Friday, March 30, 2007

Nothing should make an Indians fan more nervous....

More than fresh hype that this is the year! We heard it last year and I bought into it. Then the season started and the Tribe imploded. My big hope was to start the season unheralded but more and more the whispers are coming out....this could be the year. Now an article on right before the season opens titled Basic logic points to Indians being better, which suggests that the Indians are poised to be this years Tigers. The bullpen is better. The defense is supposed to be better. Hafner, Sizemore, Martinez are all back. The addition of Josh Barfield, a great young second baseman who is coming from a pitchers park to a hitters park is going to be huge. Sabathia and Westbrook looked good all spring. Sowers is coming up full time. Perhaps one of the best pitchers in baseball, Adam Miller, is waiting in the wings in Buffalo after failing to surrender a run in Spring. All the signs point to this being the Tribes year. And that scares me! Curse you Jayson Stark!

Mormon Coffee: The Mormon double standard when it comes to evangelism

Mormon Coffee: The Mormon double standard when it comes to evangelism

More on the Jesus Christ/Joseph Smith DVD controversy on Mormon Coffee. It is a pretty good blog, it seems that a few mormons are actually willing to discuss issues without hiding behind the "I have a testimony" defense. One comment on this blog entry is positively baffling, as a guy named "Neal" suggested that Luther and Calvin had similar goals of "Restoration" to Joseph Smith, a suggestion that no doubt has Calvin spinning in his grave.

Wednesday, March 28, 2007

The hypocrisy of Mormonism

The Reformed Baptist Thinker has run a few blog postings on a new video on Mormonism put out by a group under the blanket name Good News For LDS.

I went to an article he referenced from the mormon church owned newspaper The Deseret News and came across this quote (along with a ton of quotes of the Christian producers using "scare quotes")
Despite the images on the DVD's cover, when Parker's son, Brian, saw his parents' video, he knew it had to be made by someone else. "In my opinion, the (LDS Church) ought to go after whoever's (making the video)," Brian Parker said. "I don't go bother their religion. Why can't they just leave me alone? I don't know why they have to try and bash people, but I guess they're just going to do what they're going to do."

The irony of this is that mormons take a ton of pride in their huge missionary force, tens of thousands strong, out telling Christians that their churches are labeled an abomination by God and that their church is the one, true church. I guess when they knock on doors and pass out videos it is "spreading the Gospel" but when Christians return the favor it is "bashing" mormonism.

Monday, March 26, 2007

The future of the SBC

Tom Ascol of Founders Ministries posted on his blog today a list of eight things that the Southern Baptist Convention must do in the future if we are to grow disciples and effectively evangelize a lost and dying world, quoting Dr. Daniel Akin of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary His opening comment echoes what I have come to realize about the SBC...
The Conservative Resurgence gave Southern Baptist a second chance but it did not secure our future. Has there been a Resurgence? Yes. Has there been a Restoration? Doubtful. Have we experienced genuine Revival? Clearly the answer is no.

Many of his points are obvious and have been spoken of before (expository preaching, church discipline, etc.) but a few points were newer to me, including his point that we have essentially given up on the large, metropolitan population centers in our church planting efforts and like the 1st century church we must evangelize people everywhere, especially in the big cities. The reformation in the SBC, the conservatives taking back over our seminaries and leadership positions was not the end of the struggle, but rather the beginning.

Saturday, March 17, 2007

Required Listening!

Why Every Self Respecting Calvinist Should Know the Difference Between Israel after the Flesh and The Israel after the Promise

This may be enough to make me shell out a few bucks to download something!

The Narrow Mind with Gene Cook welcomes Jason Robertson of Fide-O and Larry Brooks to discuss John MacArthur's attack on amillennialism and his and other dispensationalists inaccurate understanding of Israel. The show is in two parts, each an hour long and well worth the time in takes to listen. There is the option of downloading a lower quality free file or paying .98 to get a high quality one. I downloaded and listened to the low quality one while working outside today, and thought it sounded fine. The really great thing about the discussion was how saturated with the Word of God it was, in context and shown in light of the whole counsel of God. The guys had it right, if you don't get Israel you don't get eschatology. The Old Testament is about shadows and types of Christ to come, and then the fulfillment is in Christ. Earthly, temporal sacrifices done away with by a permanent, perfect sacrifice of the Lamb of God. The earthly temple where those imperfect sacrifices were performed is replaced by the indwelling. The temporal promises of an earthly Jerusalem are replaced by an infinintely better heavenly Jerusalem. Why would any self-respecting Christian (to borrow the phrase) want to go back or encourage anyone else to go back, to the old ways?
Uninformed Consent

A new bill is proposed in South Carolina that would require that abortionists show women their fetus (i.e. their developing child) prior to performing an abortion. This has pro-abortionists all a-twitter. In a piece on ABC, pro-abortionists complain that doing so might confuse women with information, by forcing them to get a "medically unnecessary" ultrasound before having their "medically unnecessary" abortion...
"Politicians should not require a doctor to perform a medically unnecessary ultrasound, nor should they force a woman to view an ultrasound against her will," said Nancy Keenan, president of NARAL Pro-Choice America in Washington, D.C.

"The women of South Carolina would rather talk to their doctor about information they need to make private, personal medical decisions. This is not a place for interference by politicians," said Keenan.

I guess this is the real question: How is it bad when making a "choice" to have all the information before making that "choice"? Unless it is not really about choice at all...

The other thing that is so incredibly arrogant is the statement about what the women of South Carolina would rather do, especially since Nancy Keenan lives in Washington, D.C. Could it be that some women in South Carolina support this idea? I am pretty sure that even in backwards states like South Carolina, people get to vote, in fact there is a democratic process in place for this very type of legislation. But NARAL and company have never been about choice. They seek to thwart the right of the people to decide issues whenever they can, whether at the ballot box or afterwards in the judiciary. This is all about cheapening life, choosing convenience over conscience and feeding the coffers of abortionists, no matter what the cost in psychological damage to women and the blood of innocents shed on the gruesome altar of the god known as "choice". God have mercy on this nation and on us for allowing this to happen.

Wednesday, March 14, 2007

What failed by the scimitar succeeds by apathy...

I heard some talk radio guys in Detroit talking about this report , regarding a muslim cashier that refused to scan or bag pork products sold at the Target Store she worked at. So I checked it out on the web and came across a bunch of articles about it. I wonder if Target would be so tolerant of a Baptist cashier that refused to scan or bag liquor? Of course Christians don't behead those who disagree with them.

What the original muslim invaders failed to do in conquering Europe before the Crusades, their descendants will do by infiltration of the West, led in large part by the apathy of Western civilizations being entertained to death and by "tolerance at all costs" leftists that will some day find themselves ironically repressed by the same people that they sought to defend.
Maybe we can all get along?

I went to Southfield Reformed Presbyterian Church tonight for their prayer meeting and Bible study (2 Samuel 13, which kind of disturbing!). It was a great evening of worship with fellow believers, not believers who hold to every doctrine I do, but they do believe in the doctrines of grace and in a Sovereign Lord of the Universe, instead of a man-pleasing false god. Maybe we should try to focus on what unites instead of divides, while still maintaining our distinctives?

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

What is newsworthy is that THIS is newsworthy!

All over the news this morning. Every channel I flipped to had a piece on the Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff, General Pace, stating that he felt homosexuality is immoral. You would think be the reaction that he is the only person in the country who believes this! General Pace said the following...
"I do not believe the United States is well served by a policy that says it is OK to be immoral in any way," Pace told the newspaper in a wide-ranging interview.

That makes perfect sense. The problem is that so few people think that homosexuality is immoral anymore, because they are unable to label anything as immoral except believing that something is immoral. General Pace is also quoted as saying...
"I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts," Pace said.

For the two hundred years of our nations history, it was generally understood and accepted that homosexuality was condemned in the Bible and unnatural. Now we have a respected General merely reiterating that and everyone is in an uproar. (I am watching Fox News, and Brit Hume is about to talk about it AGAIN). The indifference exhibited by most churches is a big part of the problem, because we are afraid to affirm the authority of the Bible to make absolute statements. I am preaching through Genesis, currently looking at Abraham, and I preached last Sunday on the first half of Genesis 19, and showed from the Word of God that a) homosexuality is an abomination and b) that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was sexual immorality, specifically homosexuality. Now ignorance of God's Word has led to people thinking that God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for a lack of hospitality, which only makes sense in the most tortured, out of context style of Biblical interpretation. It is obvious that the case against that interpretation is an easy one to make. It is shameful that in the church we have to spend time even reiterating this, and it is even quite disturbing that so many people in my church told me they hadn't heard a sermon like that in a long time. Why not? One word: cowardice.

Mort Kondracke on Fox News is pulling out the race card and comparing the ban on homosexuals with racial segregation, which is the most ignorant argument one can make on this issue. Ugh.

Thursday, March 08, 2007

John Edwards for Theologian-in-Chief?

A recent interview came out, featuring John Edwards waxing poetic about how disappointed Jesus would be in America (this John Edwards ought not be confused with THE Johnathan Edwards, who really was a theologian). Apparently we don't spend enough on those in poverty.

"I think that Jesus would be disappointed in our ignoring the plight of those around us who are suffering and our focus on our own selfish short-term needs," Edwards told the site. "I think he would be appalled, actually."

Last time I checked, Edwards was a pretty wealthy guy, which is great, but one ought to be careful casting stones in glass houses, or pointing out the speck in your neighbors eye.

I guess former Senator Edwards forgot about the billions spent in the "War on Poverty" that has led to an increase, not a decrease, in poverty, and perpetuated a cycle of dependency and hopelessness. We do, and should, as a nation and especially in the church, so more to help our neighbors, but increased government spending never has and never will be the answer.

What is troubling about this is that Edwards, like so many others, seeks to speak for Jesus Christ when Jesus Christ has already spoken. Whenever anyone presumes to declare what Christ would think without a lick of Scripture presumes to much.

Saturday, March 03, 2007

In yet another low moment in race relations...

Obama's ancestors may have owned slaves

This is newsworthy? What next, one of John McCain's ancestors had poor personal hygiene? Is Obama supposed to apologize on behalf of people he has never met? Why even bring this up?

I am no fan of Obama, but this just seems silly. It is absolutely irrelevant in 2007 that some white ancestors of Obama owned slaves. It should not even be brought up, but here we are still dealing with it. The entrenched race-baiting Left just won't let this stuff go.