Its Monday morning, December 29th. I hope all had a joyous holiday season, and are looking forward to a new year full of adventure and service in the kingdom.

Meanwhile, lets talk Cowboys football. For those of us who have followed the Cowboys for over forty years, yesterday was one of the alltime lows. Oh for the days of Landry and Schramm when character was king. America's team modeled character beginning with Landry. They didn't always win, but you never felt they were totally unprepared for a big game, but they never tried to build a team around headline grabbing players who made most of the headlines off the field by shooting guns and shooting their mouths off against teammates.

Mr. Jones showed his character on the first day of his ownership and his classless dismissal of Tom Landry. Its not that I question his dismissal of Landry. He was the owner and he had a right to make that decision, but it was the way he handled it that was an embarrassment to all who respect class, character and integrity. Nothing has changed since that first day. Jerry's arrogance is shown by his lack of concern for the fans and his determination to do it "my way" even if the product looks like yesterday.

One can only hope that if the fans want change, they will show it by keeping their pocketbooks in their pockets and refuse to buy seats in the new Jerry World Stadium. If anything can conquer his arrogance, its his greed. If the fans continue to spend for a product like yesterday, then they will receive what they deserve. We reap what we sow.

Now that I have vented I feel so much better. Do you need to vent? Do it now, before your new year's resolution about venting limits your freedom. I offer my blog to you free of charge. Now vent, vent, vent.

Christmas! What a wonderful time of the year and yet many are conflicted over Christmas. Its good feelings and its bad feelings. Most will spend a day or more with family that we may not see any other time of the year. Some of these people we love more when we see them less. There is always an uncle "know it all" and an aunt "super sensitive". We drink our egg nog while walking on egg shells.

We love to give gifts and especially listen for the oohing and ahhing when our gifts to others are opened by them. We feel like failures when the oohs and ahhs are too few. Then we feel anger, after all we had to take out a second mortgage just to buy those wonderful gifts. Well, at least we will be surprized by our gifts and smiles will surface on our face. When we open that beautiful box, only to find plaid socks and underwear, we fake a feeble ooh and skip the ahh.

Well, we still can enjoy the spread. Turkey, dressing, and all kinds of pies, cakes and candies. Then I realize I'm on a diet. I eat my full anyway and then spiral into depression as I reflect upon my lack of self control.

After viewing Christmas from an "all about me" perspective, I repent and reflect again on what Christmas is really about. Its about small children when they enter Santa's domain early on Christmas morning. Their oohs and ahhs are what makes life what it is. Such unadulterated joy is hard to find these days. Maybe if we could become as little children, we could rediscover the joy of Christmas.

Yet there is an even more profound reason for celebrating and enjoying this time of the year. We don't know exactly the month or day Jesus was born, at least not with absolute certainty. Traditionally the world has chosen December the 25th as the day for celebrating God's Son and His entrance into the world. I am thankful that at least some still remember the importance of His birth and life.

At Christmas we would do well to remember the model of giving and the proper way to receive.

"FOR GOD SO LOVED THE WORLD THAT HE GAVE HIS ONE AND ONLY SON THAT WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM SHALL NOT PERISH BUT HAVE ETERNAL LIFE."

The giver is God, the gift is His only Son to live, die and live again. The recipients of the gift are the humans who occupy the planet earth. Some choose to receive the gift with the oohs and ahhs of faith; others view the gift as though he were a lump of coal.

May those who believe show their gratitude as we celebrate the gift and realize that no gift we give will ever cost as much as what God and His Son paid for our gift. May we also remember that no gift we give or receive will last forever, but God's gift keeps on giving forever.

Merry Christmas!

PART 2 OF CRITIQUE OF LISA MILLER'S ARTICLE IN NEWSWEEK OF DECEMBER 15th.

The third and final question to be discussed is "How she defends gay marriage from her interpretation of the Bible.

As noticed in our discussion of the second question, she asserts that the Bible should be interpreted as a living document which means that its meaning changes as societies and cultures change. What it meant 2000 years ago is not determinative of what it means today. That conclusion obviously opens up numberless possibilities. Meaning lives in the times we live in and in the mind of the interpreter. Conservative scholars(she shows no knowledge of scholarship including conservatives) believe meaning abides in the origin of the text, namely the author or authors. Postmodern interpreters deny that meaning is ever determined by the author for we are unable to determine the author's mind. Even if we could, they argue that it would be a waste of time because as the interpreter engages the text by interpreting it, a new text is actually born and that is the meaning that is real.

How does she handle the texts of scripture that address homosexuality. Some such as Sodom and Gomorrah, she ignores. There are two texts in Leviticus that appear to condemn homosexual practice. These two texts she dismisses as, in her own words, "throw away texts". which is basically what she does with them. She equates these two texts with other Old Testament laws that we no longer practice. I disagree with her conclusion on these two texts, but since many in churches of Christ would probably wonder what's wrong with her conclusion since they too dismiss much of the Old Testament, I see little value of going into a prolonged argument to show why I think these commandments have value today. Clearly we are justified in omitting some practices that are embraced in the Old Testament, but some do have lasting value.

Next she considers Jesus and Paul. She argues that neither were particularly interested in marriage and that neither defined marriage as between members of the opposite sex only. In fact she argues that neither define marriage in any way. Check out Matthew 19:1-8. Jesus is asked about divorce and his view of what Moses said about the subject. In Jesus' response he appeals to Gen. 2:22-24. Both in Genesis and Matthew the only marriages under consideration are those between a man and a woman. We might add, the marriage under consideration was monogamous and not polygamus. Paul, in Ephesians chapter 5 compares Christ and His bride, the church to a marriage of a husband with his wife. Again the only marriage Paul is aware of is a marriage between a man and a woman(cf5:31).

She dismisses a couple of other texts where Paul appears to be critical of homosexuality and applies them only to prostitution or adults with children. Thus Paul nowhere condemns a loving homosexual relationship, but only a perversion of such relationships or rape, etc..

She does admit that Paul seems hard on homosexual relationships, but says that progressive scholars have discovered ways to harmonize Paul with gay marriage. In her article she quotes three scholars and is always careful to remind the readers that each is a scholar. Again no conservative scholar is quoted. Either conservative scholars are now extinct or never existed.

She realizes that the most critical text in Paul and the N.T. is Rom.1:26-28. The text reads as follows:
"Because of this(cf19-25) God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion."

Her comment on the text includes the following: "Paul is not talking about what we call homosexuality at all...He's talking about a certain group of people who have done everything in this text(including 29-31). She mentions that one scholar thinks he's talking about Roman emperors. "We're not dealing with anything like gay love or gay marriage. We're talking about really, really violent people..". If you're not happy with that interpretation, she offers the additional comment that "in any case, one might add, Paul argued more strenuously against divorce---and at least half of the christians in America disregard that teaching. Thus if nothing else works, you are still all hypocrits.

I taught ministy students for 28 years and if one had written a paper with such a flimsy argument as the above, lets just say he wouldn't have done so well. As to her view of Rom.1:26-28, an interpretation must be based upon context, grammar, and historical setting. Just which of those three would offer even a grain of support for her view. I guess she could say, "well they did have emperors and many did express homosexual lifestyle with younger males. Yes, but did I somehow miss the verse in Rom.1 that mentions emperors? That text must be hidden with the one that mentions the "really, really violent people". Yes later verses do mention some sins that might include violence, but to argue that the person spoken of by Paul in Rom.1:26-28 would have to also be guilty of the following sins is beyond absurd.

She also alludes to the Anchor Bible Dictionary as asserting that the Bible no where mentions female homosexuality. Maybe she ought to check out some of her scholars or else read Rom.126-28 which mentions "women changing natural relations for unnatural relations".

Several decades ago a homosexual author John Boswell wrote a work defending homosexuality and in it he suggested that "against nature" in Rom. 1 means "against one's natural urges". Since a homosexual's natural desire is for a relationship with the same sex this passage cannot be discussing those born homosexual. Instead, he asserted that the text is speaking of heterosexuals who are behaving as though they are homsosexual. In other words, heterosexuals are behaving in an unnatural way. Again, how would one know this by reading the text?.

Articles such as Miller's and even more clearly Meacham's comment, assume that homosexuality is biologically determined. Miller writes that "If we are all God's children, made in His likeness and image, then to deny access to any sacrament based on sexuality is exactly the same thing as denying it based on skin color and no serious (or even semiserious) person would argue that". Meacham adds that "Briefly put, the Judeo-Christian religious case for supporting gay marriage begins with the recognition that sexual orientation is not a choice--a matter of behavior--but it is as intrinsic to a person's makeup as skin color". How can you blame someone for being white or black? By the same token, how can you blame someone for being heterosexual or homosexual? The analogy to race is not just an effort to silence critics, but its the basis for making the whole issue a civil rights issue so that any voice in our society against gay marriage or homosexual behavior shoul be labeled as a proponent of hate speech. In Canada a minister could be arrested for a sermon that might include some of the points I have raised and if some have their way, such will soon be the law of our land.

The question as to whether homosexuality is biologically determined is not the slam dunk that such authors as Miller and Meacham seem to suggest. Very few studies have been undertaken and if time would allow I could show that those thus far conducted have been with extremely small samples and very predjuiced methodology. Further the two major studies that supposedly suggest a biological basis for homosexuality were conducted by homosexuals. While their homosexuality does not negate their findings. only evidence can do so, their orientation does raise the possibility of bias, especially when at least one of the scientific studies was conducted by a man who admitted his goal was to prove a biological origin of homosexuality. Even if homosexual preference could be shown to be in at least some cases biologically determined, it would not change the teaching of scripture. Heterosexuality which most of us would believe is biologically determined has constraints placed on it by scripture. Only the married are to practice it and then only with one's own spouse.

There is far more proof that alcoholism is produced by genetic factors in many cases, but such knowledge does not negate the biblical teaching on drunkenness. With God's help we are expected to refuse urges and desires that are sinful, even if we have a desire to satisfy such urges. Being single is no sin whether one has heterosexual urges or homosexual urges. One can go without sin by simply not acting upon such urges. In 1Cor.6:9-11, Paul says some of the Corinthians prior to their becoming christians, had acted upon homosexual urges, but now that they are christians they are no longer to behave in such manner.

Most of my post has so far simply addressed the homosexual component of the gay marriage issue, but the "marriage" element needs to be at least briefly touched upon not only from a biblical perspective as we have already done, but also from standpoint of history and science. While I'm not an authority on either, I do know enough to questions some of the assumptions of people like Miller and Meacham. Miller claims monogamy never became a general practice of the churches until the sixth century. Such an assertion is blatantly false. Not only was mogogamy the practice of christians in N.T. times, as well as the first five centuries of church history, it has been the practice of nearly all civilizations since the advent of writing. Most scholars believe that human governments and languages began in the Tigris and Euphrates river valleys of Mesopotamis. We have written laws going back to 2000 b.c. and such laws address marriage as between one man and one woman. Even evolutionists would tend to agree with such a conclusion and would argue that marriage arose in order to provide a father for the home. The human species is one of the few animal species where offspring have both parents raising them. In most species the male impregnates the female and then deserts her and the rearing of the child is left to the mother. Since the human child remains dependent far longer than nearly any other species, it becomes much harder for the woman to rear the child by herself. Evolutionists believe that this need gave birth to biological forces and sociological forces that evolved into marriage.

As we have learned in recent decades the brain functions in response to hormones generated and transmitted to the brain. The brain then responds with certain types of feelings and behavior. For example oxytocin is a hormone generated in females during sexual intercourse and childbirth. The feelings produced by oxytocin include attachment and loyalty. It is as though the female is programmed to attach to a certain male and her offspring. In the Bible a woman is to cleave to her husband and love her children. It seems that God has wired her so that such would be natural. So whether viewed from the standpoint of evolution or creation, marriage seems to be composed of two elements a male and female, as well as offspring. God said "be fruitful and multiply" and chose marriage scripturally and biologically as the means of doing so. If such is the case, then marriage cannot be divorced from reproduction as would be true should our society embrace gay marriage. I am well aware that reproductive tecnology can produce children where at least one of the gay parents can be a natural parent, but such was not in God's mind nor apparently was such in the mind of previous humans biologically or historically.

Everyone knows that the male hormone that tends to define him is testosterone. This male hormone produces an aggressive person who at times can be aggressive to the point of violence. It seems that this hormone was given him in order to assist him in protecting not only himself but his offspring. Yet sometimes he is excessively violent even with his family, but such is not as common as we probably assume. Not only does testosterone make one physically aggressive but also increases sexual interest. What we may not know is that recent scientific studies suggest that testosterone levels decrease after marriage and increase again only if the man secures a divorce. In other words testosterone helps the man desire a sexual partner, but the decrease in levels after marriage helps him settle down and become a loving husband. Again biologically we seem to be wired for mogogamy and caring for the children that we bring into the world.

Hopefully the discussion in this critique has helped us see that there are good reasons biologically, historically, and biblically for maintaining marriage as an exclusively heterosexual experience. Objecting to gay marriage and the homosexual lifestyle does not make us haters any more then opposing adultery, fornication, greed, and arrogance makes us haters.

Let us not be intimidated by an agenda driven movement or media. Also let us remember that when we ignore biblical teaching by running to a no fault divorce court rather than working out our problems we surrender our influence and grant it to those who oppose our faith.

I'm not going to bother with reading this post so if there are multiple mistakes that need editing, well get over it! Love ya!

Have you read the cover article for the December 15th issue of Newsweek? If not, you might like to read it before you read my critique. However, if you like you can get the gist in quotes I pull from the article. The article is presented as a religious argument for gay marriage. The article is prompted by prop. 8 in California. Since the election, the gay community has been up in arms against the religious opposition mounted against gay marriage by the christian community. They believe and probably rightly so that had it not been for the christian opposition to gay marriage, the election's results would have been very different. As Lisa Miller, the author of the article says the conflict has escalated to all out war. Newsweek has quite obviously chosen to join the battle in favor of gay marriage. The magazine could have chosen to present a news article fairly representing both sides of the dispute, but instead decided to present a cover story promoting one side of the debate without a single quote from anyone who would disagree with their conclusions. Lisa Miller is the religious editor of Newsweek. If her article were not enough, editor Jon Meacham offers his support for her conclusion.

I crique it not just to speak to the question of gay marriage, but to speak to the culture war being waged against conservative christians by liberal institutions in our society, including some voices within scholarship of christianity. Every source she quotes as supporting her conclusions are described as scholars. There is an obvious reason for this practice.

I want to proceed by addressing three questions: (1) How would she like for her readers to think about religious opponents of gay marriage? (2) How would she like for her readers to interpret the Bible? (3) How does she defend her view of the bible as actually supporting gay marriage?

HOW WOULD SHE LIKE FOR HER READERS TO THINK ABOUT RELIGIOUS OPPONENTS OF GAY MARRIAGE?

She and her editor would like for the readers of Newsweek to dismiss Bible believers as "the worst kind of fundamentalism".


Her editor, Jon Meacham, quotes the Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan who opposes the decisions of the Episcopal church to accept gay ministers and gay behavior. Duncan says that his opposition is "irrevocably rooted in the Bible" which he regards as the "final authority and unchangeable standard for christian faith and practice".
Meacham then adds his comments: "No matter what one thinks about gay rights--for, against, or somewhere in between--this conservative resort to biblical authority is the worst kind of fundamentalism....to argue that something is so because it is in the Bible is more than intellectually bankrupt--it is unserious, and unworthy of the great Judeo-christian tradition."

Listen to Miller: "Would any contemporary heterosexual couple--with an optimistic view of gender equality and romantic love --turn to the Bible as a how to script? Of course not, yet the religious opponents of gay marriage would have it to be so....No sensible modern person wants marriage to look in its particulars anything like what the Bible describes." Notice the connotations of such words as "modern", "sensible", "intellectually bankrupt". The conclusion readers are expected to reach is that conservative christians are out of touch with the contemporary and modern. Christians can't be taken seriously for they are not sensible and are intellectually bankrupt.

After concluding that the Bible when properly interpreted, as she says by progressive scholars actually supports gay marriage, she writes that "Religious objections to gay marriage are rooted not in the Bible at all, then, but in custom and tradition (and, to talk turkey for a minute, a personal discomfort with gay sex that transcends theological argument). Ah, conservative christians are, as you might have guessed, homophobic and thats the real reason we oppose gay marriage.

HOW WOULD SHE LIKE FOR HER READERS TO INTERPRET THE BIBLE?

"A mature view of scriptural authority requires us, as we have in the past, to move beyond literalism... The Bible was written for a world so unlike our own, its impossible to apply its rules, at face value, to ours." She and Meacham point out that the Bible does not condemn slavery, but christians today do. The Bible is very patriarchal, but most churches are egalitarian. According to them the Bible has been used by conservative christians in history as a support for racism, but we have finally moved beyond that view. The Bible allows anti semitism and calls for the death of adulterers, but we've moved beyond that. Now its time to move beyond our taboos on homosexuality and gay marriage.

The Bible is described by Miller as a "living document". "Biblical literalists will disagree, but the Bible is a living document...In that light, Scripture gives us no good reason why gays and lesbians should not be (civilly and religiously) married--and a number of excellent reasons why they should." What does she mean by a living document? She means the same thing as liberals mean when they defend judicial activism by appeal to the constitution as a living document. Judge Charles Pickering in his book SUPREME CHAOS describes the term "living constitution" as a constitution that changes meaning as culture and society change. In other words meanings can be found in activist judges that the authors of the constitution would never have imagined to be there. As the Roe v. Wade decision of 1973 found the right of privacy which they then concluded should be extended to the right to choose an abortion. For 200 years Supreme Court justices had ruled many times on such questions and had never found such a right in the original intent of the framers, but interpretation must evolve to reflect the thought of contemporary society. So while the Biblical authors would never have dreamed that their writings could be interpreted to defend gay marriage, we now know that it can be so used by appeal to "the living document" hermeneutic.

The framers of the constitution specifically wanted to exclude such ideas as a "living constitution". James Madison, who more than any other of the founders explained the meaning of the consitution to those who were being asked to ratify it, wrote the following:" if the sense in which the Constitution was accepted and ratified by the nation is not the guide to expounding it, there can be no security for a faithful exercise of its powers".

Thomas Jefferson agreed when he wrote the following: "Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make a blank paper by construction. On every question of construction [we should] carry ourselves back to the time when the constitution was adopted; recollect the spirit manifested in the debates; and instead of trying[to find], what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one, in which it was passed". The conclusion of Madison and Jefferson about the original intent of the constitution is the same conclusion that conservative scholars take with regard to the Bible. Please don't misunderstand my argument. I'm not suggesting that the Bible is like the constitution in its form. This is where Alexander Campbell went astray and this is where we in churches of Christ have followed him astray. The New Testament is not a constitution, but it is an authoritative document which must be interpreted by trying to capture the original intent of its authors. Such is not the manner of interpretation advocated by many universities today with reference to ancient documents are for that matter contemporary documents. European academicians have brought to America a relativist approach legal, historical and religious literature. They contend that origianl intent is beyond our ability to recover and is of little value if it could be recovered. A document means what an individual or a society decide it should mean at the time of interpretation rather than by recovering its original intent. That is what is meant by a "living constitution" and a "living Bible(document)".

Understanding of this matter shows why (at least in this area) conservative christians and conservative political theorists tend to have a lot in common and why advocates of pro choice abortion rights and gay marriage tend to identify with political liberals. Its a disagreement over how we interpret our founding documents.

I am going to have to discuss the third question at a later time, probably Monday. Thanks for reading thus far and feel free to respond on my blog.

This has not been a great morning. I began a post 30 minutes ago and somehow I managed to delete it. Ah the wonder of the computer. In the old days of typewriters and white out you didn't have such problems. Speaking of the old days which I seem to do a lot of now days. I miss them, especially this morning. Its cold outside, but its warm and cozy in my book littered office. One thing is missing--warm comforting hot chocolate or coffee. In the old days, someone made coffeee for me when I arrived at the office. Then came along those feminazis(quiz: who popularized that term). Now when I arrive and say "has anyone made coffee" I hear a haunting echo that seems to be summoning me and being the servant that I am, I speed to the kitchen to make coffee. There's always someone who rains on us good ol' boys' parade and ruins our utopia.

Speaking of "good ol' boys", how many of you knew the name of the Illinois governor before yesterday morning at 6:30. I hope I'm not alone. When I read reports about governor Blagojevich, my most pressing question was "how do you pronounce Blagojevich". Maybe its Blago-je-vick, but that doesn't sound very profound. Maybe its Bla-go-jevick, but that doesn't sound much better. Being the smart guy that I am, I turned on talk radio and listened for their rendition of Blagojevich. They pronounce his name Blaga-ya-vick. I thought that I would follow their lead, but then I remembered that talk radio is dominated by conservative republicans who have little knowledge of liberal democrats, so how could I be certain that they were right. Even if they knew the proper rendering, how could I be sure that they wouldn't mispronounce the word on purpose. So naturally, I decided to go to the mainstream media where liberal names are the dominant language spoken. After hearing all pronunciations I decided that in my vocal communication or is it oral communication, oh well whatever, I would simply refer to the person in question as "the governor of Illinois".

Of course in print I can still refer to him as Bla.......... I'm practicing for my oral presentations. To refer to him as Bla......... reminds one of the transcript of his telephone conversations as recorded in the press.

The story is fascinating from a number standpoints. First, from the standpoint of the press. Here's a liberal democrat trying to intimidate the Tribune dynasty in Chicago. Since the Tribune and other well known msm are in financial crisis and fighting for their survival, how much energy will they put into investigating this story. Will there be any effort to tie "the governor" with the president elect. The New York Times, the Los Angelos Times and the tribune network of papers sacrificed all to get the "Illinois senator" elected. Their very survival might be guaranteed if they could expose a connection of the president elect to the scandal of Bla..........."the governor". Second, its interesting from the standpoint of scandal and the democrats. Our president elect ran on a platform of change in Washington. Will his experience in Illinois be his model of change? I think Washington is already enough like Illinois. What kind of reform movement did president elect Obama lead in Illinois? I guess I just haven't heard about it, I'm sure he did, after all politicians wouldn't mislead us, would they? Third, it makes you wonder about the genesis of tax free 501c 4 charities. Do these charities arise from altruism or from political favors?

There is not an area of society that seems untouched by political favors. I have seen politics in the church just as in the community. Whenever areas becomed politicized scandal is waiting to surface. Seek ye first the kingdom where political favors play no role in its administration.

Hopefully rain may come our way within 24 hours. Some severe weather is also possible. Hope we get the former without the latter.

Getting older is not exactly what I expected. I imagined a day when worries would be behind me. All my kids would be healthy, wealthy and wise. All would fight one another to provide for Gloria and me in our senior years. We would live in the mountains. I would read, write and breathe the mountain air.

I'm proud of my kids and they are thoughtful and caring. I don't worry about not being cared for, but I didn't expect that so much care would be necessary. In ten years I've had 4 bi-passes, a stint, a pacemaker and lots of bills. Saturday I was diagnosed with "fuchs' dystrophy". If you've ever heard of it, you're ahead of me. After doing a little research, I discover there is no cure except cornea transplant. It can be treated with drops until it worsens. It produces blurred vision, watering eyes and frustration. The disease is inherited and produces swelling in an inner layer of the cornea. In a worse case scenario blindness can result, but I'm trusting that mine will not become a worse case scenario. If I were blind I couldn't blog and I know that the world awaits my latest blog as is evidenced by the many many many responses to my blogs. I have never trusted numbers and am sure that I have many silent readers.


So now I have lost my vision of reading and writing in my mountain cabin. Instead I see myself with coca cola glasses rocking in a rocking chair waiting to be fed. Oh well, I couldn't breathe the mountain air anyway without wearing my pacemaker out before its time. Did someone say these were the golden years or was it the olden years? Ecclesiastes 12 means more to me than it used to when I would preach a powerful sermon about remembering the creator in the days of your youth before the golden years set in.

If any of my readers are young may I suggest you never visit this sight again. Seems like I keep using words like vision and sight. I need to expand my vocabulary before I fall into dark(stop it) depression. God bless those readers who are experiencing with me the golden years.

Please include my sister Wilna in your prayers. She just learned today that she has chronic myelomonocytic leukemia. We were hoping and praying that the tests would eliminate leukemia, but the bone marrow test confirmed it. She is very special to me and I solicit your prayers on her behalf. She is a strong lady and has been a rock in our family all of my life. She will address this disease with confidence and faith.

Its 10:50 A.M., Tuesday morning. Our church building is located on a hill just outside of Maypearl. The wind is howling and it seems colder than the temperature would suggest. My daughter Rona and her husband are with us this week. They arrived from St Louis, Mo. Monday morning about 4:30. Its great having them with us and tonight we will celebrate my grandson's 10th birthday. It seems like only yesterday that we were in the hospital comforting mom as Elvis was making his way into the world. Time does fly.

Recently I have re-read Pitirim Sorokin's THE CRISIS OF OUR AGE. Sorokin wrote this work in 1941. He lived in the Soviet Union through the revolution of 1917 and was sentenced to death in 1922, but was later banished from the country and in 1930 began the sociology department at Harvard University where he taught until his retirement in 1955. He died in 1968.

Reading his work of 1941 is like reading a current critique of our 2008 culture. He divides history into periods. The periods cycle and re-cycle. A period may last a century or a millenium. The three periods into which he divides history are (1) ideational (2) sensate and (3) idealism. The ideational is characterized by creativity and development in the areas of religion, ethics and philosophy. The sensate features development in the material world of science, empire building and economics. Idealism is a combination of thought and reason, as well as some features of the ideational. He argues that as a period begins it has high energy and creativity, but that as it advances the creative wanes and fatigue grows. As a period begins its death cycle and transitions to another mode, great stress, wars, psychological issue and pessimism emerge. He believed that beginning in about AD 1300, we entered into a sensate period. By late in the 19th century we were beginning to grow old and that by mid 20th century we were well into the transition to either ideational or idealism.

He suggests that the greatest names and most creative minds of science, the arts, poltics etc. lived in the heyday of the sensate culture from about 1500 to 1850. Leaders of the last 150 years are less creative and more imitative. Style has replaced substance. Glitter and size have replaced creativity. Throw away best-sellers have replaced classic literature. As we look back 67 years, we can see that he was prescient. Today there is much more talk about spirituality and less talk about creative theories. The question remains open as to where we are going, but it seems that he was onto something even if his models may not have been the best or exhausted the options. Will Christianity once again advance around the world or will the ideational option be characterized by the continuing advancement of Islam. Will our grandchildren live to see sharia law in America or will America once again become a shining light for democratic values and laws. Time, prayer and people will tell the tale. At the moment God only knows the outcome.

Its a beautiful Thanksgiving morning in Midlothian, Texas. Watching the news coverage of the Mumbai terrorists attacks remind us that we have been safe for 7 years. However, New York City and the railway system of the northeast are on high alert. While relaxing this morning I watched a re-run of Roseanne and her version of Thanksgiving. It included two male homosexuals who were about to adopt a child. Roseanne's mother had a fit, but guess what, she turned out to be a closet lesbian. Then there was a school play that showed the indians hosting the pilgrims for a holiday meal only to be slaughtered by the pilgrims. The pilgrims were also patriarchal and abusive of their wives. The indians taught them that to believe in a male god rather than in mother earth would lead to such abuse. I guess I should be thankful for such intelligent input to help me celebrate Thanksgiving.

It takes the Roseannes of the world to help me remember how thankful I should be. Our country is not perfect and our history is not holy, but without our past we would not be enjoying the present. Oh we have problems. The economy is in crisis, but even the economy would not be in nearly as much crisis were it not for 24/7 news coverage focusing on every conceivable negative they can surface. Real and not revisionist history will reveal just how different the present situation is from that of 1929. If you could choose any country of the world, where would you rather live than America.

As for me and my household, we will be thankful that we live where we live and continue to believe that our God has blessed us.

Thanksgiving is the second most important holiday of the year for most Americans and Christians. Families get together to overeat and watch football, well at least some family members do. Others browse the sales available the next day, black Friday. However, most of us at least give some attention to the name thanksgiving and express thoughts and prayers affirming our appreciation for America and the blessings God has bestowed upon this land. In some ways its far more comforting to look to the past than to look to the future. Of course if we look far enough into the future, we can find great hope and comfort.

Holidays such as thanksgiving and christmas remind us of where we are in America. The parents in California who are protesting the two kindergartens where children are dressing up like pilgrims and indians to eat a thanksgiving meal together in peace. Protestors feel such activity is a sad reminder to native Americans of the abuse their forefathers experienced at the hands of the Europeans when they arrived on this continent. I wonder how many of the protestors are native Americans. At least one native American mother with children in the school involved was on TV protesting the protestors. She wanted her children to enjoy the experience and did not see it as a painful debilitating experience.

Recently Steve Colbert on the Colbert Report on the Comedy channel, began the annual attack on Christmas. Every year we hear how devastating Christmas can be for atheists, muslims, and other non-christians. Do we as Christians feel humiliation because of atheists and muslims? I don't. I believe in a pluralistic democracy where freedom of speech is protected by the constitution. All religions have opportunity to celebrate the holidays or special holy days of their choice. I don't go into mourning during the celebration of hanakah. It seems that the only words and events that are threatening to others are those associated with christianity or patriotism.

Tomorrow I'm going to forget about what others think of me and christians. I'm planning to enjoy my freedoms and blessings by sharing an abundance of turkey, dressing and football. Friday I will confess my sin and fast (or not). If any are still reading this blog, may I encourage you to celebrate our forefathers faith and enjoy the blessing of family.

Good morning. It was 32 degrees early this morning and the sky is beautiful. God's creation is such wonderful place to live. However, I expect that the new heavens and earth that constitute our ultimate homeland will be infinitely greater because not only will we have the beauty, but we will have it without the storms of life that we now experience.

Since the election its been interesting to read the views of those who are counselling the Republican party on how to recover their lost influence. Some suggest the party forsook the social conservatives( translated"conservative christians"), and as a result they lost support. Others suggest that the selection of Sarah Palin was an effort to placate the social conservatives, but served to alienate the fiscal and foreign policy conservatives. Some suggest the party needs to move to the middle while others recommend it return to its roots. All of those making the suggestions seem to think views matter, but I wonder if they really influence the election in the 21st century.

In the first couple of centuries of our history, views were important in determining elections, but even then views were only one element among many that determined the outcome of elections. Why have most presidents been taller than your average citizen? Think its just coincidence! Do you think that Danny Devito could ever be elected president(and don't ruin my argument by appealing to his credentials"?

As America has moved from the era of print media to the era of the visual, requirements for the presidency has changed. Younger, better looking, and taller candidates tend to win. The Nixon - Kennedy debate signalled a shift from positions to posture and appearance. Its not what you say but how you say it. Its personality not positions. Did you hear some of the interviews conducted with voters who had just voted. They were not up to speed on the issues, but they knew who they liked better. The likeability factor is more important than complex issues or past positions.

Now my advice to either party would be to conduct a personality contest instead of a primary to select a candidate for president. Candidates would be judged by the wow factor. Does the opposite sex find the candidate extremely attractive, mildly attractive or just downright boring? Check the height of the candidate against candidates in the other party. Maybe a multiethnic panel could judge the potential candidate on the basis of looks, humor, height, smile, communication skills, walk, beauty of the candidate's family and what blessings he will promise those who vote for him. Once a candidate has excelled in each of those categories, he may be judged as presidential and offered to the public for viewing.

What does one believe and what will he do? Such questions are relics of a print era past and have no place in the visual world of the 21st century. If I'm right then the present input offered by reformation pundits is worthless. They just don't get it!

By the way churches in search of a preacher might want to consider the above approach. Oh, you say this is old news successful churches have been following this approach for several years. Take a look at some of the best known preachers among us, were the churches drawn to the preacher because of his knowledge and commitment or because of his appearance and style? Maypearl can never be accused of being part of the visual age because if you've ever seen their preacher.....I can't stand myself when that honest gene takes over.

About an hour ago I spoke with my financial advisor. According to the latest value of my retirement investments I have lost about 50% of my retirement in 4 months. I have no social security benefits so my entire savings are in this investment. Right now we could live about 10 months on what is left. Would all join me in a verse of "sing and be happy"?

As christians we should know that this world can never guarantee us security. Social security is security only as long as long as it remains solvent. In the Old Testament God taught His people over and over that money, land, ancestors, or government can provide only an illusory security. I, as much as anyone else need to learn and re-learn the fact that my confidence must be in God and His reign rather than in this world.

I, like my brothers and sisters want to provide a quality education for my daughter, and braces for her teeth. fashionable clothes and on and on and on. However, as we approach Thanksgiving and Christmas I am reminded that there are still more important realities. I have much to be thankful for and may I "seek first His kingdom" and truly believe that He will add whatever He perceives my wife, daughter and I need. May I continue to look out to those around me who are in more dire straits than I am, and may I offer a helping hand to them. These are the thoughts that I trust God will impress upon my mind and heart because without Him doing so, I will wallow in fear and self pity, forgetting how blessed I truly am.

May we continue to pray for our country and its people. I think we may be in greater need than any of us are willing to acknowledge.

Well, its been eight days and we've had time to reflect and consider the future of an Obama administration. Whatever it brings, we must as Christians realize that there are things more important than who becomes president of the these United States. As important as that is, we are citizens of a greater country.

Our no.1 enemy is not Iran and missiles it might acquire nor socialism nor islamic fascism. If we could eradicate the world of all evil governments that threaten our existence, we would not have dealt with our primary enemy. Satan is not frightened by our nation's military might.

The kingdom of God is bigger than America and stronger than America. Yet sometimes we forget that truth that's embraced only by faith. When John the Baptist came preaching "The kingdom of God is at hand", he thought he knew what it would look like when it appeared, but in Matthew chapter 11 we discover that he was wrong. He thought that in light of the Old Testament prophets the kingdom would express itself with great power which would overpower Rome and institute rule from Jerusalem. Some still long for that realization as shown by the "left behind books" of Tim Lahaye. When Jesus did not initiate an overpowering assault upon Rome, John wondered if he was really the Messiah. John's disciples posed the question to Jesus "Are you the one promised are should we look for another?". Jesus responded by pointing the disciples of John to Isaiah 61. "Go back and report to John what you hear and see: The blind receive sight, the lame walk, those who have leprosy are cured, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the good news is preached to the poor. Blessed is the man who does not fall away on account of me."(matt.11:4f.)

Later in chapter 13 of Matthew's gospel. Jesus instructs his disciples about the mystery of the kingdom. "The disciples came to him and asked, 'why do you speak to the people in parables?"

"He replied, 'The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them."..

What is the mystery or secret? The kingdom is like a sower who went forth to sow. The kingdom is not like missiles and bombs, but like sowing seed. Some respond and produce fruit while other seed is unfruitful not because of the seed, but because of the soil. The kingdom comes by preaching and response rather than by force. John didn't know this secret. He was puzzled because of the lack of force.

The kingdom is like a man who sowed good seed in his field. But while everyone was sleeping, his enemy came and sowed weeds among the wheat, and went away. when the wheat sprouted and formed heads. then the weeds also appeared. The owner's servants came to him and said, 'Sir, didn't you sow good seed in your field? Where then did the weeds come from? An enemy did this' he replied. The servants asked him,' Do you want us to go and pull them up?" 'No', he answered 'because while you are pulling the weeds, you may root up the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest. At that time I will tell the harvesters: First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles to be burned; then gather the wheat and bring it into my barn." Later in the chapter Jesus explains the meaning. The field is the world(v38) the good seed are "sons of the kingdom" and the weeds are "sons of the evil one". The harvest is the end of the age.

This parable is not about the church that contains both faithful and unfaithful but it is about the world which contains kingdom people as well as those who could care less about the kingdom of God. God is not in the period of sowing going to overthrow the wicked. John the harvest is later and not now. The kingdom is both present as in Col:1 11ff/ and future as in 2 Tim.4:1. The mystery is that the kingdom in the present is not for judgment but for salvation. John said the Messiah would baptize with the Spirit and with fire. The present is the Spirit which indwells all sons of the kingdom and the future harvest will come with great power that will impress John as well as the angels of heaven. Then every knee will bow, now we choose whether to honor Him or not. The kingdom today grows by persuasion not by power.

Jesus goes on to say the kingdom is like a mustard seed. It comes appearing insignificant and unimpressive "where's the power?". Should we look for another?

Jesus was humble, son of a carpenter, born in Nazareth and without home or bank account. No wonder that most ancient histories hardly even mention him. Yet the kingdom he brings is like a precious pearl or hiddent treasure. To those who embrace the reign of God, they realize nothing else is as important. No wonder that in the beatitudes he describes his followers and the blessed as"poor, humble, meek, merciful, forgiving, peacemakers , hungering and thirtsing for justice in the world, and persecuted by those who oppose such kingdom people as they live among citizens of the world."

As we seek kingdom truths first and the reign of God as a growing reality we are less traumatized by the events of kingdoms of the world. "Thy kingdom come thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven" which is our homeland. Praying for the kingdom to come is a prayer for God's rule to expand. Most of the time the word basileia rendered "kingdom" should be rendered reign. It refers to a rule and not a realm.

The kingdom comes not through political parties, or massive crowds of people, but like a mustard seed. Its coming is unassuming and humble, but its end will be powerful beyond anything we can imagine. Nuclear power will be like a spitwad when compared to the harvest power of the future, but for now our role is to sow the seed and watch the hidden power work withinthe hearts of changed people.

"Redeem the time; redeem the dream" (T.S. Eliot). According to Arnold Toynbee, the historian, cultures and civilizations develop and die. The process is one of challenge and response. A culture is challenged in some way and it either responds and overcomes the challenge or the culture dies and something else replaces it. Today, we are faced with plenty of challenges and it remains to be seen if we can respond so as to preserve and even strengthen the good that remains in our country.

Russell Kirk writes:"No culture endures forever: Of those that have vanished, some have fallen to alien conquerors, as did Roman Britain; but most have expired in consequence of internal decay. When the cult failed, the culture presently crumbled to powder". Kirk is using "cult" in the scholarly sense of "religion". Kirk adds that "great cultures commonly pass through alternating periods of decay and renewal, flickering out finally after many centuries".

The mandate for the christians in America is to shine as light in our culture and call for moral renewal and thereby a strenghtening of our people. It matters little if we are in the minority or majority, God can work through one, a few or many. In the Old Testament God called Isaiah to remind His people that only a remnant would keep covenant with Him. Yet through that remnant the messiah came into the world and through the Jewish remnant of 12 apostles and a handful of followers of Jesus, the world was turned upside down. Our culture of the past 200 + years owes much to those remnants of the cult from the past.

Father may we dedicate ourselves to remnant living in order that the light of a culture influenced by christianity will not go out, but will once again burn brightly to your glory>

We are awaiting what forecasters believe will be a stormy night in North Central Texas. We shall see.

It was disappointing to learn that the student newspaper at ACU, on the day before the election, endorsed Barack Obama, but again should we be surprised? Those of us who are alumni wish it were not so, but the liberal agenda is not a phenomenon of state schools only. Our Christian universities have discovered that we will complain but send our children to them in spite of the trends. When colleges reach university status, their association with other academic institutions carries more weight than their relationship with churches. Institutions of higher learning will not be held in high esteem if they appear too conservative religiously or politically. To be too conservative is to be closed minded and who wants that stigma attached to them. Conservative and intellectual are polar opposites as far as higher education is concerned. This is a significant reason that our country is moving left.

I hope that those who take the time to read the above will be blessed with a good evening and restful night.

Now that the election is over, we need to re-center our minds and hearts upon our primary mission of bringing Christ to our world, nation and community. I want to challenge my few readers to think with me and share with me your thoughts. We have means avaiable to us today that christians of the past could not have even imagined. How do we appropriate and harness those means to accomplish our goal of outreach?

It seems to me that we are far better than we used to be in addressing the poor and downtrodden with the gospel. There was a time when people so feared the so-called social gospel that we were afraid to help the poor. After all we have the poor with us always. Our mission seemed greater. We are to save the soul and not the life of the poor. What we often did was surrender both. Now I think christians are more aware that man is whole and cannot easily be rent asunder so that we could address one part and not the other. If we ignore the physical and social plight of an individual, he has no reason to believe we have any interest in him except to add numbers to our church directory. The poor will hear our rhetoric about love, but will fail to feel loved. As I say I think churches are trying harder than we once did to express love of the whole person. The Maypearl Church of Christ has scheduled our annual christmas party and this year rather than just inviting our members, we are asking the members to invite someone or a family that might not have many social opportunities or finances that would even allow them to eat out.

As I say I think we are making progress in outreach to the poor, but we are not making much progress in reaching the more fortunate in our community. Those with more money and more education seem to strike fear in us. We have already written them off. Do we believe that Christ is appealing to and needed by only the poor and in many instances the less educated of our community. I think as a church we need to be an equal opportunity communicate and not discriminate against any group. We must not allow fear or lack of creativity prevent us from reaching out to certain elements of our community.

Share with me any ideas that you have seen work or that upon reflection, you think my work in reaching any part of society, especially the more affuent and the more educated. At the same time share any ideas that you think would make outreach to the poor, who many times do not have the education opportunies that others might have,more effective.

Ronnie

Thought we might be sobered by the following poem appearing on the Constructive Curmudgeon's blog. Douglas Grouthius, a christian philosopher and professor is the Constructive Curdmudgeon.

Weep
Weep for America,
you who have tears
left for truth.

Weep for the continued
and soon to be intensified
slaughter of the innocent.

Weep for the supernatural
stupefaction that has
overtaken us.

Weep that character
no longer counts
that image is everything.

Weep that America
has forgotten her birthright

Weep

I don't expect you to read all of my blog today. I'm trying to sort through my thoughts and doing it through a stream of consciousness expressed in my writing. So my writing is my way of organizing my thoughts and should you decide you have nothing better to do, then I invite you to tune into my evaluation and share with me yours, as well as your thoughts on mine.

Why did yesterday happen? I've already touched on the obvious in my earlier blog, but now I want to do a bit of cultural analysis that helps explain for me what happened and is happening and will happen in the future unless trends are reversed. Our country has in the past decade and a half grown more liberal and cynical. From 1994 to 2007 the following trends are documented by surveys of Americans by Pew Research Center:
1. Government should care for the poor and needy(from 57% to 69%). Once upon a time such people were cared for by charitable organizations, churches, and neighborhoods. More and more people believe such care is a legitimate function of government. I certainly believe there are times when government needs to offer assistance, but in general this should not be the primary function of government. Furthermore Katrina proved that government is seldom the most efficient means of administering immediate help.

2. Traditional marriage and family values have declined from 84% to 76%. People still have a more or less traditional view, but the realities before them is that marriages and families are losing their traditional place in our culture.

3. In 1999 55% of Americans said that prayer was important to their daily life. By 2007 that number had decreased to 45%. Thus America is becoming a more secular country. This is also evidenced by the fact that in 1994, 72% of Americans said they had no doubt that God exists, while in 2007 that number had decreased to 61%. These stats evidence the fact that the influence of the Christian faith is not where it was a few years ago. This also evidences the influence of the recent flood of books promoting a more aggressive form of athiesm by such authors as Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins. All of these books became best sellers.

4. Democrats outnumber Republicans by 50 to 35%. The only annual stats that show Republicans outnumbering Democrats was 1991 and1995. This means that if Republicans are to win national elections they have to outwork and out argue the Democrats. That's why it is so hard for the Republicans to win against a charismatic personality like Obama. There is already a tendency for America to go democratic and if they have an impressive candidate its hard for them to lose.

One other stat I should have mentioned under 3 is that citizens identifying with athiesm, agnosticism or no religion has increased from 8% in 1987 to 9% in 1997 to 12% in 2007. You will note that the increase of nontheists and antitheists in America is increasing more rapidly today than it was in the 80's and 90's.

5. How many agree with this statement "Americans can find a way to solve whatever problems the country encounters"? From 2002 to 2007, the % believing the answer is yes declined 16%. This tells us that Americans are far less confident than we once were in our country's future and that we are more cynical concerning American creativity and ingenuity than in the past.

How did we get here? What's going on in society? Why do we have less faith in God and in America? The following factors weigh heavily in my explanation.

1. Control of the major idea shaping and values shaping media are in the control of those who have little faith in God or America. Higher education, news media and movie makers are all far more liberal and faithless than the average American, but their views bombard the public and slowly but surely America begins to echo the ideas and values of these culture creators.

2. The dissolution of the American family and the transitioning of mind shaping from family to hollywood and public schools are also trending young people in a much more liberal direction with growing disrespect for America and its founders, as well as God and the churches.

If time would allow and if I thought anyone would really care to read it, we could expound endlessly upon illustrations of the above, but I know I'm preaching to the choir.

What about the future and what can we do? We must stay informed and continue to recognize the importance of our freedom of speech. We must speak or forever remain silent. If we do not take advantage of our freedom by using it for good, we will eventually lose it. We need to be courageous in our witness for God and in our articulation of ideas consistent with God's word. The enemy would like to marginalize christianity as a realm belonging to ignorant and uninformed people. They tried to do that with Sarah Palin, accusing her of trying to censor books and being an advocate of creationism and dedicated to removing the theory of evolution from our education system. Movies like Religiouslous by Bill Mayer and the books by Hitchens, Harris and Dawkins take the most extreme religious views and try to paint with a broad brush all christians as of the same genre. I think its ridiculous for christians to wage war against children being exposed to the theory of evolution. Instead we should argue for open discussion and the opportunity for intelligent design and the possibility for credible theories other than naturalistic evolution. Such a view I'm sure is what Sarah Palin would defend, but she is caricatatured as an ignorant extremist.

Several years ago the church historian Mark Noll wrote a book entitled THE SCANDAL OF THE EVANGELICAL MIND which took to task conservative religious leaders for some of the mindless and thoughtless positions we have taken over the years that have hurt our credidility. With many christians Hollywood and higher education have simply been written off as belonging to the enemy. We cannot hope to compete in the mind shaping industry of our country if we narrowly confine our christian world to the church building and those areas that pose no threat to us. Our neighbors visit the theater far more frequently than they visit our churches. They will send their children to public schools and colleges before they will send or carry them to church. If we don't compete in the market place of ideas we will lose by default. We must not be content with simplistic answers that satisfy no one but ourselves and those who are like us.

We must read quality literature and encourage others to do the same. We must prepare to engage Athiests, agnostics and secularists in intelligent discussion and not bow out as soon as they challenge our faith. Read authors like Dinesh D'souza who has taken on the best known athiests in debate. We are not in a battle about instruments of music or the millenium we are in a battle for the existence of God and the reality of the historical Jesus. The days are long past when we could influence someone by simply saying the bible says. Today, people will answer "so what" to our assertion that "the bible says". Many times we talk to ourselves with arguments that might have worked in the 50's, but the discussion has moved far beyond those issues and sometimes we continue answering questions that are not being asked and so we look and sound irrelevant and out of touch. We must be informed and help our children and grandchildren to become informed as they grow and mature.

Churches need to challenge youth to enter the world of the arts and higher education as missionaries. We worry that they will be tempted and fall. Where is our faith? If we surrender all areas that contain temptation, we will have to exit this world. Temptation is as strong in the church as in the classroom.

Conservatives and Christians must outthink and outbehave those with whom we disagree and most of all we must outpray those who may be blinded by the father of lies.

The sky is falling! The sky is falling! I think we all knew in our heart of hearts that the results would be as they were. In my lifetime the only other presidential candidate who approached the level of charismatic appeal of Obama was John Kennedy. Reagan had an appeal that I guess one could characterize as charismatic, but I prefer to attribute to his simple and straightforward presentation of conservative ideas and values.



We must all admit that Barak Obama is one of the most gifted communicators that we have ever seen in the political arena. His gifted presentations don't make him anymore right than anyone else, but it makes him more appealing. I think that appeal and the charmed existence he experienced in the world of journalism and the media were enough to overcome any argument that might be mounted against him or his views. I must also tip my hat to his campaign and its grassroots organization. He outmanned and outperformed the McCain campaign. Thus I must reluctantly admit that in some ways he deserved to win. That doesn't change at all my concern for our country and the future.



I have actually grown in my respect for McCain through the campaign. He's no messiah and as a human makes mistakes, but I greatly admire his character and his service to our great country.



What have we learned that might help conservatives in the future? We have learned that our country and its people have changed. We deceive ourselves if we believe that most people are conservative, but were just mesmorized by Obama. The Pew Research Center has polled our country every year for the past 20 or so years so trends could be determined. For the past four years there has been a significant turn leftward. Why? When I get to the office, I will give my answer to that question, and will look forward to your input.



Until then,

I must confess I've had a bit of anxiety today. Faith does not free us of concern for our family, country and the future on earth. Well, I'm headed home to watch the results. Will blog in the morning. Please be available in case I need counselling.

There is a fable that helps illustrate some of what has been happening in the presidential debates. In the fable, a dog has a bone in his mouth and upon coming in contact with a pool of water, looks into the pool and discovers what appears to be another dog with even a bigger bone in his mouth. The dog with the bone liked the idea of a bigger bone so he turned loose of his bone and reached in the water for the other bone. The result was that he lost his bone and discovered to his dismay that the water bone was not real after all. The point is that we often lose the attainable by seeking for the unattainable.

I rather think that may be the plight of the 40% of non taxpayers who are impressed with the promise of receiving a check from the IRS without having paid any taxes. Doesn't it seem more just if we take from the wealthy and give to the needy.

What happens, however, if the jobs that provide minimum income, but at least income dry up because the wealthy in order to maintain that wealth have to cut back payroll and benefits. Then the income from the wealthy decreases unless their taxes are raised even more and even more jobs are lost and the non taxpayers numbers will increase from 40% to 50, or even more. The payers become less and the amount paid becomes less while the needy become more and more. It might be better to hold on to what we have rather than look into a dream pool which seems to offer bigger benefits only to prove to be an illsion.

In America we are committed to justice and many times with the best of intentions we want to help the disadvantaged only to discover that the justice we seek is beyond humans to produce and in the process we become less just. In our effort to manipulate the system to increase justice we quite often ignore the innocent and create more injustice for innocent victims than we eliminate.

In law enforcement, our courts decided that criminals were not being treated equally by law enforcement officers. Thus the Miranda rights were introduced requiring that suspects who were being arrested should be reminded of their right to silence. After all, experienced criminals learned the hard way not to talk, but novices who were just beginning their criminal life style did not have the sreet savvy and would often confess. Our courts decided it was not fair that career criminals had an advantage over beginners. The forgotten group was the innocent victims of criminal behavior and those who would witness their attackers going free because of a question concerning reading his rights or some other minor technicality in the securing of evidence that clearly indicts the suspect. No wonder America has become less safe.

Thoma Sowell, a black philosopher, has come under attack from many of the black leaders in America because he refuses to blame the breakup of the black families and the greater share of social and financial problems they experience upon the results of slavery. He points out that until the sixties divorce rates and marriage breakups in the black community were consistent with the numbers of the white community. Slavery had been over for a hundred years. He further noted that immigration from Africa to America was and had been for decades higher than the number of black Americans immigrating to Africa. He points out that their standared of living and opportunites are far greater than they would have been had they remained in Africa.

America should provide and defend equal opportunity for all citizens regardless of race or creed. However, when the American government moves from providing safeguards for equal opportunity and begins promising equal outcome for all regardless of whether they have taken advantage of their opportunities or not, we are travelling a dangerous path and the innocent will suffer and the outcomes will be good only for those making the promises and not for those having to live with the processes introduced to effect the change.

Affirmative action is another example of taking away privileges earned by hard work and offering them to people who may be less equipped to saisfy the demands of a challenging curriculum. Parents who work hard and children who work hard in quest of a quality education can be denied the opportunity in order to try and compensate for perceived disadvantages suffered by a minority in the past. Entrance exams are dumbed down and grading is dumbed down in order to assure a successful outcome.
Then employers are disappointed because graduates with good transcripts can't perform. Our graduates when compared with graduates in other industrialized and technologically advanced countries do poorly, and we become less competitive in the global market place. The result is that all suffer including those whose deprivations we were attempting to address. We best help the needy not by redistribution of the wealth but providing equal opportunity for success to those who will study hard and work hard. Most of America's wealth is not in the hands of inherited aristocracy but in the hands of people who grew up in a middle or even low income home. Yet, their family and often their faith encouraged them to not become victims caught in the trap of the status quo, but to dream and to work to turn those dreams into reality.

Where else on the planet do such opportunities exist?Which country in the world would you rather live in than The good ol' USof A. What's is good for America is good for all Americans. If we begin encouraging class envy and begin drafting legislation designed to bring about equal outcomes rather than protecting life, liberty, property and equal opportunity we will see more and more incentive killed from equal opportunity employers and more and more incentive to reach out our hands. The only people thriving will be the people we have empowered by the loss of our own power granted by freedom and equal opportunity.

This was a great week-end. Most of you already know that my daughter Haylee was baptized Saturday evening. The previ0us week-end she had gone to help in the church under the bridge in Waco. This church ministers to the homeless in Waco and each Sunday has a worship service and a meal for the homeless. One of our youth leaders had gathered the teens in a circle and asked various members of the youth group to read aloud certain scriptures. He asked Haylee to read aloud Gal.2:20 which includes "I have been crucified with Christ", Haylee respectfully declined to read the text. The youth leader in a state of shock asked her why she would not read it and she replied "because I have not been crucified with him and don't believe I should say something that's not true of me".

Now its true of her and immediately following her baptism we all read Gal.2:20 aloud and in unison. Haylee joined with us. It was a thrill for her mom and dad, as well as others who were present at her baptism


Please pray for her and that she will be a powerful influence for the Lord.

rd

rd ramblings and reflections

Sometimes I try to think in terms of the big picture and most of the time my mind is overwhelmed because the big picture includes God and trying to figure out what He might be doing behind the scenes is beyond human comprehension except for maybe an occasional glimpse from precedents in the past. Yet faith requires that I not assume that humankind is in the driver's seat of world affairs. Thus as the election approaches I ask myself if God is involved in the process and if so what might His will be for the outcome and the consequences that would seem to follow.. Admittedly such analysis is speculative and some would say worthless. If you are of such a mind, then turn on Fox or go to Drudge where speculation doesn't include God. Maybe such is safer and more spiritual. You be the judge, but for those who have little to do and who believe God might be ok with such speculation then continue to read and let me know what you think.

First, I believe in God's providence. I don't believe that everything that happens is determined solely by man's thoughts and actions. When the ir0n curtain came down so unexpectedly and confounded all the experts in 1989, I believe God's providence was involved. When Joseph was sold into slavery in Egypt, I believe human thought and action precipitated the event, but that God brought together the circumstances in such a way that the sell of Joseph happened in order to accomplish a purpose of God that transcended Joseph's experience. I wonder if God has some purpose in mind beyond election Tuesday that might transcend America and our personal lives. Could it be that God has some purpose beyond the national boundaries of the United States.

I'm sure leaders of Iran would answer yes to my last question and would argue that Allah wants America with its infidels to decline into an economic and violent abyss. Obviously I disagree with such an assessment, but we must remember that there are millions who are praying to their God and working to see that their prayer becomes reality.

Second. consider some of the events of the past couple of months leading up to the election. After the Republican convention and McCain's selection the polls showed McCain with a lead. The surge was working and at that time Iraq was the big issue in the minds of Americans. Then unexpectedly and overnight the bottom fell out of the economy. Who predicted it? Why did it happen when it did? Coincidence. maybe! Providence, surely we don't rule out that possibility. If it did have to do with a stategy of God, then we ask "what is God up to"? Why would He rig the election so that Obama would win? Doesn't He know that those of us who are serving Him are fearful of the consequences of an Obama administration , especially as it may impinge upon certain freedoms in our land such as freedom of religion to speak as the bible speaks even on such subjects as homosexuality and gay marriage. Surely God agrees with us Roe vs Wade opened up the floodgates of death and needs to be overturned, but that such will not happen in our lifetime if Obama is elected.

Just as with Joseph, God may have a salvation strategy that we are unable to comprehend that even transcends the immediate critical issue of life. Is such possible? As important as life is, could there be anything more important. From a human standpoint my answer would be no, but from an eternal standpoint, my answer would be yes. Eternal life is even more important then life in this world. The infants in the womb are ok eternally, but millions and billions of lives outside the womb are not ok eternally. The message of Christ and his mission of salvation may in God's sight transcend the issues of American politics.

Over the past decade or two some amazing things have been happening. The center of Christian influence has been moving south and east . For several hundred years the center of Christian influence and mission was the west (Europe and America). Look at the great cathedrals of Western Europe, they are museums with memories of a christian past. America's christianity has become soft and watered down into a nice comfortable cultural community not much different from other therapeutic communites such as AA. God blessed America and I believe His providence made it possible for America to win the revolutionary war and prosper under a constitutional form of government, but today we have forgotten. God warned Israel through Moses that after they entered the promised land they would be tempted to forget who brought them there and even begin to worship other gods and give them the credit for their prosperity and plenty. Hundreds of years later in Hosea, chapter two, Hosea writes that Israel had forgotten who brought her to the land and had committed spiritual adultery by going after other gods.

Have we forgotten? For a few days following 9-11 we briefly remembered. Even congress remembered as law makers gathered on the steps of the capital to sing of how God had blessed America and pray that He would do so again. However, repentance did not come and remebrance was short lived.

Maybe its time for God to raise up His people in other lands and to move our prosperity south and east where people with greater enthusiam and commitment will carry His torch in the world and bring the message of Christ to the world. Maybe christianity in America has followed after the baals of our culture. Just as Israel did, we call the baals by the name of Yahweh but our God is not really to be identified with the God who brought us here.

Technology, entertainment. prosperity and comfort have replaced the Christ who calls us to the cross. Maybe we are to be brought back to the cross for the sake of the world, and if we refuse the journey back God will reach the world from the south and the east while we fade into the museums of the past.

I obviously have no confidence in my speculations because I'm not God or a prophet, but I do have some historical patterns from the past that suggest that my speculation is not without basis. Is such speculation alarming and disquieting, sure it is. False prophets of old preached peace because they found that people had rather be comforted than alarmed, and usuallly paid the preacher better when they heard "peace, peace" rather than"repentance, judgment".

My prayer is that the above speculation is wrong and that Tuesday will be a day we can celebrate because of a victory that in our humble estimation will be best for America and Christianiy. However, if we are disappointed may we remember that we are a kingdom people even before we are Americans and that we may still believe that God's kingdom can and will prosper if we continue to serve our king and pray for His people not just in America, but to the south, east , north and west. "Thy kingdom(reign) continue to come and expand".

Just 3 days to v day. What are our major concerns should Barak Obama be elected? socialism? enemies abroad might be emboldened to attack as Joe Biden warned? increased taxes that might even do more damage to the economy? These are legitimate concerns, but none of these are my number one concern.

My number one concern may be illustrated by the following:
(1) Joe the plumber challenges Obama's plan to raise taxes and suddenly Ohio begins an in depth background check on Joe. Is he behind in child support? Is he up to date on all his loans and taxes? Who are his friends? etc..(2) dozens of investigators upon the announcement of Sarah Palin as John McCain's running mate land in Alaska to do in depth research to see what problems they can find with Palin's past. (3) Three newspapers endorse John McCain and suddenly the Obama plane no longer has space for reporters from these papers to accompany the Obama parade. Obama's bridge building rhetoric becomes hollow when you find that those who don't agree with him will be punished rather than engaged in discussion. Will this be the way he negotiates with Iran, Russia and China? And Bush is a cowboy!

Over and over voices opposing Obama encountered discipline rather than discussion. Do you think talk radio has any chance of survival when Obama is president and the senate and house are in the control of his colleagues in the same party?? I have problems with some talk shows because I think they have more air than thought, but we are still better off by having freedom of speech as opposed to controlled speech. Do you think talk radio will be the only victim? What about the internet? What about churches? Already the IRS watches over churches and parachurch organizations to make sure they don't become involved in elections. Of course many do and have for a long time, but in the future will certain kinds of churches become more of a threat than others? Jeremiah Wright will probably be viewed as a wonderful example of freedom of religion, but those like James Dobson who consider homosexuality as a sinful behavior might want to be extra careful.

The previous paragraph would be considered by many as trading in fear. We're told "it would never happen here". Canadian churches would have said that a few years ago, but now laws exist in Canada that designate certain bibical texts as hate speech and one who cites those texts in public places is in danger of being placed behind bars. Some have already suffered that fate.

AN ACT FOR ESTABLISHING RELIGIOUS FREEDOM authored by Thomas Jefferson in 1786 includes the following: "to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles, on the supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy, which at once destroys all religious liberty....it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and order....truth is great and will prevail if left to herself.. she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict..unless disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate, errors cease to be dangerous when (truth) is permitted freely to contradict them.

May we pray that free argument and debate will always be unhindered by political power of the left or the right. If religions we don't agree with can be silenced then those we do agree with can be silenced by the same powers and if political argument we don't embrace can be silenced so can the argument that we endorse. Pray for our country's decision and for the candidates even the one we may not endorse. Truth can handle itself if allowed the freedom to express itself.

rd

To be or not to be, to blog or not to blog, that is the question. The popularity of my blog is evident by the comments I receive. Linda has asked that I continue and I appreciate her loyal following and I guess as long as I have two followers, Linda and the blog's author, its worth it. After all, as an introvert, I'm not much into crowds anyway. Today's blog presents me as the counsellee and my reader as the counsellor. In other words I need to vent and I know you will want to read my story.

In March of 2007 I bought a pre-owned Toyota Avalon. In June of 2008, I received a message from the Illinois Tollway that included a picture of my Avalon having passed through a toll booth without paying the toll. I was informed that I owed a fine of $104.00. At first I was puzzled then I noticed that the violation occurred in June of 2006. I thought "Oh this will be easy to resolve, I'll just call them and inform them that I did not purchase the car until 9 months after the violation". Wrong! I called and they informed me that I would have to provide proof.

I asked them how they had determined me to be the owner. They said the information was supplied by the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles. I then called the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles and they said. Our records show clearly that you purchased the auto in March 2007 and did not own the vehicle at the time of the violation. They suggested I ask the representative of the tollway to call TDMV and they would correct any misunderstanding the tollway might have. When I called my helpful Tollway representative, they said I would have to provide proof. By now a principle is at stake for me. I asked why I should have to correct their error and that all it would take was for them to make a simple telephone call. I was informed that they don't involve third parties. When I asked how that could be true, since they had involved them in acquiring the data that supposedly listed me as the owner of the car. They said they had policies to follow.

Meanwhile I had received another notice warning me that the fine is now 375.00 and climbing.
I spoke to five different people at the tollway and spent 3 hours of their time and mine when a two minute conversation between them and the TDMV could have solved the problem. I pointed out that the crime was committed by the car, not by me and that it seemed rather obvious to me that I am being assumed guilty rather than innocent and that the burden of proof should be on them. Furthermore I pointed out to them that even the TDMV representative said they would look awfully silly if they came after me since it is so evident that the truth is on my side. Surprizingly, they were not impressed and reminded me that I must provide documentation proving that I didn't own the auto or I would remain in violation.

What's wrong with our country? Policies and bureaucracies that spend 4 hours of taxpayers money on something a two minute telephone call could resolve. Automated telephone answering systems and dialing systems intrude upon our privacy and eat up our time. I think operations like the Illinois tollway operate by the assumption that if they can waste enough of your time and hassle you long enough you will pay whether you owe it or not. They may be right, for I don't want my license taken away or have to appear before an Illinois judge or serve time in the slammer.

I know, I know , why don't I just send the documentation they are asking for? Did I mention there is a principle at stake, although at the moment I can't remember what it is.

Sunday morning following the morning worship a young man who is in a rehab center for drug addiction, asked me to define virtue. I had mentioned virtues in my sermon. It dawned on me that we are familiar with values but not virtues. In our discussion of the coming elections we hear a lot about the values of the candidates, but not much is said concerning their virtues.

In its classical definition "virtue" means the power to accomplish a particular function. Hemlock could be referred to as a "deadly virtue". Some older translations rendered Mark's words "Jesus, immediately knowing that virtue had gone out of him, turned him about in the press and said, Who touched my clothes" in a way that illustrates the classical definition of virtue as power

Eventually, virtue came to mean a man who is whole and strong, one who can fulfill his moral function in society. The Greek virtues included were four in number: justice, prudence, self control and courage. These four are embraced in the New Testament, and specific
Christian virtues of faith, love and hope were added to these so that in later history, these were the characteristics usually used to describe a virtuous man from a christian standpoint, while at least the first four were essential to all men and women. Virtues were about character formation and were learned in childhood from family and faith communities. In modern times virtue has fallen out of favor and has been relegated to a Victorian past. Instead "values" are in favor today. Values are fluid and depend upon the eyes of the beholder. Just as the buyer and seller will disagree about the value of a car, so we disagree about morality and neither of us can prove the other wrong because values are personal and subjective.

Virtue was not just a concern of Christians. Plato, Aristotle and Socrates discussed it. Confucius said (and he really did)that the superior man thinks always of virtue while the common man thinks of comfort.

I'm afraid most of us are more common than superior. Because the family is crumbling so are the foundations. Our children know the price everything and the value of nothing. It takes virtue to shape values.

To paraphrase C .S. Lewis, I would rather play cards against a man who is skeptical about ethics, but bred to believe that "a gentleman does not cheat" that one who has a phd in moral philosophy but grew up among card sharks.

If you see an application to anything going on in the election process, well good for you. You might be virtuous after all.

rd

Another beautiful morning in the neighborhood. The skies are clear, the air is crisp and God is on the throne.

Eight days to go and then we learn our fate for the next four years. There are encouraging trends that suggest that the race may be tightening. More recent polls suggest that the difference between candidates may be 5% or less. Several swing states show a tightening. The discovery yesterday of a tape of Obama on a radio talk show advocating the courts and congress should do more to redistribute the wealth confirms the comment he made to Joe, the plumber. The radio show was from 2001 and proves that his views have been consistent. Will it make a difference to the American voters, who knows. Our heritage has been freedom and justice with the defense of property rights. Class envy has not been considered a good thing. Rather individual responsibility and self determination have been the virtues thought to lead to success. We have rejected the maxim "from each according to his means to each according to his needs.". In rejecting the maxim, we have not been indifferent to the needs of our fellow human beings.

In 2006 Arthur Brooks, a professor of public administration at Syracuse University, wrote a book containing his extensive research in Americans giving patterns or charitable giving. The bookWHO REALLY CARES is an eye opener. He thought when he began his research that he would find that left leaning voters would be more charitable because of their articulated concern for the underprivileged and poor. However, what he found was that while America has more charitable giving than any country in the world, the majority of the giving comes from conservatives. Why? Because conservatives believe it is their responsibility to help their neighbors and that more money will reach the needy through local and bureaucracy free giving than will reach them through government. Those who believe the government should redistribute the wealth are not nearly as likely to actually come to the rescue of the needy. Of course there are plenty of conservatives who are not liberal givers and plenty of liberals who are generous, but as groups the conservatives are more charitable.

When government takes over our health care, do you think the quality of care will remain the same. Check out the quality of care available in England. There are long waiting lists for major surgery and rationing of care based upon age. The older we get the less appealing is government controlled health care. As someone has said "Anyone who is not a socialist before age thirty has no heart, but anyone who is still a socialist after age 30 has no head".

Its a beautiful morning in the neighborhood. Its 37 degrees and has the fall feel. Great to be alive and blessed to live in America. However, for those of us who believe God rules in the kingdoms of men, there has to be grave concern about the future, not because our faith in God is weak, but because we trust God's word.

From a human standpoint, there are serious problems in our land. Our economy according to Greenspan is going through a "once in a century" tsunami that is destined to lead to escalating unemployment, increase in homeless population, less profits from businesses, and more government control of our economy. Retirees have seen their savings disappear. I could have finished paying for my house with the money I've lost in the last two months. I'm not alone.

The world scene is no more promising the the domestic. Russia continues to flex its remaining muscles, Iran threatens a pre-emptive strike on Israel, North Korea threatens to continue its military build-up and China progresses toward a financial take-over of our country.

The media has proved itself to be aiding and abetting in a move toward silencing certain voices in our country. Congress is most likely going to reinstate the fairness doctrine and silence radio talk shows that have in recent years offered an alternative to the msm. The left and the right have grown more shrill with the passing of time, but the right is going to see itself squeezed out of the conversation. All that will be left is the left. Oh conservatives can write books, but the populace seems more influenced by sound bites then by books.

Unions will no longer have a secret ballot which will give far more power back to union leaders.

Big business has shown itself to be more interested in gold fixtures in the private bathrooms of the CEOs tha the well being of their employees and the country as a whole. Small businesses are closer to the people, but will have a harder time surviving because of increased taxes placed on them.

However, these problems are but the tip of the iceberg. They are but symptoms of far bigger problems that may seal our fate. Two recent reports get closer to the real problems. According to a survey of the American people, 80% of those polled say there is a dirth of leadership in our land. Our founding generation produced Benjamin Franklin, John Adams, Thomas Jefferson and George Washington. How could our founding generation have so many great minds and dedicated leaders while today we search as Jeremiah did for a few true leaders and all we find for the most part are partisan politicians who will say anything and take any position just to get elected and once elected, campaign promises and positions become irrelevant until its time to run for re-election.

Another report informs us that children of Americans are less likely to graduate from high school than their parents were. Our graduation rate is the lowest of any industrialized country in the world. Why is this so? Well, look at our homes. Divorce rate is about 50%. Single parent homes are growing much faster than two parent homes. Children spend far more time alone than I did when I was growing up. I doubt if those hours are filled with study time. In a sports saturated society, many minority students grow up idolizing T.O. and dreaming of their own professional football career and the money and lifestyle that will be theirs. When it doesn't work out, they turn to "whatever". Until more black leaders like Bill Cosby and Thomas Sowell emerge to help instill the values of education, faith, and family, many will continue to go down a path that will lead to ruin and dropouts. Let not whites think we are doing better, many of our daughters are following such icons as Paris Hilton and Brittany Spears. Have you seen Brittany's latest video, it hardly encourages education!

The point is----our problem is a moral crisis that reached the point that may be beyond return. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and other founding fathers realized that the form of government they were instituting would only work when people policed themselves by morals growing out of religious convictions. Though many of the fathers were deists and not conservative "evangelicals" they still realized the importance of faith to the future of the American experiment in liberty. That's why our founding documents spoke of inalienable rights granted us by our Creator, and sought to protect religious freedom. Modern courts have largely undone what the founding fathers put in place. The Christian voice is being systematically removed from the market place of ideas by "separation of church and state". As a result ultimate moral truths are being surrendered for relativism and pragmatism.

Where are the voices of God who will stand in the breach and call for a return to the old paths of absolute moral truth such as the truths expressed in the 10 commandments. God is....marriage and family must be valued and preserved( marriage as a man and woman )... property rights must be preserved (thou shalt not steal and that applies to government also)...Truth must be the coin of our currency( Thou shalt not bear false witness ). Think of some of the things that have been said about Sarah Palin. Above all life must be protected. These values will define a nation. These values are not restricted to Jews and Christians. Read Amos, chapters one and two. Countries without a revealed law were still expected to maintain self evident values that come from natural revelation. All men everywhere should see the wisdom of defending life, marriage and truth even if they don't recognize God. That's why God held accountable nations who knew not God.

Our country has been super blessed and we have a heritage that includes God as the source of permanent moral truths. Yet we've allowed our country to evolve into a selfish, lifeless, truthless culture that is now confused about what to do and seeking everywhere for an exit strategy. Hosea said if you sow to the wind, you will reap the whirlwind. I pray that we will survive the reaping.

Read Micah 7:1-7 and practice verse 7. God bless.