Hoax or the Real Thing?

In a previous post, I referenced an mp3 file I discovered off another blog. It turned out to be a radio ad for a church in the motif of a "monster-truck ad" for sunday worship.

It was truly horrid.

A friend challenged the authenticity of the mp3--perhaps someone's idea of a joke.
(Yet, given the state of the American church, such an ad is not inconceivable.)

So, I emailed the church last week. I still have not heard an answer.

Meanwhile, I tried to google the question. I did discover a church, with a big red door, that fit the ad description to a tee:

St. Andrews Episcopal Church in Birmingham, Alabama


But I was not satisfied.

I googled the ad and came up with another blog posting the issue. In fact, the blogger claims that her sister lives in the same town, attends another Episcopal church there and enjoyed the ad.

That blogger linked to an Episcopalian blogger commenting on the usefulness of such an ad.

While reading that posting, a quote was referenced:

"Second, well, I'm appalled. Phrases like "see sin crushed beneath monster loaves of bread" or whatever that phrase was, and "giant vats of wine" just strikes me as over the top in some way that I can't quite put my finger on. I do, however, have a fairly negative gut reaction to it. I'm not so sure that caricaturing the Holy Mysteries is the best way to get people to take them more seriously. In fact, it may do just the opposite by simply strengthening the idea that going to church is not so different from going to a monster truck rally..."

This is quite amazing: typically Christians (at least laymen) who deny any conservative approach to evangelism still have scruples about approaches not forbidden in their general approach. Thus, although this ad in general is a good example of "contextualization" (or so the bloggers contend), it still hits the wrong nerve for some.

But why? If pragmatism is the driving force for churches to evangelize the world, then one man's scrupples are another man's opportunities.

On the other hand, if evangelism is strongly regulated by the Bible and not the fancies of men, then an objective standard exists to determine right from wrong. And that is a comforting thought in the midst of a world drowned in subjectivity.

We should avoid hoaxes masquerading the mission of the Church as an institution bringing fun into the life of those that hate God; rather we should desire the real thing in presenting the truth of Christ's Law which condemns the world and lovingly proclaim His Gospel which truely "crushes" sin.

SDG

Embarrassing Christianity

A few months back I was amazed to discover professing Christians cursing in worship.

Well, this is a close second: ecclesiastical barf.

(Hey, I just calls it like I sees it!).

Thanks to the Riddleblog for pointing this out.

Stop Planting Trees!!

That is the logic of the modern science.

SDG

What's Worth Reading

Recently a friend called me to chat. In the midst of the conversation, he asked about the various books I read--then, knowing me so well, he changed his question:

"What do you read for recreation?--for fiction?"

Yes, it's true: I don't always read theology, philosophy and other such mundane materials.
I read, and recommend, Sci-Fi/Fantasy--especially fantasy.

I greatly enjoy Robert Jordan's Wheel of Time series. He is the Tolkien of this century. And I'm only on volume 11!

Saberhagen's stories about death-loving machines--Berzerkers--destroying every life-form in the universe are the quintessential short-story plot-twists I learned to love in junior high literature class.

Robert Asprin's fantasy spoof series, Another Fine Myth and the like, is quiet entertaining, giving me a laugh even after fifteen years.

There are other worthy books (for another blog!) and there are other genres (maybe my wife can list a few later), but these are worthwhile--if you like that genre.

Enjoy!

SDG

Best Posts of 2005

Mr. Snitch finished his list.

Here are some of my favorites (or at least interesting...):

A possible poem by micheal moore.

Media lies.

Interesting social theories.

Social breakdown by drivers.

Thoughts on how to model the socio-political spectrum.

Enjoy!

SDG

Politics & Religion 1: Doctrine Matters

What are the conditions in which one may write bold affirmations about political figures?

My last posting was percieved as harsh by some. It was not the tone (I don't believe) of the posting that was offensive, rather is was the content: that president Bush desires a form of political salvation.

Now, unfortunately one cannot write every argument defending such a proposition in any given paper, let alone in a blog. Blogs are supposed to be pithy and, hopefully, profound (at times).

In answer to the question: one writes bold affirmations when the truth needs to be told.

As for defending my assertion, it is best to know from whence I come socio-politically and above all philosophically and theologically. Let it be known that I am not a modern Republican in principle and especially not a neocon. I am more closer to a traditional Conservative or, perhaps, a Christian Libertarian of the J. G. Machen type or the Progressive Calvinists of yesteryear.

Theologically I am a conservative Calvinist Presbyterian. Philosophically I am a Van Tillian.

Why is this relevant? It means that I am not "heresy hunting". I am merely expressing my analysis of the political scene in accordance with the above reference points. Furthermore, my assertions arose from several facts and quotes. One simple fact is the president's lauding of the Iraqi constitution because it was Democratic--regardless of its explicit socialistic nature. The remainder of the post will focus on the theological issues and the next will cover more explicit quotes and facts.

I voted third-party because Bush was not conservative enough: too much governmental expansion, too much debt, health care, etc. Many already know the rest.

In the case of my previous posting, the analysis was based upon the premise that salvation is the fundamental issue with man (and was stated as such). Another premise is that culture is religion externalized: it expresses, although not in a one-to-one manner, basic religious beliefs.

I also believe that every area of life (sometimes called sphere sovereignty--personal, familial, ecclesiastical and political) is rooted in the Word of God. Obviously, this would entail critiquing those "ministers" of the state (Roms. 13) with that Word. This necessarily means that salvation is not merely individualistic (you and me) but also familial, ecclesiastical, political, etc. All of creation, especially the human moral relationships in said spheres (and more besides), will be transformed at the Eschaton. In the here and now, they are being transformed, especially through the sanctification of the Christian individual and the Body of Christ. Thus, Christ will save the "world"--that entire system of inter-related moral relationships among men.

So, when president Bush states:

"In many Middle Eastern countries, poverty is deep and it is spreading, women lack rights and are denied schooling. Whole societies remain stagnant while the world moves ahead.
These are not the failures of a culture or a religion. These are the failures of political and economic doctrines. " (2003 speech).

--I naturally must reply. Granted this statement was spoken in 2003, but it was never retracted. Recently he stated, "Yet liberty is the future of every nation in the Middle East, because liberty is the right and hope of all humanity." (sciencedaily). More quotes could be multiplied (and will be in the next posting).

This statement alone (read the entire speech if you are unsure) proves the statement of my last posting: that the government is the savior. These problems listed (and presumably more) are from sin: the fall of Adam brought about the total ruin of all creation and all relations, social institutions, governments, etc (Rom. 5; 8; etc.). (That is why Paul applies the Law of God to those in child-parent, slave-master, and citizen-ruler relations.)

If salvation in Christ includes his sanctification of politics, then only Christ has the answer to solve that problem area: and it is not government. It is religion. Or the sanctification of culture. Specifically, Christianity is needed to leaven such cultures. In this case, the problem of poverty, etc. is related to the culture and the fatalistic ends-justifies-means religion known as Islam. Poverty does not simply arise because of wrong "political and economic" doctrines but, fundamentally, because of theological doctrine.

Granted, in God's common grace, societies can impliment certain policies that may temporarily aliviate the problems (for instance European socialism is "working" enough--for now--but that does not justify its existence). But that is not the issue: the issue is "what says the Lord".

My intent is not to besmirk president Bush, but whether he realizes it or not, his is not a Christian conservatism worth emulating. President Washington's farewell address (to name but one religious-political speech of that era) did not withdraw religous convictions from the limelight; he was not "talking politics", but integrated his religion and his politics. He knew that doctrine matters.

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." (2 Tim. 3:16).

And that means politics.

Bush: Salvation by Politics

Watching the presidential was not high on my to-do list last night.

Why? Because, even as the political pundits on PBS recognize, this yearly speech does not boost the presidents image as much as it prevents it from sliding down. Besides, in this case, the president is regurgitating typical neo-con politics.

My wife braved the event. Twice she rushed into my room exclaiming: "yougottahearthis!"

1) The president claimed that the true Islam faith is "noble".
2) The president extolled the virtues of Democracy as the path for a terror-free world (and its up to America to save the world, of course).

(This was too much excitement for my wife, so she changed channels.)

From a Christian perspective, when one realizes that man's basic need is redemption, it follows that unregenerate man will seek everything but God to bring salvation.

In this case it is politics. Otherwise known as the government.
Specifically, president Bush argued that the true way to eradicate terrorism was through revolutionizing the political process with Democracy.

There was no mention of culture. There was no reference to religion. Obviously, this silence follows when politics is the reference point of modern Humanism.

Besides the philosophical and theological arguments against such an approach, the simple fact that the Palestinian Democracy voted overwhelmingly for a hard-core terrorist organization flies in the face of such American utopias.

Democracy only manifested the wickedness of evil hearts.

Salvation is not through the change in environment, whether cultural, political or ecological; it is only through regeneration of man's heart by the power of Christ's Spirit.

SDG

Orange is the Color of...

Well, oranges.
But more to the point: it represents Bronco power in Denver and Reformational power in Holland.

In the former case, it is claimed that since the sunset is orange (at least out in the Rockies) God must be in favor of the Broncos.
In the latter case, it represents the liberator, William of Orange, who helped create Protestant Holland in the 1500s.

In the former case, orange is the color of the helmet-god whose oblong. leather scepter dominates the fall ESPN schedule, commanding obedience from its followers with weekly religious fervor.
In the latter case, orange is a symbol of religious freedom and Protestant belief, commanding respect and life-and-blood-giving commitment.

Such religious commitment--in both cases--expresses the heart-felt conviction of those in each following. If this simple concept is accepted, then it is readily apparant where the heart of many hundreds of thousands (millions?) of fanatical, fundamentalist football fans resides: not in the God of Christianity but in the god of sports.

The proof is in the orange pudding:
People spend money on what is important (real or imagined); many spend money on sports (lots and lots...do I have to tell you the price of a hot dog at a game?), therefore that is important for them.
People spend time on what is important: many spend time on sports (lots and lots...you get the idea), therefore it is important to them.

However, hobbies and entertainment are Biblically acceptable. So, money and time are not the most perfect indicators (but fairly reliable!). It is when conflict ensues--between God's law and man's desire--that the true colors bloom forth.

Thus, when God says tithe to me, fans will tithe to football.
Thus, when God says take time for me, fans will take time for
baseball.
Thus, when God says prioritize your life around me, fans will prioritize around their other god.

People will offer themselves to Saturday sports-saturation such that they are exhausted on God's Sabbath. Others will show their true colors by completely missing public worship and spending money on the local game. Still others will sacrifice family worship, bible studies, and catechism for their kids, but they will not miss that oh-so-important Monday Night Game, Saturday practice or Sunday kick-off.

Yesterday, the Broncos lost. Good.
I like a good football game. But not on the Lord's Day. It is not Football Day, but God's Day. It has been so since the beginning of this creation (Heb. 4:1ff.).

Yesterday, the Bronco fans bled orange for their god by dishonoring God's Rest.
Yesterday, true Protestant fans bled orange for their God by honoring that Rest.

Orange is the color of...dedicated Protestants and their spilt blood in years past.

Orange is the color of...your religious fervor.

Orange is the color of...offerings, sacrifices and a life dedicated to our Covenant God.

SDG

A Short Review 7: Wisdom for Christians

Wisdom for Christian Living, Matthew Henry

This condensed work of the ever-popular Matthew Henry is comprised of twelve topics for devotion culled from his works. The booklet includes relevant issues including faith, prayer, Bible study, devotion and commitment, intimacy with God, worship, relationships, the fruits of the Spirit, Christian duty, spiritual warfare, the Great Commission, and the expectant return of Christ. Each of these topics includes several sub-topics that flush out the various implications of the verse under examination. It is easy to read yet full of godly wisdom. Each devotion is centered on a verse and covers a single page.

Although this work is “lightly edited,” is still retains the flavor of Henry. His style is fluid, enjoyable and practical. He always has the layman in mind and consistently centers on Christ and the Gospel. Matthew’s godliness and vast knowledge of the Word jumps out on every page, bringing wisdom from the old paths.

It is always good to have faithful and encouraging devotional. It can easily be used for personal or family worship. This particular work may be small but it is useful for those desiring a Reformed devotional to reinforce the practical and doctrinal truths of the Bible.

Mr. Snitch is a Bold Man

Mr. Snitch (no, really that's the blog name!) is doing cyberspace a favor.
A big favor.

His latest posting explains his idealistic long-term goal with the best-of-blogs contest (sorry, it's over now). He's trying to find the best blogs based upon content, originality and the like instead of the traditional "how many hits did it get" approach (as though that means the posting was good).

He also would like to keep this up and organize easy access such that one could look up past postings from yesteryear that are still worth reading.

Bold idea. Bold man.

But, then, that's how things get done.
Sometimes.

Keep up the good work, Mr. Snitch.

Rose Bowl, Texans & Geeks

I'm a recovering Geek.
I've got a B.S. in Electrical Engineering (E.E.).
I read about: computers, math, philosophy and religion.
I use computers and play computer games.

In spite of this, I even watch sports.
I watched that most excellent Rose Bowl game last night. Very nice. I especially liked last minute plays like the one Young pulled off.

Just like Elway.

I was not always like this. The change began in the military. The dayroom, that is. All the single guys lived in a dorm with a tv room at the end of the hall.

Naturally, on Saturdays the room was taken over by sports fanatics. Since all my friends were there and there was nowhere to go in the panhandle of Florida (no, really!), I learned to watch--and enjoy--a good football game.

However, on the flip-side as a Coloradoan I have a natural (?) antipathy to anything Texan (nothing personal :-). But, since I was not always a faithful follower of football, I tended to support the underdog.

And that was Texas.

Besides, Coloradoans dislike Californians much more than Texans :-)

I'm still a Geek (hence, the blog!), but I like to think I'm breaking down sterotypes with my enjoyment of football (and hockey).

Well, enjoy your day while I get back to my computer homework, philosophy books and Quake IV.

The Gutsy Scotsman

John Knox will be forever associated with courage.

After the Scottish parliment outlawed the mass (in Mary's absence), the Queen of Scots tried to assert her authority by violating this law. She would travel around the countryside with some priests,administering the mass. She would then continue her travels but then leave a priest behind, enacting the mass without her, tempting the public to join in.

This did not bode well.

In response, Knox rebuffed Mary, Queen of Scots [c. 1560]:

“ye are bound to keep laws unto your subjects; ye crave of them service; they crave of you protection and defense against wicked doers; now, madam, if ye shall deny your duty unto them, think ye to receive full obedience of them? I fear, madam, ye shall not!”
[Professor Godfrey's history class]

Such an attitude clearly predates the supposed "father" of American democracy, John Locke!
Oh, that the Spirit would protect us from tyrants.

SDG

Bah-Humbug!

Dickens did not like Calvinism.

He was a Unitarian bent on spreading his superficial morality. This was reflected in many of his works, including A Christmas Carol.

I had heard (from other Calvinists) that this story (and perhaps others) were caricaturing Puritans. Of course, being the skeptic that I am, I held this assertion in abeyance--until I googled this question a few days ago.

G. K. Chesterson clearly ties Dickens' two works--Copperfield and Little Dorrit--to Calvinism. Elsewhere, at Literary Encyclopedia, the article states: "A Christmas Carol, however, takes up a decisively anti-Puritan stance."

Hmm..Scrooge the hard-nosed Calvinist?

Well, perhaps A Christmas Carol should be boycotted by all decent Reformed folk! At least it might get the word "Calvinist" out into the public discussion of American life.

Nah, that's too much work. I'd rather read a good book or an enjoyable movie...mmm...what dvd is this?

"A Christmas Carol" ??

Bah-humbug!

Billy Idol Gets It, Why Not Bush?

Billy Idol Gets It, Why Doesn’t President Bush?
By Rock

This year’s Pageant of Peace celebrated in Washington D.C. was marked by an amazing speech by President George W. Bush just prior to lighting the national Christmas tree. It was amazing because he managed to talk about Christmas without ever referring to Jesus Christ. The President said, “Each year, we gather here to celebrate the season of hope and joy -- and to remember the story of one humble life that lifted the sights of humanity.” He then went on to thank Santa Claus for coming to the pageant. This obscure comment left one wondering if he was speaking of Christ or Santa Claus. Many will say that at least he still uses the term “Christmas” rather than “holiday season”. This is of little consequence or gravity. It is true that this is the season of hope and joy, but only because Jesus makes it so for his elect. As Christ’s own, we can take great pleasure in celebrating His birth. However, for those outside of God’s election, for those without the proper wedding garments, for those who refuse the invitation to repent and be baptized, it can only be a time of fearful anticipation of judgment. Furthermore, the “one humble life” did not merely “lift the sights of humanity”, it saved men from the wrath of a holy, pure, just, and perfect God.

The President then went on to say,

"Christmas is a time to rejoice, and to give thanks for the blessings of the season and for the blessings that surround us every day of the year. We also remember that we have a responsibility to help those in need. America is a compassionate and generous land. And acts of kindness toward others fulfill the spirit of the season.[italics mine]"

Do “acts of kindness toward others” really fulfill the “spirit of the season”? Is that why Christ came to the earth, so that we would be “kind” toward others? Isn’t the spirit of the season that Jesus Christ lived the perfect life that we could not and was crucified on our behalf? The Bible says, “For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.”(1 Cor. 1:18) Don’t get me wrong, I am not against acts of kindness. I am against them being characterized as the “spirit” of the Christmas season.

President Bush made the following comments and quoted one of the great humanists of our day,

"As we approach Christmas in this time of war, we pray for freedom, and justice, and peace on Earth. In his Christmas Eve address to the nation in 1941, Franklin Roosevelt said that "Against enemies who preach the principles of hate and practice them, we set our faith in human love, and in God's care for us and all men everywhere." We ask for God to watch over our men and women in uniform who are serving overseas. Their families miss them -- hold a seat open for them -- and pray for their safe return. America's military men and women stand for freedom -- and they serve the cause of peace. Many of them are serving in distant lands tonight, but they are close to our hearts.[italics mine]"

In light of the great thing which God has done for us in sending His Son to die for the sins of the elect, how is it possible for President Bush to quote such a foolish statement as the one made by F. D. R. at a Christmas celebration? Any faith placed in human love is truly a misplaced faith. Divine love is the only sure footing for our faith. People change, humans are, well, human. They are incapable of steadfast, unfailing love. Even the elect are weak and realistic enough to admit it. And does God really care for “all men everywhere”? Apart from the common grace received by the unregenerate, what care exists? Did not Jesus Himself say, “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”(John 3:18) The Bible also says, “. . . For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me . . .”(Ex. 20:5) And again, “For God gives wisdom and knowledge and joy to a man who is good in His sight; but to the sinner He gives the work of gathering and collecting, that he may give to him who is good before God. This also is vanity and grasping for the wind.”(Eccl. 2:26) So we see that God’s care is not universal and His grace does not extend to everyone.

I was watching all of this on the Fox News Channel as the story broke in on the regularly scheduled program. After the President, First Lady, and some children from a Katrina Hurricane charity turned on the lights of the Christmas tree, I sat dumbfounded and shocked. Still trying to digest what I had witnessed, with all its goody two shoes implications, the lyrics of a Billy Idol song came to mind. In 1982 Billy Idol wrote a song called “White Wedding” which became very popular. It always amazes me how clearly the unregenerate prophets of this age can identify the condition of the world around them. Listen to some of the words...

Sometimes Its Fun to Vote

Well, at least voting for your favorite blog posts.

In the sidebar I'll be adding a link for a top 100 postings contest.

Of course, like all votes and serveys ony certain types of individuals participate. I know some (if not most of my readers) only read occasionally and surf the 'net for single item issues.

But if you have nothing better to do...vote on!

"To H*** with 'Holidays'..."

"To H*** with 'Holidays' Put CHRIST back in Christmas"

Need I say more?

A church in Florida started a Boycott of stores using the word 'holiday' (petition here) . Of course, it made the ten o'clock news not because of the boycott itself (there are plenty of those to go around), nor for the desire to have Christ back in "Christmas" (that's an old theme) but because of the banner itself: it expresses an anger and rage that, I think, many in the Pagan world find interesting.

Now, I grant that debate over words can indicate a larger issue: in this case the "culture war". But what exactly is the "culture war"? Many see it as the de-Christianization of America.

Rather it should be seen as the death-throws of American Christianity. Since culture merely expresses religion and that the laws of the land reflect the commitment of the populace, it should be abundantly clear that significant Christian influence has passed away. (think: abortion, political correctness, watergate, Desperate Housewives, etc.).

The irony in all this is the fact that as the churches have been a waging a frontal attack upon the the Pagan culture, their rear-guard has been left open. Theological abberations of all sorts fourish with her bosom.

Perusing that Florida church website reveals several (obvious) such doctrinal errors & oddities:

--Pastors Randy & Paula White
--"Without Walls International Church strongly believes that God has the power to restore individuals to their fullest potential."
--"...he [pastor White] prayed in unknown tongues, taking dominion over the strip clubs and other establishments associated with the 'adult entertainment' and pornography strongholds in the city. "

Doctrine and practice are appalling in many churches: doctrinal ignorance is lauded as wisdom; immature action is praised as "innovative". Churches close on christmas, curse in worship and charge admission for counseling.

Even unbelievers question the lack of focus from American church--they see us as defending petty issues. (see: "Its the most wonderful time of the year").

Doctrine and practice must be wed. The real "culture war" is within the American churches themselves.

May our sovereign Lord protect us from ourselves.

A Short Review 6: The Bible Tells Us So

A Short Book Review 5
The Bible Tells Us So,
R. B. Kuiper

This readable book is a short presentation and defense of the major truths of the Christian faith. It is an irenic work, with illuminating illustrations, and an excellent conclusion underlining the antithesis between regenerate and unregenerate, Christianity and Liberalism.

Writing against the liberalism and modernism of his day, Kuiper explains who God is, the salvation he wrought and the uniqueness of Christianity. The liberals of his day cried, “No creed, but Christ!” all the while watering down the work of the Savior. In contrast, he correctly maintains that Christianity is both doctrine and life; when defining saving faith he recognizes the danger of accepting Christ as a person without the Biblical propositions of who and what He is and the danger of accepting the propositions of Christ without the Biblical Person (p.97). The two must be wed.
It is imperative that the Church today fight the temptation to follow the siren call of old-school liberalism—

many today, as I have heard with my own ears, utter the same trite comment: “No creed, but Christ!”

Meanwhile, we wonder why high percentages of Evangelicals are becoming Mormons and Jehovah Witnesses. Proposition (doctrine) and Person (life) cannot be divorced.

This is only one of the many problems and issues covered in this book. Nevertheless, for a simple review of the basics or for encouragement in the faith, The Bible Tells Us So is recommended for old and young alike.

SDG

Verbal Vomit or Golden Apples?

After, providentially, finding a blog through Christianity Today, I nearly dropped my computer. The posting outlined an amazing event at a church in Denver--Scum of the Earth. The pastor was in a bit of a quandary: you see, the church celebrated Christmas through a service that included poetry readings. And the woman they asked to compose a poem included the f-word—not once or twice, but multiple times. At the end of the day, after much consulting, it was decided to let her read a modified version for the Christmas Eve service—including “only four expletives” and those as quotes from another character in the poem.

How thoughtful.

Naturally, there were strong reactions from the audience.

Such verbal vomit reflects more than a desire of a pastor to “connect” with a sub-culture. It displays a basic misapprehension of what the third commandment entails. Although clearly sinful, it is a barometer of the level of rebellion found in churches today. A wandering mass of vagabonds seeking any means to stretch the limits of credulity, some in the wasteland of American Christianity (whether in the mainline churches or not) have no sense of shame.

At first blush readers may condemn my language as harsh. Please bear with me: I acknowledge that churches have a zeal for evangelism—but more often than not, it is not according to knowledge.

I have not the time to elucidate the breadth and depth of this commandment; nor explain the differences between false swearing, oath taking and cursing; nor expound how using God’s handiworks—creation—in a flippant and coarse manner demeans God Himself; nor explicate the psychology of how sinful men verbally vomit on others as a form of emotional expiation for their anger, guilt, self-righteousness and the like.

Language is neither private (God is everywhere) nor unlimited and infinitely pliable (only God is unlimited). Thus, individuals or even a group of individuals do not have the right to do anything with language. In other words, language, although conventional, still expresses cultural values—and since all cultures are rooted in religion, that language expresses one’s religion. And all religions have standards of right and wrong, which, again are reflected in language. So, when a sub-culture wishes to express its rebellion against the larger cultural mores it turns toward those things that are taboo, obscene or shocking. Shame is the first thing to go.

Besides the obvious fact that we should offend people with the Gospel (Christ preached more about sin and hell than grace) and not our speech, it is patently clear that Christians should avoid coarse, filthy speech (Col. 4:6, Eph. 4:29). “Filth” in the Greek means “foul speaking, low and obscene speech” [Thayer]—the Greek background points not to blasphemy per se (language against God) but coarse or crass words.

Followers of Christ do not need to act out their old ways to bring shock to their audience. Imagine: instead of reading a poem about sinful acts, one acted it out instead—that by voyeuristic proxy the reader of the play gestured as well as cursed?

One cannot have speech be a free-for-all without denying absolute truth. If this were so, what words would express rebellion, dissatisfaction or dishonor? One could say anything with moral impunity.

Although most of this posting is related directly to abuse of language, the third commandment involves false doctrine as well as false speech. So, even though many Christians would be offended at verbally transforming the marriage bed into a crass cursing, they should be more offended at doctrinally filthy mouths. Besides the obvious pragmatism of the situation, with its disregard for the third commandment and apparent therapeutic usage of filthy words, the last installment on the blog made a passing remark that was shocking in its simplicity and amazing in the fact that no one commented on it:

“Most non-Christians I know do not hate God; they think that God and the church hate them because they are considered vile. We want to reverse that deception…” ---Mike Sares

Really!? Romans one through three clearly declares that man is self-deceived, loving sin and hating God: to love the world is to hate God (John 15:18ff.). Thus says the Lord:

The world cannot hate you, but it hates Me because I testify of it that its works are evil. –John 7:7

Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. –Romans 8:7

And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;
being filled with all unrighteousness…backbiters, haters of God—Romans 1

Since this false doctrinal stance is maintained, false speech is allowed. It is that simple. The sub-culture under question is not assumed to be in rebellion against God through its language; thus, it is acceptable to use such language to communicate to them. Since they "do not hate God" then the language they use does not express hate; therefore such language is proper to use.

It is too bad the entire situation is setup as an either/or fallacy in which that church is supposedly taking a stand for people perceived as “vile”—I do not perceive them that way and my church welcomes them. The real fact is that many of them do not want our churches because we make them uncomfortable (or should!) with the Law and the Gospel.

James reminds us that our tongue is a powerful member: we must choose—through His power—between breathing sweet truth or vomiting lies. Between ingesting golden apples or digesting garbage.

A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in settings of silver. Proverbs
25:11

SDG

It Was Worth It

What would you think if 500 hundred people waited at 4 in the morning for church to open up?
Your fist thought would be that this was not real; your second thought would be that the church must be handing out 100 dollar bills!

Either way, you are acknowledging a basic psychological fact:

people sacrifice for their gods.

In this case, Black Friday represents a "holy" day for millions of Americans offering their "tithes" to the god of prosperity. They are willing to inconvienence themselves to get up before the worms are awake; they are willing to expend precious family, house and work time to wait in line for fleeting material goods. Adding in the traffic headackes, complaining children and customers as well as one's sanity, Americans expend much more mental, physcial, and temporal energy for a once-a-year event than they do figuring out what issues to vote upon!

But they all believe it was worth it.

When this "tithing" (as well as the "tithing" throughout the year on TVs, cars, videos, cable, internet, computers and games) is added up it quickly dwarfs the church tithing of America. When the time, energy and commitment are thrown into the equation, church recedes into the background. Apparantly, the things of this world are worth such efforts. The things of God are not.

Sacrifices to one's god is easily discovered through such an analysis: what are you willing to do to please your god?

Get up early for prayer time, sunday school and church?
Set up the books and chairs sunday morning?
Take time to attend weekly bible study?
Tithe to God's Church?
Pray, read and study the Bible daily?

We are willing to spend time, energy and money on the things that are worth it.
Clearly, God's church and people are worth our time.
It is worth it for me.

Is it worth it for you?

SDG

Thanks For Giving Us Life, Lord

Thank You, Lord.

Praising, lauding and glorifying You for all that You have bestowed upon my family is the least I can do. Even this, Oh Lord, is but a faint shadow of the honor due You.

As such, even after serving You, it is only what is required of us, Your unworthy servants.

Thank you for:

America:
Freedom of Association
Freedom of Arms
Freedom of Speech
Freedom of Worship
Freedom of Selling
Freedom of Buying

Body of Christ:
Reformed Churches
Orthodox Presbyterian Church
Providence Church
Deacons
Elders
Ministers

Thank You for,
Friends,
Health,
Prosperity.

Thank You for: security, technology and plenty; for breath and life.
Thank you for Your Son and the Spirit who breathes life into us.

For all this my family worships you; for all this we do not deserve. It is not of our own making, doing or goodness that brought this upon us. It is only Your undeserving grace, mercy and kindness.

In all this prosperity--of freedom, worship, and life--we plead one thing of Thee:

"Give me neither poverty nor riches -- Feed me with the food allotted to
me; Lest I be full and deny You, And say, 'Who is the LORD?' Or lest I be
poor and steal, And profane the name of my God." Prov. 30:8-9.

SDG