama’s job performance and faith, to the topic of gay marriage, to talking about a new bible with their notes in it, to the topic of a post Christian world and a quote by Al Mohler, Jr.

Please let me know what you think.

Culture, Current Events, Debate, History, Law and Faith, Politics

Obama’s Attack on Medical Civil Liberties

Here is a disturbing list of things that President Obama has already done since he’s been in office for under 3 months (by Newt Gingrich and Rick Tyler):

  • Efforts to roll back freedom of conscience protections are only the latest in a series of aggressive actions that demonstrate intolerance for those whose conscience is convicted in support of a culture of life:
  • In the first month of his presidency, Obama reversed the established Mexico City policy that kept taxpayer money from being used by international organizations for abortions as a method of family planning protecting millions of American from paying for a procedure that they find morally objectionable.
  • Last week, the President unilaterally lifted embryonic-stem-cell research restrictions.
  • In the President’s recent healthcare summit, groups that support abortion were invited but pro-life groups with a stake in healthcare were excluded.
  • With the President’s support, Congress recently approved $50 million in funding for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA). UNFPA is complicit in China’s unspeakably cruel one-child enforcement policy, which employs forced abortion and sterilization.
  • The President’s nomination of Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius to be the new Secretary of Health and Human Services prompted George Weigel who leads Catholic Studies at the Ethics and Public Policy Center to question whether “conscience-rights protection for pro-life physicians and health-care workers [will] be sustained, amended, or eliminated.”
  • In February, the Administration decided that it would no longer extend hiring protections to faith-based organizations but would instead review on a “case-by-case basis.

. . . . . . .

Yet, the most hostile assault against the civil liberties in the medical profession may be yet to come.

In 2007, Obama promised a Planned Parenthood gathering on the 35th anniversary of Roe v. Wade that, as president, he would sign the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA). If enacted, FOCA would repeal all federal and state restrictions on abortion including the ban on partial-birth abortion. FOCA would force all public hospitals and health programs offering maternity services to provide abortions. Moreover, provisions in state constitutions that protect speech and the free exercise of religion of those whose conscience is opposed to abortion could be invalidated.

Having no reason to believe that President Obama will not fulfill this radical campaign pledge, some Catholic bishops are talking openly about engaging in civil disobedience to protect Catholic hospitals and their doctors from being forced to perform abortions.

The chilling effect of the Obama administration forcing doctors and nurses to choose between their losing their careers and being compelled to participate in abortions against their moral and religious belief is incalculable. Not only will pro-life doctors and nurses be driven from the professions, but patients will lose the ability to choose doctors who reflect their own religious and moral convictions, doctors who now help them to make healthcare choices based upon them.

The fact is, there are doctors and nurses who have no moral objection to abortion. Why then, should some medical professionals be compelled to do something that compromises their conscience? It is one thing to hold fast to the pro-abortion position as a matter of a personal opinion, it is quite another to force someone else to compromise their moral integrity.

Now the clock is ticking on the thirty-day review and public feedback period where public opinion might change the administration’s direction toward religious freedom. Let’s hope. [Continue Reading…]

Apologetics, Culture, Current Events, Debate, Denominations, Politics, Pop Christianity, Reforming

The Coming Evangelical Collapse

Michael Spencer has a very provocative article that was published in the March 10th edition of the Christian Science Monitor. I encourage you all to read it. Here is an important excerpt:

WHY IS THIS GOING TO HAPPEN?

1. Evangelicals have identified their movement with the culture war and with political conservatism. This will prove to be a very costly mistake. Evangelicals will increasingly be seen as a threat to cultural progress. Public leaders will consider us bad for America, bad for education, bad for children, and bad for society.

The evangelical investment in moral, social, and political issues has depleted our resources and exposed our weaknesses. Being against gay marriage and being rhetorically pro-life will not make up for the fact that massive majorities of Evangelicals can’t articulate the Gospel with any coherence. We fell for the trap of believing in a cause more than a faith.

2. We Evangelicals have failed to pass on to our young people an orthodox form of faith that can take root and survive the secular onslaught. Ironically, the billions of dollars we’ve spent on youth ministers, Christian music, publishing, and media has produced a culture of young Christians who know next to nothing about their own faith except how they feel about it. Our young people have deep beliefs about the culture war, but do not know why they should obey scripture, the essentials of theology, or the experience of spiritual discipline and community. Coming generations of Christians are going to be monumentally ignorant and unprepared for culture-wide pressures.

3. There are three kinds of evangelical churches today: consumer-driven megachurches, dying churches, and new churches whose future is fragile. Denominations will shrink, even vanish, while fewer and fewer evangelical churches will survive and thrive.

4. Despite some very successful developments in the past 25 years, Christian education has not produced a product that can withstand the rising tide of secularism. Evangelicalism has used its educational system primarily to staff its own needs and talk to itself.

5. The confrontation between cultural secularism and the faith at the core of evangelical efforts to “do good” is rapidly approaching. We will soon see that the good Evangelicals want to do will be viewed as bad by so many, and much of that work will not be done. Look for ministries to take on a less and less distinctively Christian face in order to survive.

6. Even in areas where Evangelicals imagine themselves strong (like the Bible Belt), we will find a great inability to pass on to our children a vital evangelical confidence in the Bible and the importance of the faith.

7. The money will dry up.

[Continue Reading…]

Culture, Current Events, History, Law and Faith, Politics, Science

Obama’s Legacy: Promoting a Culture of Death

Ryan T. Anderson:

President Obama today [March 9th, 2009] fulfilled his campaign promise to lift federal-funding restrictions on research involving the destruction of human embryos. He couldn’t have done so at a more inappropriate time, for just last week scientists made headlines again announcing yet another breakthrough in what is known as “induced pluripotent stem-cell” technology. Following up on the initial breakthrough in November 2007 that allowed scientists to produce the biological equivalent of embryonic stem cells without creating, using, or destroying any human embryos, scientists have continued to refine their methods. Last week’s announcement was the latest in a long string of developments. If Obama truly wants to find honorable compromises that the entire nation can accept in good conscience and even endorse, he should be promoting these alternative sources.

During the ceremony this morning, Obama announced that by signing this executive order “we will lift the ban on federal funding for promising embryonic stem cell research.” Of course there never was a ban on federal funding for embryonic stem-cell research. President Bush was, in fact, the first president in history to fund embryonic stem cell research. The compromise Bush reached, however, put restrictions in place that prevented the further destruction of human embryos. It is these restrictions protecting human life that Obama has lifted.

[HT: James Grant]