(This upcoming election is more about the out of control growth of our federal government for many years now, but especially over the past 2 years. The following commentary addresses this issue from a Christian perspective.)
Kudzu Government
Chuck Colson, Breakpoint.com, May 14, 2010
Many Christians are uneasy with the growth of government in American life. They just can’t quite explain why.
From General Motors to health care. From bank bailouts to national anti-obesity campaigns. Government is becoming more and more involved of every aspect of American life. Most Christians are rightly uncomfortable with this. But most of us can’t explain to our friends and neighbors why that is. That’s one reason I broadcast BreakPoint every day—to help Christians understand and defend a Christian worldview as it applies to every area of life. It’s also why I launched the Colson Center for Christian Worldview. At ColsonCenter.org, we feature the work of respected theologians and worldview thinkers—people like T.M. Moore, my long-time colleague.
As part of his weekly “ViewPoint” Bible studies, T.M. Moore has written for us a fantastic study called “Kudzu Government: The Lust for Autonomy and the Roots of Statism.” http://www.colsoncenter.org/the-center/columns/viewpoint The fundamental principle of a statist worldview, T. M. writes, is the belief that “government is in the best position to create the conditions and provide the framework for maximum human flourishing. When such becomes the operating principle of a nation, then nothing is off limits for government intrusion, revision, redefinition, and control.”
T. M. compares this kind of government to kudzu, a rapid-growing, leafy vine. Kudzu has its proper place—as an ornamental vine in a garden. But when it grows unchecked, it literally devours everything in its path. Any of you who have ever driven down a country road in the South know exactly what I mean.
Likewise, government has its proper, biblically sanctioned role—which is to restrain evil and promote justice. But as T. M. writes, “When government becomes a law unto itself...it breaks the bounds of its proper confines, and forcing its ways on every other area and aspect of life, it smothers and chokes everything it touches—values, institutions, establishments and entities—and replaces them with itself.” The statist worldview is particularly dangerous to religion. As T.M. writes, “Few things rankle the kudzu state more than the loud-mouthed prophet who simply won’t go along with the program.” So statist regimes either silence religion altogether (a la Communism and Nazism), or, just as insidiously, co-opt religion to use as a tool for government power and policy.
Look at the situation in America today. I’ve talked many times about the threat of abortion and gay marriage to religious freedom. Revoking non-profit status, laws about anti-discrimination in employment, revoking medical or pharmaceutical licenses—these are all “soft” ways that government can seek to force religious individuals and institutions into conforming to government policies. What makes T. M.’s study on “Kudzu Government” so useful is the way it employs Scripture to illustrate the dangers of statism. The story of Jeroboam, Joseph in Egypt, Ahab, David, and Solomon—all of these illustrate the tendency of those in power to want to assert more and more authority over their subjects’ lives.
Please come to ColsonCenter.org to download a free copy of “Kudzu Government.” Use it yourself, and give it to your small group. And be sure to come back every week for a new ViewPoint study by T. M. Moore on topics of great interest to Christians—all from a thoroughly biblical perspective.
FURTHER READING AND INFORMATION
Rex Lex: Kudzu Government Part 1, T.M. Moore | Colson Center | May 10, 2010
To Be as God: Kudzu Government Part 2, T.M. Moore | Colson Center | May 11, 2010
What’s Yours Is Ours: Kudzu Government Part 3, T.M. Moore | Colson Center | May 12, 2010
Redefining Religion: Kudzu Government Part 4, T.M. Moore | Colson Center | May 13, 2010
Troubling the Truthful: Kudzu Government Part 5, T.M. Moore | Colson Center | May 14, 2010
It’s the Culture: What Makes a Good Society, Chuck Colson | BreakPoint Commentary | May 13, 2010
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Saturday, September 11, 2010
#68- The Mosque Controversy, Part 3: A Unique look at Islam; Also A Commentary on the Koran Burning Controversy
[As every Sunday, please turn into “The Coral Ridge Hour" this SUNDAY 5-5:30 pm (over-the-air, channel 40.1 in Orlando). They will have the second of a two part feature on Radical Islam. Also, if you have cable, please call 1-800-295-5869 for the broadcast times of their new program called “Cross-Examine” - "to help viewers examine everything in life through the lens of the cross of Jesus Christ.” (or go to their website: www.crossexamine.com)]
(On this 9th anniversary of 9/11, I am reminded that on that day, I was at my desk in the office when I heard people rushing to the conference area of the office. As I saw people gathering around a television set, I saw on the screen a plane flying into a building. My first thought was, “What are people doing watching a movie?!!” Then, as I stood there, I saw the second plane crash into the second tower and suddenly realized it was not a movie but a live news report!! It was all so surreal, and I still don’t remember when or how any of us got back to focusing on whatever we were working on that day. So, what’s YOUR memory of that tragic day?)
George Sada, an ethnically Iraqi Assyrian CHRISTIAN and a hero in the former Iraqi air force, wrote a book entitled: “Sadam’s Secrets: How an Iraqi General Defied and Survived Saddam Hussein,” (2006). In it he says:
“I’m often asked about militant Islam and the threat of global terrorism. More than once I’ve been asked about the meaning of the Arabic words “Fatah” and “Jihad.” What I normally tell them is that to followers of the militant brand of Islam, these doctrines express the belief that Allah has commanded them to conquer the nations of the world both by cultural invasion and by the sword. In some cases this means moving thousands of Muslim families into a foreign land-by building mosques and changing the culture from the inside out, and by refusing to assimilate or adopt the beliefs or values of that nation--to conquer the land for Islam. This is an invidious doctrine, but it’s …being carried out in some places today by followers of this type of Islam.” (pp.285-6)
“[They] won’t be stopped by appeasement. They are not interested in political solutions. They don’t want welfare—their animosity is not caused by hunger or poverty or anything of the sort. They understand only one think: total and complete conquest of the West and of anyone who does not bow to them and their dangerous and out-of-date ideology of hate and revenge.” (p.289)
“What I want to say next is not easy for me to say but I think I must say it anyway. One of the nicest things about the American people is that you are generous and friendly people, and because of this you are sometimes naïve and overly trusting. You want to be friendly, so you open up to people and then you’re surprised when they stab you in the back. Many brave young soldiers have died in Iraq for this reason, but I think this is also a big part of the problem with the State Department and others in government who fail to understand the true nature of this enemy” (p. 289-90).
(I know that this event has now been canceled but I thought I’d go ahead and post it anyway just for the insight it presents.)
A Bad Idea - International Burn a Koran Day: by Chuck Colson, Breakpoint.com, September 8, 2010
Remembering the terrorist attacks of 9/11 is something we should do. But there are appropriate and inappropriate ways to do it.
Pastor Terry Jones’s thoughts about Islam are simple and direct. The title of his book says it all: Islam is of the Devil. The same thought is on a sign outside of his church, the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida, and on the T-shirts and coffee mugs the church sells. In order to raise greater awareness of the dangers of Islam, Jones has designated 9/11 as “International Burn a Koran Day.” According to their Facebook page Jones hopes, and I quote, “To bring awareness to the dangers of Islam and that the Koran is leading people to hell. Eternal fire is the only destination the Koran can lead people to so we want to put the Koran in its place—the fire!” End quote.
Every Christian believes that no man can come to God but through Jesus Christ. That’s not a bigoted remark, that’s simply the truth claim that underlies Christianity. And I would expect that Muslims would tell me that my religion, Christianity, is a false religion. The unique thing about the United States is that we are prepared to fight for and defend every single individual’s right to his or her choice to practice the religion of their choice. We learn to respect our differences in a free, pluralistic society. I have also referred repeatedly on BreakPoint to the dangers of the Islamist movement, which is an ideologically extreme perversion of the Islamic faith. And this is why so many armed conflicts around the world involve Muslims—often fighting other Muslims.And the attempts to inject parts of Sharia Law in the United States and Britain are a hazard to our constitutional order.
All that being said, I find Jones’s plan to burn the Koran foolish and contemptible. It poses dangers Jones has either overlooked or chooses to ignore. As Dr. John Rankin, president of the Theological Education Institute correctly notes, if Jones burns the Qur’an, “the images will reverberate on the Internet internationally, and this could lead to unparalleled fury in the Muslim world.” And most of that fury will be directed into violence against Christians in Muslim areas throughout the world. If Jones goes through with this horrid plan, people—Christian people—will suffer and some will die. General Petraeus has even expressed fear for our troops in Afghanistan.
Second, Rankin comments, “The Gospel would thus be slandered.” The Apostle Peter tells Christians that we are to be good apologists, but as we give people reasons for our hope in Christ, it has to be “with gentleness and respect.” Burning the Koran will be taken as the height of disrespect by the Muslim world where copies of the Koran are treated as sacred objects and are handled with the utmost care and reverence. Nothing in the Bible encourages us to treat Muslims or any other religious group with this kind of contempt. Rankin concludes, “The stakes are high in terms of the reputation of the Gospel and protection of innocent lives in tinderbox sections of the Muslim world.”
My most fervent prayer is that Jones will reconsider and cancel the Koran burning in the name of the Gospel of Peace. Part of a Christian worldview is the ability to articulate what we believe and why we believe it in the face of competing worldviews like Islam. But we detract from our witness if we allow anything except the Gospel to offend our unsaved neighbors.
Further Reading and Information
Far From Ground Zero, Obscure Pastor is Ignored No Longer, Damien Cave | The New York Times | August 25, 2010
Gainesville church plans to go ahead with Qur'an burning, James A. Smith, Sr. | Florida Baptist Witness | September 7, 2010
John Rankin Blog, Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Seven Questions for the Pastor Who Wants to Burn Copies of the Koran on 9/11, Fox News | Rev. John Rankin | September 3, 2010
[http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/09/03/rev-john-rankin-pastor-terry-jones-dove-world-outreach-center-bureau]
(On this 9th anniversary of 9/11, I am reminded that on that day, I was at my desk in the office when I heard people rushing to the conference area of the office. As I saw people gathering around a television set, I saw on the screen a plane flying into a building. My first thought was, “What are people doing watching a movie?!!” Then, as I stood there, I saw the second plane crash into the second tower and suddenly realized it was not a movie but a live news report!! It was all so surreal, and I still don’t remember when or how any of us got back to focusing on whatever we were working on that day. So, what’s YOUR memory of that tragic day?)
George Sada, an ethnically Iraqi Assyrian CHRISTIAN and a hero in the former Iraqi air force, wrote a book entitled: “Sadam’s Secrets: How an Iraqi General Defied and Survived Saddam Hussein,” (2006). In it he says:
“I’m often asked about militant Islam and the threat of global terrorism. More than once I’ve been asked about the meaning of the Arabic words “Fatah” and “Jihad.” What I normally tell them is that to followers of the militant brand of Islam, these doctrines express the belief that Allah has commanded them to conquer the nations of the world both by cultural invasion and by the sword. In some cases this means moving thousands of Muslim families into a foreign land-by building mosques and changing the culture from the inside out, and by refusing to assimilate or adopt the beliefs or values of that nation--to conquer the land for Islam. This is an invidious doctrine, but it’s …being carried out in some places today by followers of this type of Islam.” (pp.285-6)
“[They] won’t be stopped by appeasement. They are not interested in political solutions. They don’t want welfare—their animosity is not caused by hunger or poverty or anything of the sort. They understand only one think: total and complete conquest of the West and of anyone who does not bow to them and their dangerous and out-of-date ideology of hate and revenge.” (p.289)
“What I want to say next is not easy for me to say but I think I must say it anyway. One of the nicest things about the American people is that you are generous and friendly people, and because of this you are sometimes naïve and overly trusting. You want to be friendly, so you open up to people and then you’re surprised when they stab you in the back. Many brave young soldiers have died in Iraq for this reason, but I think this is also a big part of the problem with the State Department and others in government who fail to understand the true nature of this enemy” (p. 289-90).
(I know that this event has now been canceled but I thought I’d go ahead and post it anyway just for the insight it presents.)
A Bad Idea - International Burn a Koran Day: by Chuck Colson, Breakpoint.com, September 8, 2010
Remembering the terrorist attacks of 9/11 is something we should do. But there are appropriate and inappropriate ways to do it.
Pastor Terry Jones’s thoughts about Islam are simple and direct. The title of his book says it all: Islam is of the Devil. The same thought is on a sign outside of his church, the Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida, and on the T-shirts and coffee mugs the church sells. In order to raise greater awareness of the dangers of Islam, Jones has designated 9/11 as “International Burn a Koran Day.” According to their Facebook page Jones hopes, and I quote, “To bring awareness to the dangers of Islam and that the Koran is leading people to hell. Eternal fire is the only destination the Koran can lead people to so we want to put the Koran in its place—the fire!” End quote.
Every Christian believes that no man can come to God but through Jesus Christ. That’s not a bigoted remark, that’s simply the truth claim that underlies Christianity. And I would expect that Muslims would tell me that my religion, Christianity, is a false religion. The unique thing about the United States is that we are prepared to fight for and defend every single individual’s right to his or her choice to practice the religion of their choice. We learn to respect our differences in a free, pluralistic society. I have also referred repeatedly on BreakPoint to the dangers of the Islamist movement, which is an ideologically extreme perversion of the Islamic faith. And this is why so many armed conflicts around the world involve Muslims—often fighting other Muslims.And the attempts to inject parts of Sharia Law in the United States and Britain are a hazard to our constitutional order.
All that being said, I find Jones’s plan to burn the Koran foolish and contemptible. It poses dangers Jones has either overlooked or chooses to ignore. As Dr. John Rankin, president of the Theological Education Institute correctly notes, if Jones burns the Qur’an, “the images will reverberate on the Internet internationally, and this could lead to unparalleled fury in the Muslim world.” And most of that fury will be directed into violence against Christians in Muslim areas throughout the world. If Jones goes through with this horrid plan, people—Christian people—will suffer and some will die. General Petraeus has even expressed fear for our troops in Afghanistan.
Second, Rankin comments, “The Gospel would thus be slandered.” The Apostle Peter tells Christians that we are to be good apologists, but as we give people reasons for our hope in Christ, it has to be “with gentleness and respect.” Burning the Koran will be taken as the height of disrespect by the Muslim world where copies of the Koran are treated as sacred objects and are handled with the utmost care and reverence. Nothing in the Bible encourages us to treat Muslims or any other religious group with this kind of contempt. Rankin concludes, “The stakes are high in terms of the reputation of the Gospel and protection of innocent lives in tinderbox sections of the Muslim world.”
My most fervent prayer is that Jones will reconsider and cancel the Koran burning in the name of the Gospel of Peace. Part of a Christian worldview is the ability to articulate what we believe and why we believe it in the face of competing worldviews like Islam. But we detract from our witness if we allow anything except the Gospel to offend our unsaved neighbors.
Further Reading and Information
Far From Ground Zero, Obscure Pastor is Ignored No Longer, Damien Cave | The New York Times | August 25, 2010
Gainesville church plans to go ahead with Qur'an burning, James A. Smith, Sr. | Florida Baptist Witness | September 7, 2010
John Rankin Blog, Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Seven Questions for the Pastor Who Wants to Burn Copies of the Koran on 9/11, Fox News | Rev. John Rankin | September 3, 2010
[http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/09/03/rev-john-rankin-pastor-terry-jones-dove-world-outreach-center-bureau]
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
#66 - The Mosque at Ground Zero. Part 1
Sense and Sensibility
By Chuck Colson, Breakpoint.com., August 6, 2010
Earlier this week [of Aug. 6th], the proposed New York City mosque at ground zero cleared its final hurdle. Nothing seems to stand in the way of its construction. I am appalled that peace-loving Muslims would want to do this on what is, for most Americans, hallowed ground. I am even more appalled that the mayor of New York is in favor of the idea. It would be like the Japanese building a Shinto shrine at Pearl Harbor! At a speech in front of the statue of liberty, Mayor Bloomberg made the case for the mosque on the grounds of tolerance. But tolerance isn’t the issue here. And certainly not tolerance as Bloomberg means it.
Tolerance used to mean listening respectfully to others’ opinions, even when you disagree. Tolerance as Bloomberg understands it, means “I won’t say no to you for anything you want, and you don’t say no to me for anything I want.”—The ultimate expression of political correctness, and the most certain formula for moral chaos. But the construction of the mosque at ground zero is not about tolerance. And it isn’t about religious liberty. This is about prudence: the good sense to do what is right. That’s one of the four classic, cardinal virtues given to the West.
Let me give you an example. It isn’t a violation of tolerance or religious liberty when a local zoning commission tells a church, or a synagogue, that it cannot build a sanctuary in a residential neighborhood. Parking issues, traffic, could adversely affect the neighborhood. So, local government can make the prudent decision to tell the church to build somewhere else. So it would not be an act of intolerance to deny the construction of a mosque at a certain location—particularly one, ground zero, where the mosque will serve as a daily reminder to New Yorkers of the terrorists, who, motivated by their Islamo-fascist beliefs, killed 3,000 innocent people in the name of Islam. Go build the mosque somewhere else.
Earlier this week in the Wall Street Journal, columnist Bill McGurn wrote about a marvelous example of prudence in a similar situation during the early 1990s. Catholic nuns had moved onto an abandoned building at Auschwitz—the site of the Nazi death camp—to pray for peace and the victims of the Holocaust. The Jewish community was quite outraged. Although the nuns had the legal right to be at Auschwitz, Pope John Paul II intervened. Recognizing Jewish sensitivities, he ordered the nuns to move somewhere else to carry on their work. And they did.
Because I believe that the vast majority of Muslims are peace loving citizens who do not support terrorism, I can’t imagine why they would want to tempt us to think otherwise by building a mosque at the site where their co-religionists perpetrated the most barbaric acts of modern times. If they—and Mayor Bloomberg—don’t have the prudence to respect the sensibilities of others, then Congress ought to step in. With the upcoming elections, I’m sure your congressman will be all ears to your concerns. I understand the dilemma of religious freedom in this case. But as Bill McGurn pointed out, “having the right to do something doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.” The Pope understood that at Auschwitz, and the Muslim community ought to understand it at ground zero.
Further Reading and Information
The Mosque Controversy and Religious Freedom, Cathy Young | RealClearPolitics | August 5, 2010
WTC Mosque, Meet the Auschwitz Nuns , The Wall Street Journal | August 3, 2010
Strange Tolerance, Stan Guthrie | BreakPoint Features | August 5, 2010
[Don't miss Part 2 on this subject THIS FRIDAY!]
By Chuck Colson, Breakpoint.com., August 6, 2010
Earlier this week [of Aug. 6th], the proposed New York City mosque at ground zero cleared its final hurdle. Nothing seems to stand in the way of its construction. I am appalled that peace-loving Muslims would want to do this on what is, for most Americans, hallowed ground. I am even more appalled that the mayor of New York is in favor of the idea. It would be like the Japanese building a Shinto shrine at Pearl Harbor! At a speech in front of the statue of liberty, Mayor Bloomberg made the case for the mosque on the grounds of tolerance. But tolerance isn’t the issue here. And certainly not tolerance as Bloomberg means it.
Tolerance used to mean listening respectfully to others’ opinions, even when you disagree. Tolerance as Bloomberg understands it, means “I won’t say no to you for anything you want, and you don’t say no to me for anything I want.”—The ultimate expression of political correctness, and the most certain formula for moral chaos. But the construction of the mosque at ground zero is not about tolerance. And it isn’t about religious liberty. This is about prudence: the good sense to do what is right. That’s one of the four classic, cardinal virtues given to the West.
Let me give you an example. It isn’t a violation of tolerance or religious liberty when a local zoning commission tells a church, or a synagogue, that it cannot build a sanctuary in a residential neighborhood. Parking issues, traffic, could adversely affect the neighborhood. So, local government can make the prudent decision to tell the church to build somewhere else. So it would not be an act of intolerance to deny the construction of a mosque at a certain location—particularly one, ground zero, where the mosque will serve as a daily reminder to New Yorkers of the terrorists, who, motivated by their Islamo-fascist beliefs, killed 3,000 innocent people in the name of Islam. Go build the mosque somewhere else.
Earlier this week in the Wall Street Journal, columnist Bill McGurn wrote about a marvelous example of prudence in a similar situation during the early 1990s. Catholic nuns had moved onto an abandoned building at Auschwitz—the site of the Nazi death camp—to pray for peace and the victims of the Holocaust. The Jewish community was quite outraged. Although the nuns had the legal right to be at Auschwitz, Pope John Paul II intervened. Recognizing Jewish sensitivities, he ordered the nuns to move somewhere else to carry on their work. And they did.
Because I believe that the vast majority of Muslims are peace loving citizens who do not support terrorism, I can’t imagine why they would want to tempt us to think otherwise by building a mosque at the site where their co-religionists perpetrated the most barbaric acts of modern times. If they—and Mayor Bloomberg—don’t have the prudence to respect the sensibilities of others, then Congress ought to step in. With the upcoming elections, I’m sure your congressman will be all ears to your concerns. I understand the dilemma of religious freedom in this case. But as Bill McGurn pointed out, “having the right to do something doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.” The Pope understood that at Auschwitz, and the Muslim community ought to understand it at ground zero.
Further Reading and Information
The Mosque Controversy and Religious Freedom, Cathy Young | RealClearPolitics | August 5, 2010
WTC Mosque, Meet the Auschwitz Nuns , The Wall Street Journal | August 3, 2010
Strange Tolerance, Stan Guthrie | BreakPoint Features | August 5, 2010
[Don't miss Part 2 on this subject THIS FRIDAY!]
Sunday, September 5, 2010
#65 - The Sunday Special
Dear friend,
Today, I’d like to begin a new feature of this blog, “The Sunday Special.” As you know, my postings during the week tend to be geared toward helping you understand the issues of the day more fully so that you can be more fully informed as a citizen of this republic. I also know how the subjects covered can be “heavy” and often hard to absorb.
Obviously, during each week, there are other things I observe or learn that are not as “heavy” that you might also enjoy reading. Maybe enjoy more, though I hope you will take the time, if even on the weekends, to read over the postings I’ve made for the past week. (Once in awhile, I may just post one of my “Letters to the Churches” that will be on the “heavy” side but which I hope you will be sure to read.)
Anyway, I hope you enjoy this new feature I hope to make available every Sunday. (It should be posted by the time you sit down for Sunday dinner, wherever you are.)
As always, I would enjoy if you would post on the blog site your comments and feedback.
Thanks, Stan
#1 - HAVE YOU HAD EVER HAD PROBLEMS BEING MOTIVATED TO LOSE WEIGHT? The other day, I was reading the book “The Obama Diaries.” (I’ve possibly read every book about our President since he was inaugurated, which is at least a dozen books. Many are very technical as they analyze his political philosophy and actions. While they are informative, they are sometimes dull reading that can be overwhelming. This book stands out as doing the same analyzing without getting too “heavy.” Unless you refuse to consider any analysis other than what the mainstream (liberal) press feeds you constantly, I encourage you to borrow this book from your public library. It’s a great, and sometimes even a fun read.)
ANYWAY, at the end of a chapter that talks about Mrs. Obama’s anti-obesity campaign, the author, Laura Ingram, talks about the importance of physical fitness. I started to just glance over that section as it seemed to say the usual stuff about eating right and exercising. (Heard it, tried it!). What surprised me was that the author talked about it in the context of trying to shovel snow from her driveway in order to get to work one winter. She describes her getting winded and wondering if she would be able to carry her children to the nearest hospital if there was an emergency and she couldn’t otherwise get them there.
The author makes the point that we need to see our need for physical fitness not just in a selfish way, merely as to how it would be good for us. But instead, as citizens, we need to consider whether, in any emergency situation, if we are able to help not just those we know but also strangers who are in need of help. For the first time, its occurred to me that, while I may not care whether or not I’m just another “fat slob,” I need to think of my being physically fit in a truly selfless way (Of course, there’s every reason to also think of it in a “selfish” way.)
Just as there once were (still are?) official volunteer firemen, we each need to be ready at a moment’s call to help others in an emergency. I think of the guy who was at his child’s school and suddenly saw a parent lose control of their car and drive into a retention pong. That guy was fit enough to immediately dive into that pond and pull out the children who would have otherwise drowned. I don’t know about you, but this perspective has given me a new motivation to get into and stay in shape. [Isn’t it amazing how you can get motivated about something when reading it in the context of something entirely different, in this case motivated about losing weight and being physically fit while reading a book on political analysis?]
#2 - Doctors Have Health Problems? I just got an email from a long time friend whose a doctor. In it he tells me that he is praying for my sleep problems and asks for prayer for himself as he is also struggling with sleep problems. It just occurred to me that I can't remember when I heard a doctor share that he had some kind of medical problem. I've always just assumed that doctors are always feeling well - ie, have no health problems - because they are "in the business" of helping others with THEIR health problems. Here's a thought: The next time you visit your (a?) doctor, take a moment at the end to ask HIM OR HER how they are feeling. You might expect a "fine" but then, you might get a different answer. Either way, it would be a great opportunity to ask that doctor if you could just take a moment to pray with them for them. An opening to share the gospel? You never know!!!
Today, I’d like to begin a new feature of this blog, “The Sunday Special.” As you know, my postings during the week tend to be geared toward helping you understand the issues of the day more fully so that you can be more fully informed as a citizen of this republic. I also know how the subjects covered can be “heavy” and often hard to absorb.
Obviously, during each week, there are other things I observe or learn that are not as “heavy” that you might also enjoy reading. Maybe enjoy more, though I hope you will take the time, if even on the weekends, to read over the postings I’ve made for the past week. (Once in awhile, I may just post one of my “Letters to the Churches” that will be on the “heavy” side but which I hope you will be sure to read.)
Anyway, I hope you enjoy this new feature I hope to make available every Sunday. (It should be posted by the time you sit down for Sunday dinner, wherever you are.)
As always, I would enjoy if you would post on the blog site your comments and feedback.
Thanks, Stan
#1 - HAVE YOU HAD EVER HAD PROBLEMS BEING MOTIVATED TO LOSE WEIGHT? The other day, I was reading the book “The Obama Diaries.” (I’ve possibly read every book about our President since he was inaugurated, which is at least a dozen books. Many are very technical as they analyze his political philosophy and actions. While they are informative, they are sometimes dull reading that can be overwhelming. This book stands out as doing the same analyzing without getting too “heavy.” Unless you refuse to consider any analysis other than what the mainstream (liberal) press feeds you constantly, I encourage you to borrow this book from your public library. It’s a great, and sometimes even a fun read.)
ANYWAY, at the end of a chapter that talks about Mrs. Obama’s anti-obesity campaign, the author, Laura Ingram, talks about the importance of physical fitness. I started to just glance over that section as it seemed to say the usual stuff about eating right and exercising. (Heard it, tried it!). What surprised me was that the author talked about it in the context of trying to shovel snow from her driveway in order to get to work one winter. She describes her getting winded and wondering if she would be able to carry her children to the nearest hospital if there was an emergency and she couldn’t otherwise get them there.
The author makes the point that we need to see our need for physical fitness not just in a selfish way, merely as to how it would be good for us. But instead, as citizens, we need to consider whether, in any emergency situation, if we are able to help not just those we know but also strangers who are in need of help. For the first time, its occurred to me that, while I may not care whether or not I’m just another “fat slob,” I need to think of my being physically fit in a truly selfless way (Of course, there’s every reason to also think of it in a “selfish” way.)
Just as there once were (still are?) official volunteer firemen, we each need to be ready at a moment’s call to help others in an emergency. I think of the guy who was at his child’s school and suddenly saw a parent lose control of their car and drive into a retention pong. That guy was fit enough to immediately dive into that pond and pull out the children who would have otherwise drowned. I don’t know about you, but this perspective has given me a new motivation to get into and stay in shape. [Isn’t it amazing how you can get motivated about something when reading it in the context of something entirely different, in this case motivated about losing weight and being physically fit while reading a book on political analysis?]
#2 - Doctors Have Health Problems? I just got an email from a long time friend whose a doctor. In it he tells me that he is praying for my sleep problems and asks for prayer for himself as he is also struggling with sleep problems. It just occurred to me that I can't remember when I heard a doctor share that he had some kind of medical problem. I've always just assumed that doctors are always feeling well - ie, have no health problems - because they are "in the business" of helping others with THEIR health problems. Here's a thought: The next time you visit your (a?) doctor, take a moment at the end to ask HIM OR HER how they are feeling. You might expect a "fine" but then, you might get a different answer. Either way, it would be a great opportunity to ask that doctor if you could just take a moment to pray with them for them. An opening to share the gospel? You never know!!!
Friday, September 3, 2010
#64 – Economist-In-Chief or Commander-in-Chief?
(Don't Miss...: As always, please check out "The Coral Ridge Hour" this Sunday. (5-5:30pm, channel 40.1 (over the air), in Orlando.) Last Sunday, they began a four part series on why Christians should keep abreast of the public policy issues, ie "politics," in our country. I am saddened by the great number of Christians who do not believe this. I believe that this view is unbiblical citizenship. I'm sorry if you missed last week's broadcast, "Will the Church Forget." It is one of the most challenging and powerful messages I have ever heard. If you live in Orlando and would like to borrow my DVD copy of it, just call me at 407-382-3735. Also, please check the ministry website at Coral Ridge Ministries.org and click on the "Equip and Grow" button. One of the downloads you can get is entitled "The Christian and Politics." I strongly urge you to check it out.)
Obama Turns Page, Treats Iraq as a Distraction
The Foundry: Conservative Policy News – A Feature of The Heritage Foundation
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/08/31/obama-turns-page-treats-iraq-as-a-distraction/
Posted By James Phillips, August 31, 2010
"President Obama’s wooden speech tonight, ostensibly focused on Iraq, actually gave short shrift to the war in Iraq and failed to convincingly articulate a vision of Iraq’s future, his own Iraq policy, or America’s role in the world. The President talked about ending the war, but not of victory. Apparently in a rush to put the war in the past, he gave little attention to why the war was fought, what was at stake, or how the war related to broader U.S. goals in the Middle East."
"Instead, Obama maintained that “now it is time to turn the page,” and focus on restoring the economy—“my central responsibility as President.” Clearly more at ease acting as the “Economist-in-Chief” rather than the Commander-in-Chief, the President then devoted a surprisingly large portion of the speech, only his second from the Oval Office, to vague rhetoric about fixing the economy. But protecting America’s security and leading the nation in war should be his highest priorities as President, not to mention the paramount focus of a speech about Iraq. Unfortunately, the televised address sounded more like a campaign speech from a politician rather than a message from the Commander-in-Chief of a nation at war. He said that “Our combat mission is ending, but our commitment to Iraq’s future is not.” But he gave no inkling of what that commitment entails, why America has a vital interest in Iraq’s future, or his Administration’s vision of Iraq’s future."
"Unfortunately, President Obama missed a golden opportunity to reassure anxious Iraqis and nervous U.S. allies elsewhere that the United States is a dependable friend that is determined to consolidate the long-term security of Iraq—not merely make a rush for the exit. While the speech may have helped him with Democratic voters, it is likely to undermine confidence in American leadership not only in Iraq and the broader Middle East, but in many other areas of the world. President Obama’s proclamation of his “central responsibility” for economic matters, shoe-horned into a major speech about Iraq—one of the world’s most important international security issues—will only encourage foreign doubts about his Administration’s commitment to finishing the job in Afghanistan, winning the struggle against Islamist extremism, and protecting U.S. allies around the world."
For more on what the speech should have covered, see: Obama’s Iraq Speech Should Stress a Resolute U.S. Security Commitment
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/08/obamas-iraq-speech-should-stress-a-resolute-us-security-
[Also, I found it sad that, while the President acknowledged President Bush's love for the troops, he failed to give the former President any credit for the troop surge late in his administration that turned the tide for the "good guys." It was a great opportunity for him to demonstrate humility by acknowledging the contribution of his predecessor. But as he has done often with other such opportunities to show himself as one who unites, he lacked the leadership to do so.]
Obama Turns Page, Treats Iraq as a Distraction
The Foundry: Conservative Policy News – A Feature of The Heritage Foundation
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/08/31/obama-turns-page-treats-iraq-as-a-distraction/
Posted By James Phillips, August 31, 2010
"President Obama’s wooden speech tonight, ostensibly focused on Iraq, actually gave short shrift to the war in Iraq and failed to convincingly articulate a vision of Iraq’s future, his own Iraq policy, or America’s role in the world. The President talked about ending the war, but not of victory. Apparently in a rush to put the war in the past, he gave little attention to why the war was fought, what was at stake, or how the war related to broader U.S. goals in the Middle East."
"Instead, Obama maintained that “now it is time to turn the page,” and focus on restoring the economy—“my central responsibility as President.” Clearly more at ease acting as the “Economist-in-Chief” rather than the Commander-in-Chief, the President then devoted a surprisingly large portion of the speech, only his second from the Oval Office, to vague rhetoric about fixing the economy. But protecting America’s security and leading the nation in war should be his highest priorities as President, not to mention the paramount focus of a speech about Iraq. Unfortunately, the televised address sounded more like a campaign speech from a politician rather than a message from the Commander-in-Chief of a nation at war. He said that “Our combat mission is ending, but our commitment to Iraq’s future is not.” But he gave no inkling of what that commitment entails, why America has a vital interest in Iraq’s future, or his Administration’s vision of Iraq’s future."
"Unfortunately, President Obama missed a golden opportunity to reassure anxious Iraqis and nervous U.S. allies elsewhere that the United States is a dependable friend that is determined to consolidate the long-term security of Iraq—not merely make a rush for the exit. While the speech may have helped him with Democratic voters, it is likely to undermine confidence in American leadership not only in Iraq and the broader Middle East, but in many other areas of the world. President Obama’s proclamation of his “central responsibility” for economic matters, shoe-horned into a major speech about Iraq—one of the world’s most important international security issues—will only encourage foreign doubts about his Administration’s commitment to finishing the job in Afghanistan, winning the struggle against Islamist extremism, and protecting U.S. allies around the world."
For more on what the speech should have covered, see: Obama’s Iraq Speech Should Stress a Resolute U.S. Security Commitment
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/08/obamas-iraq-speech-should-stress-a-resolute-us-security-
[Also, I found it sad that, while the President acknowledged President Bush's love for the troops, he failed to give the former President any credit for the troop surge late in his administration that turned the tide for the "good guys." It was a great opportunity for him to demonstrate humility by acknowledging the contribution of his predecessor. But as he has done often with other such opportunities to show himself as one who unites, he lacked the leadership to do so.]
Friday, August 27, 2010
#63 - Yes, There Is A Place for the Bible in PUBLIC Schools
(Personal Note : As always, please check out "The Coral Ridge Hour" this Sunday. (5:00 pm, channel 40.1 (over the air), in Orlando.) Last Sunday, they began a four part series on why Christians should keep abreast of the public policy issues, ie "politics," in our country. I am saddened by the great number of Christians who do not believe this. I believe that this view is unbiblical citizenship. I'm sorry if you missed last week's broadcast, "Will the Church Forget." It is one of the most challenging and powerful messages I have ever heard. If you live in Orlando and would like to borrow my DVD copy of it, just call me at 407-382-3735. Also, please check the ministry website at Coral Ridge Ministries.org and click on the "Equip and Grow" button. One of the downloads you can get is entitled "The Christian and Politics." I strongly urge you to check it out.)
Public Schools and the Bible - What You Need To Know
By: Chuck Colson, August 26, 2010 – Breakpoint.org
It may be hard to believe, but many state school officials across the country actually encourage teaching public school students about the Bible and Christianity. That’s because the Bible and Christianity are so important in understanding Western civilization and, specifically, American history and culture.
For example, the California Department of Education’s History-Social Science standards expect sixth-graders to “Note the origins of Christianity in the Jewish Messianic prophecies, the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth as described in the New Testament, and the contribution of St. Paul the Apostle to the definition and spread of Christian beliefs (For example, belief in the Trinity, resurrection, salvation).”
In Massachusetts, state school officials expect seventh grade students to “Describe the origins of Christianity and its central features: monotheism; the belief in Jesus as the Messiah and God’s son who redeemed humans from sin; the concept of salvation; belief in the Old and New Testament; and the lives and teachings of Jesus and Saint Paul.”
High school students in Florida are expected to “know the significant ideas and texts of… Christianity…”
Not only is it academically expected across the country, it is legally supported by the courts. Many people mistakenly assume using the Bible in a public school is prohibited by law. But in fact, the Supreme Court has actually endorsed using the Bible in public schools. In the 1963 Supreme Court case of Abington School District v. Schempp, the Court ruled that public schools cannot initiate devotional reading of the Bible. However, Justice Clark, writing the majority opinion also stated: “It certainly may be said that the Bible is worthy of study for its literary and historic qualities.” In the case of Stone v. Graham, where the Supreme Court ruled against the posting of the Ten Commandments in schools because they “are undeniably a sacred text in the Jewish and Christian faiths,” it nonetheless found that Commandments and the “Bible may constitutionally be used in an appropriate study of history, civilization, ethics, comparative religion, and the like.”
This is why courses like the Bible Literacy Project you’ve heard me speak about so often, are so important. You can find out about the Bible Literacy Project at BreakPoint.org. And because introducing the Bible to public school students is academically expected and legally supported, our friends at Gateways to Better Education have written a one-page document entitled “School District Guidelines for the Use of Bible Stories in The Classroom.” Gateways is a national ministry with expertise in the much-needed work of equipping Christian parents and teachers in the public schools. Having a Bible reading policy in place will reduce the “chilling” effect teachers feel from a principal who thinks it is not appropriate to reference the Bible. Your school may be open to implementing these guidelines for two reasons: First, it establishes what is and isn’t appropriate for teachers and guest speakers, and second, it helps protect a school from accusations that it is allowing devotional readings of the Bible as a classroom activity.
To download a free copy of the Bible reading guidelines for public schools, come to our website, www.breakpoint.org.
Further Reading and Information
Gateways to Better Education - Keeping the Faith in Public Schools
Model Curriculum and Resources California Department of Education
Bible Literacy Project - An Educated Person is Familiar with the Bible
Public Schools and the Bible - What You Need To Know
By: Chuck Colson, August 26, 2010 – Breakpoint.org
It may be hard to believe, but many state school officials across the country actually encourage teaching public school students about the Bible and Christianity. That’s because the Bible and Christianity are so important in understanding Western civilization and, specifically, American history and culture.
For example, the California Department of Education’s History-Social Science standards expect sixth-graders to “Note the origins of Christianity in the Jewish Messianic prophecies, the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth as described in the New Testament, and the contribution of St. Paul the Apostle to the definition and spread of Christian beliefs (For example, belief in the Trinity, resurrection, salvation).”
In Massachusetts, state school officials expect seventh grade students to “Describe the origins of Christianity and its central features: monotheism; the belief in Jesus as the Messiah and God’s son who redeemed humans from sin; the concept of salvation; belief in the Old and New Testament; and the lives and teachings of Jesus and Saint Paul.”
High school students in Florida are expected to “know the significant ideas and texts of… Christianity…”
Not only is it academically expected across the country, it is legally supported by the courts. Many people mistakenly assume using the Bible in a public school is prohibited by law. But in fact, the Supreme Court has actually endorsed using the Bible in public schools. In the 1963 Supreme Court case of Abington School District v. Schempp, the Court ruled that public schools cannot initiate devotional reading of the Bible. However, Justice Clark, writing the majority opinion also stated: “It certainly may be said that the Bible is worthy of study for its literary and historic qualities.” In the case of Stone v. Graham, where the Supreme Court ruled against the posting of the Ten Commandments in schools because they “are undeniably a sacred text in the Jewish and Christian faiths,” it nonetheless found that Commandments and the “Bible may constitutionally be used in an appropriate study of history, civilization, ethics, comparative religion, and the like.”
This is why courses like the Bible Literacy Project you’ve heard me speak about so often, are so important. You can find out about the Bible Literacy Project at BreakPoint.org. And because introducing the Bible to public school students is academically expected and legally supported, our friends at Gateways to Better Education have written a one-page document entitled “School District Guidelines for the Use of Bible Stories in The Classroom.” Gateways is a national ministry with expertise in the much-needed work of equipping Christian parents and teachers in the public schools. Having a Bible reading policy in place will reduce the “chilling” effect teachers feel from a principal who thinks it is not appropriate to reference the Bible. Your school may be open to implementing these guidelines for two reasons: First, it establishes what is and isn’t appropriate for teachers and guest speakers, and second, it helps protect a school from accusations that it is allowing devotional readings of the Bible as a classroom activity.
To download a free copy of the Bible reading guidelines for public schools, come to our website, www.breakpoint.org.
Further Reading and Information
Gateways to Better Education - Keeping the Faith in Public Schools
Model Curriculum and Resources California Department of Education
Bible Literacy Project - An Educated Person is Familiar with the Bible
Friday, August 20, 2010
#62 - Homosexual Marriage at the Polls - The People Have Spoken
By: Chuck Colson|, Breakpoint.com, August 18, 2010
(Personal Note #1: As always, please check out "The Coral Ridge Hour" this Sunday. (5:00 pm, channel 40.1 (over the air), in Orlando.) Last Sunday, they began a four part series on why Christians should keep abreast of the public policy issues, ie "politics," in our country. I am saddened by the great number of Christians who do not believe this. I believe that this view is unbiblical citizenship. I'm sorry if you missed last week's broadcast, "Will the Church Forget." It is one of the most challenging and powerful messages I have ever heard. If you live in Orlando and would like to borrow my DVD copy of it, just call me at 407-382-3735. Also, please check the ministry website at Coral Ridge Ministries.org and click on the "Equip and Grow" button. One of the downloads you can get is entitled "The Christian and Politics." I strongly urge you to check it out.)
(Personal Note #2: While it is often referred to as “gay” marriage, you will never see me use that term. (1) I don’t believe that any behavior condemned in God’s Word should be called “gay.” And (2) In 1987, I attended a retreat at which a woman who was named Gay by her parents cried at one of our meetings when she shared how the perversion that the term “gay” is now used to refer to causes her much pain. Since that day, I’ve pledged never to use that term to refer to homosexual behavior.)
"As the ruling in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, which overturned California’s Proposition 8, makes its way through the appeals process, one of the big questions concerns the impact of another case: Lawrence v. Texas. That 2003 Supreme Court decision overturned the Texas law making sodomy a criminal offense. Judge Vaughn Walker clearly thinks that the line between Lawrence and his ruling is clear. His opinion not only cited Lawrence – it was, as many commentators have noted, practically written for an audience of one: Justice Anthony Kennedy, the author of the Lawrence decision, and the likely swing-vote on the Supreme Court. But is the link as clear as Walker and his supporters say it is? No. Especially when you take public attitudes into account."
"At the time Lawrence was decided, Texas was one of only thirteen states that made sodomy a crime. In the rest of the country, consensual same-sex acts had been made legal by legislation. In other words, the public had adopted what could rightly be called a tolerant view of these acts: whatever people thought of homosexuality, they didn’t think it was a matter for the criminal law, and the political process reflected this cultural and political consensus. Thus, the ruling in Lawrence, whatever its constitutional merits, ratified an already-existing consensus – it didn’t set out to impose one. Even justice Thomas, who dissented from the majority opinion, called the Texas law 'uncommonly silly.' ”
"The same cannot be said of the ruling overturning Proposition 8. Only five states and the District of Columbia permit same-sex marriage and half of those are the result of court rulings. What’s more, the trajectory of public, as distinct from elite, opinion has been clearly to ratify the traditional understanding of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Since 1993, when the Hawaiian Supreme Court upheld same-sex marriage, the American people have consistently made their opposition clear at the polls. Every time the issue has been on the ballot (31 states in all), voters have rejected same sex marriage. This despite being outspent by same-sex marriage proponents and always being vilified in the media and elite opinion. All of this exposes the claim that we’re trying to “impose” our view on others. We aren’t doing that. That’s ludicrous! We’re simply defending the democratic consensus."
"The only way to counter this distortion is if we do it ourselves: present our case winsomely and persistently. And, given what’s at stake in this battle, we don’t have any choice. The battle over this California case involves more than same-sex marriage or even the institution of marriage. As the Manhattan Declaration [Manhattan Declaration.org] points out, the biggest threat to religious freedom comes from those who want to redefine marriage and impose a particular view of sexual morality on all of us."
"How could pastors denounce sinful behavior held by a court to be a constitutional right? The only way to keep that from happening is to make clear—to make known—the great consensus in America in support of traditional marriage. Because courts rarely go against that."
Further Reading and Information
Poll: Support for Same Sex Marriage Grows, Brian Montopoli | CBS News | April 27, 2009
Same-Sex Mariage, Gay Rights, PollingReport.com
'Gay Marriages' Haulted; Case Fast-Tracked, Michael Foust | Baptist Press | August 17, 2010
(Personal Note #1: As always, please check out "The Coral Ridge Hour" this Sunday. (5:00 pm, channel 40.1 (over the air), in Orlando.) Last Sunday, they began a four part series on why Christians should keep abreast of the public policy issues, ie "politics," in our country. I am saddened by the great number of Christians who do not believe this. I believe that this view is unbiblical citizenship. I'm sorry if you missed last week's broadcast, "Will the Church Forget." It is one of the most challenging and powerful messages I have ever heard. If you live in Orlando and would like to borrow my DVD copy of it, just call me at 407-382-3735. Also, please check the ministry website at Coral Ridge Ministries.org and click on the "Equip and Grow" button. One of the downloads you can get is entitled "The Christian and Politics." I strongly urge you to check it out.)
(Personal Note #2: While it is often referred to as “gay” marriage, you will never see me use that term. (1) I don’t believe that any behavior condemned in God’s Word should be called “gay.” And (2) In 1987, I attended a retreat at which a woman who was named Gay by her parents cried at one of our meetings when she shared how the perversion that the term “gay” is now used to refer to causes her much pain. Since that day, I’ve pledged never to use that term to refer to homosexual behavior.)
"As the ruling in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, which overturned California’s Proposition 8, makes its way through the appeals process, one of the big questions concerns the impact of another case: Lawrence v. Texas. That 2003 Supreme Court decision overturned the Texas law making sodomy a criminal offense. Judge Vaughn Walker clearly thinks that the line between Lawrence and his ruling is clear. His opinion not only cited Lawrence – it was, as many commentators have noted, practically written for an audience of one: Justice Anthony Kennedy, the author of the Lawrence decision, and the likely swing-vote on the Supreme Court. But is the link as clear as Walker and his supporters say it is? No. Especially when you take public attitudes into account."
"At the time Lawrence was decided, Texas was one of only thirteen states that made sodomy a crime. In the rest of the country, consensual same-sex acts had been made legal by legislation. In other words, the public had adopted what could rightly be called a tolerant view of these acts: whatever people thought of homosexuality, they didn’t think it was a matter for the criminal law, and the political process reflected this cultural and political consensus. Thus, the ruling in Lawrence, whatever its constitutional merits, ratified an already-existing consensus – it didn’t set out to impose one. Even justice Thomas, who dissented from the majority opinion, called the Texas law 'uncommonly silly.' ”
"The same cannot be said of the ruling overturning Proposition 8. Only five states and the District of Columbia permit same-sex marriage and half of those are the result of court rulings. What’s more, the trajectory of public, as distinct from elite, opinion has been clearly to ratify the traditional understanding of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Since 1993, when the Hawaiian Supreme Court upheld same-sex marriage, the American people have consistently made their opposition clear at the polls. Every time the issue has been on the ballot (31 states in all), voters have rejected same sex marriage. This despite being outspent by same-sex marriage proponents and always being vilified in the media and elite opinion. All of this exposes the claim that we’re trying to “impose” our view on others. We aren’t doing that. That’s ludicrous! We’re simply defending the democratic consensus."
"The only way to counter this distortion is if we do it ourselves: present our case winsomely and persistently. And, given what’s at stake in this battle, we don’t have any choice. The battle over this California case involves more than same-sex marriage or even the institution of marriage. As the Manhattan Declaration [Manhattan Declaration.org] points out, the biggest threat to religious freedom comes from those who want to redefine marriage and impose a particular view of sexual morality on all of us."
"How could pastors denounce sinful behavior held by a court to be a constitutional right? The only way to keep that from happening is to make clear—to make known—the great consensus in America in support of traditional marriage. Because courts rarely go against that."
Further Reading and Information
Poll: Support for Same Sex Marriage Grows, Brian Montopoli | CBS News | April 27, 2009
Same-Sex Mariage, Gay Rights, PollingReport.com
'Gay Marriages' Haulted; Case Fast-Tracked, Michael Foust | Baptist Press | August 17, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
