You Can't Help Who You Hate?

If I were to say I can't help who I hate, to justify some very serious act of  revenge, I suspect many if not most would say in response:

Well, you may not be able to help who you hate, but you must control how you act on that hate! When it comes to  hate, we understand that feeling can't be allowed to have free reign over or actions. But, what about love?

If we have loving feelings toward someone, are we incapable of controlling our actions that flow from those feeling? This seems to be some of the rationalization for overthrowing traditional, and dare I say biblical, concepts of sexual morality that had remained pretty constant throughout civilized societies up till just recently.

Do I agree we should be able to love whoever we want? Yes, the Bible says we should love everyone, even our enemies, but that does not mean we always feel warm feelings toward them? No, that is why they are our enemies, but it does means we do good to them, we love them with our actions, in spite of the feelings we may have. And, of course does not mean we should have sex with our enemies!

A huge error, or perhaps even intentional and nefarious switching of word meanings, has left many in modern society thinking that love and sex are interchangeable terms. The Bible has no issue with people loving (feelings) whoever they want, and we should do good to all (loving actions), but who we have sex with is a matter the Bible clearly speaks to.

Biblically, we should only have sex with someone of the opposite sex (defined by biology not feelings), to whom we are married.

I know, you may not  believe the Bible and do not want it to guide your life in sexual matters or otherwise. OK, fair enough, but please use accurate language as you defend your lifestyle.

There are the feelings of love which we can choose to act on or not, just like there are feelings of hate that we can act on or not. The only reason we might choose to not act on our hate is that some things are wrong (according to some moral standard), then there is surely some standard that dictates where the line between right and wrong is as it relates to acting on loving feelings as well. Kidnapping someone so you could have them all to yourself, because you have such strong loving feelings for them, would be morally wrong for example.

And of course love and sex are not the same thing, so if you mean you can't help who you have loving feelings for I will agree, but if you mean you can't help who you have sex with, that is ridiculous! 

Bill Nye, is he being dishonest, or is he not at all bright?

It is hard to believe this was meant to be a serious discussion of abortion issues?

 

OK, so Bill Nye says the reasons women should be able to get abortions include:  

1. Because many eggs never get attached to the uterine wall and pass from the woman’s body on their own?

Really? Does that have anything to do with a child being ripped from the womb who has already developed to the point of being recognizable as a human?

2. Because the woman may not like the man who got her pregnant?

OK, now what if she does not discover he is a jerk until the baby is 6 months old? Should she kill the baby then? What does the life of the baby have to do with how much the mother likes the father?

3. Because we would not even know about how eggs are fertilized or many other things without science.

Again, how does what we know about reproduction from science translate into making killing unborn babies ok?

      4. Laws restricting abortion are in nobody’s best interest.

I think the baby would disagree!

Please see picture below, and send my cat some money!

 

I took this picture of my cat "Flop". If you wanted to use it for any reason, I would let you do so for no charge, but now PETA is attempting to gain animals the right to own the copyright on their art.

Link - PETA sues to get animals copyrights!

However, as the bank will not let my cat open an account, how unfair, please make any checks for Flop out to me, and I will use the money on her behalf!

Funny, but also sad advertisement for a bible study!

I received an add in the mail for an "Animate Bible Faith Practices" curriculum. It claims to be good for among other reasons being "just right theology".

Described further as, "Built on centrist Protestant theology, it's not too liberal or too conservative."

It sound ideal for folks who don't care about theology at all!

False teachers and their undermining of the scriptures with emotional arguments.

Those who seek to force the church to accept lifestyles as normal, that the scriptures clearly condemn, are using emotional arguments that highlight the suffering of those who are being told they should repent of such lifestyles, rather than embrace them. There are many problems with the logic of these arguments and of course it puts human experience over scripture. James White has done a three part response to David Gushee, a leader in this false teaching movement which can be accessed through the links below. It might help us prepare to refute such arguments, if we fully understand what they are. 

James White refuting false teaching part 1

James White refuting false teaching part 2

James White refuting false teaching part 3

A giant inconsistency in the animal rights movement!

I am sure many others have made this point before, but I was struck by something this morning as I was reading in -

Matt. 6:26 Look at the birds of the air, for they neither sow nor reap nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not of more value than they?

Is it true that we are more valuable than the other animals? If so, then what does that mean regarding our responsibility toward the earth and other life forms? If we are not more valuable, do we have any special responsibility on earth?

Gen. 1:24 Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind”; and it was so. ²⁵ And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. ²⁶ Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all^[ the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” ²⁷ So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. ²⁸ Then God blessed them, and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.”

²⁹ And God said, “See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. ³⁰ Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food”; and it was so. ³¹ Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good. So the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Here are a few key observations from this text:

1st, we were created by God and in the image of God, something that was different from all the other living things God created.

2nd, we were given dominion over the other created things and the right to eat of them as God permits.

3rd, the unique nature/value of mankind, comes with the command that we be stewards of the earth!

Later we read a beautiful summary of this concept in -

Gen. 2:15 Then the Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to tend and keep it.

So, we have a clear distinction made by God between us and the other life He created. However, with that comes a special responsibility to tend and keep the earth. He clearly has called mankind to be caretakers of the earth, and we must assume that we can do that wisely and effectively, as we seek to follow Him according to His word!

However, if we are not different from the other life forms on earth, then we have no special responsibility to manage or protect them! If God did not set us apart for that role, then we don't have it. In fact, if you were to believe in evolution, I could argue that I have a responsibility to do what is best for me and me alone! If I am stronger, and you are weaker, I should survive and you should die, if that is what my survival requires.

You might argue for some kind of responsibility to steward the earth so there would be food for other humans tomorrow, so the human race can survive, or you might say we have a special responsibility to take care of other animals, because we have a unique evolutionary place, as very intelligent beings, to do what other animals can't.

To these or any other arguments for our responsibility toward other life forms I give the same answer –

Says who?

Pita cofounder and animal rights activist Ingrid Bergman said “A rat, is a pig, is a dog, is a boy”. If you believe mankind is just another life form created through the evolutionary process, then you must agree with miss Bergman, and it follows we have no special value or obligations on earth.

So, either we believe God created us in His image to worship and serve Him as outlined in His word, including being special stewards of the earth.

Or

We could sleep just fine and let the rats, dogs, and pigs worry about other life forms if they want!

  "Scripture taken from the New King James Version®. Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved."

Incredibly good argument against abortion!

I found this article on bodily autonomy and abortion, by Matt Walsh, to be most excellent. It is a little graphic, but the points he makes on how our freedom to do with our bodies as we wish must be limited, are well worth a read.

Here is a sample quote:

"If my body is autonomous, my person must be autonomous, and if my person is autonomous, then my very existence is autonomous, and if my very existence is autonomous, then it is simply unacceptable and (by your logic) immoral for anyone to expect me to do anything for anyone at any point for any reason."

Did the president smoke real marijuana?

There has been much written on president Obama's recent comments on the dangers, or lack of dangers, of smoking marijuana.

Here is one such article - the president on pot!

I am most shocked by the president comparing smoking marijuana with smoking cigarettes, as seen in the following quote -

"As has been well documented, I smoked pot as a kid, and I view it as a bad habit and a vice, not very different from the cigarettes that I smoked as a young person up through a big chunk of my adult life,"

I agree that cigarettes are a bad habit; they do harm to the one smoking them, they also do harm to those exposed to second hand smoke, and there are significant cost to society as a whole for the health effects of those who smoke cigarettes. All these are true of smoking marijuana as well. However, I would be much more willing to trust someone who just smoked a cigarette to fly a plane, do surgery or have their hand on the nuclear trigger!

I regret to admit I used tobacco for many years and even more regret that I used marijuana for many years as well. I wasted time, money and hurt my health with tobacco, as I did with marijuana. However, with marijuana I also wasted many hours of time I should have invested in school, work and relationships. Marijuana is also a sin for which I am very sorry. I also made bad decisions while under the influence of marijuana and used it to cover the guilt and shame I had for other sins, rather than facing and repenting of them. Here an article about marijuana use and sin - thegospelcoalition

To compare marijuana with alcohol may be reasonable. Alcohol does much damage to individuals, families and society, just like marijuana. But do we really need one more legal way to hurt ourselves and society?

However, to compare marijuana to cigarettes is absurd and I have only a few possible explanations for why the president would make such a ridiculous comparison -

1. He is the devil's servant and pushing the devil's agenda.  This in fact is true of all who have not been born again through faith in Jesus, so it may apply with or without any of my other theories about the presidents view on marijuana.

2. A purely political motive - the president thinks people on pot will be more likely to vote Democrat and/or to support his socialist agenda.

And for the most generous possibility -

3. The president was sold something besides marijuana, that he smoked as a child, and therefore actually does not know that smoking marijuana really does cause impairment. Could the president be comparing the effects of smoking oak leaves to cigarettes? That would explain his comments.

Regardless of the reason for his comments, the president has essentially opened the door for everyone of every age to feel like smoking marijuana is no big deal and legalizing it can bring nothing but good results.

Deciding to make these comments may be the worst decisions he has made in my opinion, and that says a lot!

Record low temperatures are being caused by global warming, really?

I am not a scientist, I am not qualified to say what affect global warming is having on the earth's climate. However, right after I was joking with my wife this morning that someone will probably blame the record low temperatures on global warming, they did! An expert on one of the national news morning shows suggested that this record cold snap was likely linked to global warming. He could be right, but it makes as much sense as saying -

The high flood waters are due to the ongoing drought conditions.

OR

The obesity epidemic is being caused by a worldwide famine.

OR

The population explosion is due to decreasing fertility rates.

OR

As we see in this record cold being caused by global warming claim - all the data that conflicts with the experts theory, actually proves it to be true!

Sometimes a little humor is needed!

“will continue to suffer permanent, severe and irreparable harm and injury"

What is this quote referring to?

Maybe -

Victims of ongoing violent abuse?

Those living without food, shelter or clothing?

Military prisoners at Guantanamo Bay?

People who are being exposed to extremely violent or sexually graphic images?

No, not any of these things.

Prepare yourself for shock and awe!

It describes the harm that will be done to visitors and students at a school in Ohio if they catch a glimpse of a depiction of Jesus in a display of famous historical figures!

The ACLU and the Freedom from Religion Foundation used these words in their law suit against the school which now has to remove the picture (after 60 years on display) and they must pay a fine of $95,000 as well.

Here is a link to an article with more details from Fox News.

Sodom and Gomorrah had nothing on the U.S.

I still can't believe this is true - California Gov. Brown signs transgender student bill