I was reading some news articles today when I ran across one that sounds like really positive news out of Cuba. It is really a small deal, but it may portend much good to come.
Cubans, for the very first time ever, are now allowed to own their own cell phones.
What's so good about that? Well, besides the possible link between cell phone use and cancer, (what, by the way, isn't linked in some way to cancer?) I do think this is a good sign.
You see, governments are meant to uphold the rights of their citizens. Cuba, for far too long, has been ruled by a government too fearful of what its citizens would do with their own rights to really give them access to them. This is common to all communistic governments in history. Their worldview, founded completely on atheistic humanism, requires the government to bring about a society in which want is eliminated through the use of force. Somehow, these people believe that they can create a Utopia through completely non-Utopian means, and the result has always been disaster, oppression, and mass death.
A Biblical worldview sees government not as a tool for creating some perfect society but as a tool God created to punish evildoers and protect people from them. There is no goal of perfection because the Bible teaches that there can be nothing like that where fallen people dwell. Rather, perfection is only found in God and people only trend toward perfection when God is honored and He makes a difference in peoples' lives. Utopia will occur, but it cannot be ushered in by any human effort - it will only occur when Jesus Christ returns to rule the world as King!
So, I am encouraged when Cubans are allowed to own cell phones. It shows that their leaders are beginning to accept the failure of their system and give back to the people rights and responsibilities that have been denied them.
Monday, April 14, 2008
Saturday, April 05, 2008
So, I posted...
Well, I know it's been a while, but I simply couldn't keep reading about this woman foisting herself and her poor unborn child on the American public, which is apparently ignorant of facts, without saying something.
Maybe, I'll keep it up some more.
Maybe, I'll keep it up some more.
Not a Miracle...
OK, so unless you've been under a rock for the past few days, you've heard of this "man" who is pregnant. She appeared on the Oprah show this week...surprise, surprise. While on the show, she called what has happened to her a miracle.
I take issue with this. This "man" is really a woman, simple and plain. While I agree fully with the overall opinion that the beginning of a new life is a miraculous event, I cannot see a woman getting pregnant, even after she has had much of her femininity removed surgically, as an event any more miraculous than any woman getting pregnant.
The message seems to be - "My gender is what I say/feel it to be, and my gender is no related to my ability to reproduce." Unfortunately, this is completely backward. Obviously, since no real men have ever actually become pregnant, this is not so. The ability to carry a child and bring it into the world is a purely female ability. Thus, if this "man" has that ability, "he" is really a she and her gender is intimately tied to what has happened to her.
The truth is, this sort of mixed-up mindset about sexuality and gender is sad, in the individual case, and horrific, in the general/culture-wide sense. Our culture has become completely crazy! It has for some time claimed that it is OK (within your rights and unquestionably ethical) to have sex with whomever you wish. Now, we see a further shift to the point where you even get to define your own sexuality (your being!) however you want. This is absurd, and it reaches beyond sexuality, as well. You can define your own heritage, race, religion, history... It is as if many people have simply chosen that there can be nothing "real." Everything is "plastic," changeable and even banish-able from who we are.
No wonder we cannot keep out commitments, to spouses, to debtors, to national and international efforts. No wonder our children are increasingly unaware of where they really come from. No wonder our "leaders" increasingly appeal solely to our appetites, which is the part of ourselves that so often rules over the rest. No wonder, even in our churches, young and old alike cannot tell you what they believe and why.
How is this even a news item at all?
I take issue with this. This "man" is really a woman, simple and plain. While I agree fully with the overall opinion that the beginning of a new life is a miraculous event, I cannot see a woman getting pregnant, even after she has had much of her femininity removed surgically, as an event any more miraculous than any woman getting pregnant.
The message seems to be - "My gender is what I say/feel it to be, and my gender is no related to my ability to reproduce." Unfortunately, this is completely backward. Obviously, since no real men have ever actually become pregnant, this is not so. The ability to carry a child and bring it into the world is a purely female ability. Thus, if this "man" has that ability, "he" is really a she and her gender is intimately tied to what has happened to her.
The truth is, this sort of mixed-up mindset about sexuality and gender is sad, in the individual case, and horrific, in the general/culture-wide sense. Our culture has become completely crazy! It has for some time claimed that it is OK (within your rights and unquestionably ethical) to have sex with whomever you wish. Now, we see a further shift to the point where you even get to define your own sexuality (your being!) however you want. This is absurd, and it reaches beyond sexuality, as well. You can define your own heritage, race, religion, history... It is as if many people have simply chosen that there can be nothing "real." Everything is "plastic," changeable and even banish-able from who we are.
No wonder we cannot keep out commitments, to spouses, to debtors, to national and international efforts. No wonder our children are increasingly unaware of where they really come from. No wonder our "leaders" increasingly appeal solely to our appetites, which is the part of ourselves that so often rules over the rest. No wonder, even in our churches, young and old alike cannot tell you what they believe and why.
How is this even a news item at all?
Monday, October 29, 2007
Literal Interpretation of Genesis (All of it!)
My wonderful wife has encouraged myself and her other blog readers to write on environmentalism from a Christian perspective/worldview. She has "encouraged" me a little more than most, I suppose, but I needed the "encouragement."
I'd like to point out that the Christian responsibility to care for the world we live in is directly related to God's initial commands to Adam and Eve in the garden, right after He created the world. There are those who would say that modern science has proven conclusively that the world is billions of years old and that mankind exists now as a result of the forces of evolution acting throughout those billions of years. I respectfully disagree. Modern science has become a worldview all its own, rather than a method for detecting truth, which is what science really is. As such, it has made conclusions about the world that fit with its materialistic view that there is no God and no such thing as a spiritual world at all. Thus, forces like evolution, which requires vast amounts of time to be mathematically plausible, are postulated to explain how everything that does exist got here.
There are many problems with all of the above thinking, but, as it relates to the environment, the problem at hand is that such thinking undercuts the heart of why we must care for the world. The primary reason is that God made both us and the world and He gave charge of it to us. Caring for the world is an outworking of a holy life and cannot be honestly done by those who deny that there is even such a thing as holiness. At best, those who deny God's existence and His creation of the world as it is written in the Bible, worship the material that they claim is all that exists.
Genesis is where the entire story of the world begins. It is where the world is made and every important institution finds its origins (family, marriage, government). It is also where the central problem of man begins - sin - and God's response to sin is foretold. This cannot be an allegory or myth. It must be truth or our whole reason for being turns to chance encounters of atoms bouncing around the galaxy, at the very best.
I'd like to point out that the Christian responsibility to care for the world we live in is directly related to God's initial commands to Adam and Eve in the garden, right after He created the world. There are those who would say that modern science has proven conclusively that the world is billions of years old and that mankind exists now as a result of the forces of evolution acting throughout those billions of years. I respectfully disagree. Modern science has become a worldview all its own, rather than a method for detecting truth, which is what science really is. As such, it has made conclusions about the world that fit with its materialistic view that there is no God and no such thing as a spiritual world at all. Thus, forces like evolution, which requires vast amounts of time to be mathematically plausible, are postulated to explain how everything that does exist got here.
There are many problems with all of the above thinking, but, as it relates to the environment, the problem at hand is that such thinking undercuts the heart of why we must care for the world. The primary reason is that God made both us and the world and He gave charge of it to us. Caring for the world is an outworking of a holy life and cannot be honestly done by those who deny that there is even such a thing as holiness. At best, those who deny God's existence and His creation of the world as it is written in the Bible, worship the material that they claim is all that exists.
Genesis is where the entire story of the world begins. It is where the world is made and every important institution finds its origins (family, marriage, government). It is also where the central problem of man begins - sin - and God's response to sin is foretold. This cannot be an allegory or myth. It must be truth or our whole reason for being turns to chance encounters of atoms bouncing around the galaxy, at the very best.
Friday, September 14, 2007
It's Been a While...
Well, I've been absent from blogging for a while (OK, wife, quite a while), but I've been recently looking for an interesting thing with which to get back into the writing. Here it is...
I ran across this story today. It amazes me what people will do for their own gratification! Let me see if I can give you the run down and why it makes no sense, from a Biblical point of view.
First, there is this man who was badly injured in a motorcycle accident. His injuries leave him unconscious and probably dying, especially from attendant strokes suffered after the accident.
Second, there is this man's fiancee, to whom he was to be wed this same time next year.
Third, there is this man's parents.
The fiancee wants the hospital where her man is being cared for to harvest some of his semen (YIKES!) for her to carry his child. She explains to the reporter that this is not simply an act of love for him or out of a desire to have children in general but mostly so his parents could have something left of their only son. His parents and fiancee originally made this request under Iowa's state laws concerning organ transplants but were rejected because of the obvious distinction between saving and creating lives. However, after an emergency request was made to the court system, a judge allowed the procedure.
Now, why is this wrong, in my opinion? Well, it is wrong because it is getting the production of children backwards. While children do most often (though, not always) provide a measure of satisfaction and blessing on parents, that should never be the reason for having them. Children do not exist to provide entertainment or satisfaction for parents. In fact, as most parents will probably testify (not being one yet, I am conjecturing, though hopefully realistically) having a child quickly becomes less about what the parent gets out of the deal than what the parent must put in.
So, for parents of this man to manipulate state laws clearly meant to save the lives of people suffering from illnesses in order to "have a part of him left" is wrong-headed. They want that child (in fact, I think they are thinking more of a small version of their own son than the person that will really be produced out of this) for their own comfort in losing their son, not for the child himself. The same seems to be the case for the potential mother.
What happens if this child ends up being nothing like his/her father? This is quite likely. What then? Unfortunately, children aren't throw-away, like electronics that no longer serve our needs. Also, what about the child's need for a father? Will this be ignored? Additionally, what about this man's rights? He did not make a decision to produce a child (not even in the strictest sense of simply having sex). What is he miraculously awakens from his injuries? I can just see his response, can't you? ("You did what!!!")
I ran across this story today. It amazes me what people will do for their own gratification! Let me see if I can give you the run down and why it makes no sense, from a Biblical point of view.
First, there is this man who was badly injured in a motorcycle accident. His injuries leave him unconscious and probably dying, especially from attendant strokes suffered after the accident.
Second, there is this man's fiancee, to whom he was to be wed this same time next year.
Third, there is this man's parents.
The fiancee wants the hospital where her man is being cared for to harvest some of his semen (YIKES!) for her to carry his child. She explains to the reporter that this is not simply an act of love for him or out of a desire to have children in general but mostly so his parents could have something left of their only son. His parents and fiancee originally made this request under Iowa's state laws concerning organ transplants but were rejected because of the obvious distinction between saving and creating lives. However, after an emergency request was made to the court system, a judge allowed the procedure.
Now, why is this wrong, in my opinion? Well, it is wrong because it is getting the production of children backwards. While children do most often (though, not always) provide a measure of satisfaction and blessing on parents, that should never be the reason for having them. Children do not exist to provide entertainment or satisfaction for parents. In fact, as most parents will probably testify (not being one yet, I am conjecturing, though hopefully realistically) having a child quickly becomes less about what the parent gets out of the deal than what the parent must put in.
So, for parents of this man to manipulate state laws clearly meant to save the lives of people suffering from illnesses in order to "have a part of him left" is wrong-headed. They want that child (in fact, I think they are thinking more of a small version of their own son than the person that will really be produced out of this) for their own comfort in losing their son, not for the child himself. The same seems to be the case for the potential mother.
What happens if this child ends up being nothing like his/her father? This is quite likely. What then? Unfortunately, children aren't throw-away, like electronics that no longer serve our needs. Also, what about the child's need for a father? Will this be ignored? Additionally, what about this man's rights? He did not make a decision to produce a child (not even in the strictest sense of simply having sex). What is he miraculously awakens from his injuries? I can just see his response, can't you? ("You did what!!!")
Thursday, May 10, 2007
Crimes Against Religious Liberty
This past week a bill passed through the U.S. House of Representatives which, if passed into law, will curtail our freedom of religion enormously. This bill, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, is designed with one goal in mind - to make it a crime to express any negative thought or feeling regarding homosexuality. It equates teaching against homosexuality, even in a religious setting like a church service, with hate crimes such as murdering or otherwise attacking a person solely because of their race or sexual choices. It is clear that homosexuals are the only group whose "rights" are meant to be protected by this law from certain measures that were rejected from being part of the bill, such as an exemption for religious liberty and protections for the homeless and senior citizens. This bill is part of the wider agenda to normalize homosexuality and silence any voice raised against it.
All freedom-loving Americans, especially those who cherish their religious liberty, should unite to defeat this bill. For one thing, there are already laws in every state and on the federal level that deal with hate crimes. Secondly, this law could be used to prosecute pastors who preach the Bible's teaching on homosexuality from the pulpit - a clear violation of true separation of church and state (see the First Amendment to the US Constitution). In fact, laws similar to this one have been passed in several others countries, such as Canada, and in Canada ministers have been charged with hate crimes because they taught the Bible. Finally, this bill gives government the right to pas judgment on citizens' thoughts and attitudes. I believe that inciting someone to commit a hate crime should be illegal (calling on people to beat up illegal immigrants, for example), but teaching that something is morally wrong is certainly not the same thing. Our minds must be free!
The argument is that it is people like preachers who teaching the Biblical prohibition against homosexuality that actually promote hate crimes. However, this is far from the truth. Christians who are staying true to the Bible will always condemn sin whil holding up the love and hope of Christ. For, in every passage of the Bible where homosexuality is condemned, other sins that are somewhat more common are also condemned. We all stand guilty before a holy God, but we have a Way to Him which is opened to us by grace, to which all sinners, no matter what sin, have been called to enter. The Christian message is at once terribly concerned with holiness and amazingly offering of wholeness.
It is interesting that the same people who have cried loudest against the government entering our bedrooms have sought most for that same government to enter our heads!
All freedom-loving Americans, especially those who cherish their religious liberty, should unite to defeat this bill. For one thing, there are already laws in every state and on the federal level that deal with hate crimes. Secondly, this law could be used to prosecute pastors who preach the Bible's teaching on homosexuality from the pulpit - a clear violation of true separation of church and state (see the First Amendment to the US Constitution). In fact, laws similar to this one have been passed in several others countries, such as Canada, and in Canada ministers have been charged with hate crimes because they taught the Bible. Finally, this bill gives government the right to pas judgment on citizens' thoughts and attitudes. I believe that inciting someone to commit a hate crime should be illegal (calling on people to beat up illegal immigrants, for example), but teaching that something is morally wrong is certainly not the same thing. Our minds must be free!
The argument is that it is people like preachers who teaching the Biblical prohibition against homosexuality that actually promote hate crimes. However, this is far from the truth. Christians who are staying true to the Bible will always condemn sin whil holding up the love and hope of Christ. For, in every passage of the Bible where homosexuality is condemned, other sins that are somewhat more common are also condemned. We all stand guilty before a holy God, but we have a Way to Him which is opened to us by grace, to which all sinners, no matter what sin, have been called to enter. The Christian message is at once terribly concerned with holiness and amazingly offering of wholeness.
It is interesting that the same people who have cried loudest against the government entering our bedrooms have sought most for that same government to enter our heads!
Thursday, March 08, 2007
Sharia - Proof of a Broken, Unjust System
The other day I read of a 19 year old woman in Saudi Arabia who had been sentenced by a court there to 90 lashes. Her crime - being alone with a man who is not a relative. Now, that in itself is an obvious injustice. What personal freedom is there in this case? However, the real injustice is the rest of the story. She had apparently been dating a man without her parents' knowledge, a no-no, and he decided to blackmail her. So, when she went to meet with him, he and six other men kidnapped and raped her! Some of her assailants have been punished, but not all. It is as if the courts there, which are governed by a strict adherence to Islamic law found in the Koran called Sharia (sorry to any who actually speak Arabic for my Western spelling), are trying to send the message that a woman who leaves the protection of her family for being in public with another man deserves to be treated like this!
This system is broke, and people all over the world should say so. However, we Westerners have mostly bought into the ambiguities of moral pluralism to the extent that we can't even call evil by its true name.
This system is broke, and people all over the world should say so. However, we Westerners have mostly bought into the ambiguities of moral pluralism to the extent that we can't even call evil by its true name.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)