Friday, March 17, 2017

#1891 (3/17) HAPPY ST. PATRICK'S DAY: "Learning from the Irish - The Creational Theology of the Celts"

"Learning from the Irish - THE CREATIONAL THEOLOGY OF THE CELTS" -by: Chuck Colson, Breakpoint.org, March 17, 2008; http//www.breakpoint.org/2008/03/breakpoint-learning-irish


Although the mists of history hide much about St. Patrick, this much we do know: He was not even Irish. He was born in Roman Britain and kidnapped by Irish attackers. After escaping captivity, Patrick returned to Britain and became a priest, and later a bishop. He returned to Ireland 30 years later and, despite the danger, witnessed Christ among the Irish, converting thousands.

As Thomas Cahill describes in his outstanding book, How the Irish Saved Civilization, these barbaric warriors "lay down the swords of battle, flung away the knives of sacrifice, and cast away the chains of slavery." Not only did the Irish save civilization, their zeal for Christ certainly saved the Church in Western Europe.

As my colleague T. M. Moore wrote at BreakPoint.org, "The period of Celtic Christianity, which lasted some 400 years between the fifth and the ninth centuries, is one of the most fascinating and fruitful of epochs." Particularly appealing, writes T. M., is the Celts' "acute sensitivity to the revelation of God in creation."

Many believers today do not go much beyond "the heavens declare the glory of God"—but we ought to, particularly in this age when everyone from population-control advocates to materialists worships the creation rather than the Creator. Here, studying the Celts' "creational theology," as T. M. calls it, gives Christians a place to bring truth into that conversation.

"Reading the works of Celtic Christians," we get the impression, says T. M., "that if God is making Himself known through the things He has made, then we need to be studying those things carefully, in order to discover His glory, encounter His presence, and learn what we can." And talking about God's general revelation opens doors for conversations with those who might not talk about God otherwise.

Take the sixth-century Irish monk Columbanus, who evangelized much of Western Europe. He encouraged believers to "understand the creation, if you wish to know the Creator." A writer known as the Irish Augustine insisted that God brought creation into being so He "might reveal through created things all the vast goodness and power and benevolence which beforehand He possessed within Himself alone."

And philosopher and theologian John Scotus Eriugena is considered perhaps the first proponent of "intelligent design." "Observe the forms and beauties of sensible things," he wrote, "and comprehend the Word of God in them. If you do so, the truth will reveal to you in all such things only He who made them."

Patrick himself, it is said, often used the things of creation to point beyond to the Creator. His use of the shamrock and its three leaves to describe the Trinity, even if it is legendary, is just one example.

You see, Celtic Christians showed us how to connect our faith with the physical creation. They showed us how to engage those who do not yet know God as we move about in this world, which reveals His glory.

So this St. Patrick's Day, when friends wish you "the luck of the Irish," tell them about the faith of the Irish—and what they had to say about the beauty of our earth and the beauty of its Creator.

For Further Reading and Information
T. M. Moore, “Glory All Around: Celts and Creational Theology,” BreakPoint Online, Feb. 19, 2008 http://www.colsoncenter.org/contact-wfp/cc-page-not-found
BreakPoint Commentary No. 070316, “Apostle to the Irish: The Real Saint Patrick.” - http://www.colsoncenter.org/contact-wfp/cc-page-not-found
“Captive for Christ,” Mark Ealey, The Point Radio, 17 March 2008. http://archive.breakpoint.org/images/error/breakpointerror.html
“Celtic Christian Spirituality,” Reverend Monk Dr. Gorazd, Orthodox Christian Information Center, 2001. http://orthodoxinfo.com/general/celtic.aspx
“Barbarians in Our Midst: How the Irish Spread the Gospel,” an interview with Dr. George G. Hunter III, Steve Beard, Good News Magazine, March/April 2000 (reprinted at www.thunderstruck.ws). http://www.thunderstruck.org/holysmoke/Hunter-Int.htm
“Quiet Flirtation: Monasticism and Evangelicals,” Catherine Claire,
BreakPoint WorldView, October 2007. http://www.colsoncenter.org/contact-wfp/cc-page-not-found
How the Irish Saved Civilization,Thomas Cahill, (1st Anchor Books Ed, February 1996).
ttps://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0385418493/104-9753769-4339903?ie=UTF8&tag=breakpoint-20&linkCode=xm2&camp=1789&creativeASIN=0385418493

Thursday, March 16, 2017

#1890 (3/16) "We Must Keep Our Promise to Fully Repeal Obamacare"

"We Must Keep Our Promise to Fully Repeal Obamacare"Sen. Mike Lee / March 13, 2017 / http://dailysignal.com/2017/03/13/we-must-keep-our-promise-to-fully-repeal-obamacare
House Speaker Paul Ryan led the Republican effort to pass a full repeal of Obamacare in 2016 that was ultimately vetoed by President Barack Obama. (Photo: Pool/Reuters/Newscom)

“For five years, Senate Democrats have blocked our efforts to repeal Obamacare,” House Speaker Paul Ryan said on Jan. 6, 2016. “That ends today.” “With this vote, we are keeping a promise and putting a bill that repeals Obamacare and defunds Planned Parenthood on the president’s desk,” Ryan continued. “This budget reconciliation bill, which would reduce the federal deficit by a half trillion dollars, forces the president to confront the failures of Obamacare head-on. But most importantly, it clears the path to repealing this law with a Republican president in 2017 and replacing it with a truly patient-centered health care system. We will not back down from this fight to defend the sanctity of life and make quality health care coverage achievable for all Americans.”

It is now 2017, and we have a Republican president in the White House. A bill repealing Obamacare should have been sent to President Donald Trump’s desk weeks ago. Unfortunately, the House of Representatives is now debating a bill that not only fails to repeal as much of Obamacare as it voted to do in 2015, but it also affirms much of Obamacare’s current structure, thus making any future efforts to replace the system that much more difficult.

The House leadership’s health care bill simply is not the Obamacare repeal bill we’ve been waiting for. It is a missed opportunity and a step in the wrong direction.

It doesn’t repeal the Obamacare Medicaid expansion. It doesn’t repeal the Obamacare regulations that drive up the cost of premiums. But it does create a brand new spending program whose size and cost are entirely unclear. This is a bad bill—one that will almost certainly be made worse once the Senate parliamentarian gives it the “Byrd bath” required for it to go through the Senate with just 51 votes.

The simple reality is that Republicans do not have the 60 votes in the Senate they need to pass a bill that repeals all of Obamacare and replace it with a new conservative health care system designed from scratch.

But Republicans do have the 51 votes in the Senate needed to use the reconciliation process laid out in the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 to pass legislation that changes federal revenue or spending obligations. But thanks to a rule created by former Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., changes to federal policy that are “merely incidental” to a bill’s budgetary components are not “privileged” and therefore are subject to a filibuster. Hence the term “Byrd bath,” which in this case could be used to knock out key provisions of the House bill, including prohibitions on taxpayer funding of abortion and price controls on insurance premiums.

The good news is that we already have a bill that not only made it through the Byrd bath but was also voted for by every Republican: the 2015 repeal bill that Ryan praised in the quote above.

Now, the 2015 bill is not perfect. It might be improved during a Senate vote-a-rama when the Senate parliamentarian might be convinced that Obamacare’s insurance regulations do in fact have a big impact on federal spending (almost every economist agrees that Obamacare’s insurance regulations drive up the price of premiums, which are subsidized by federal revenues). But it might not.

Either way, there will be a lot more work to do on health care reform. Work that can’t be finished in the narrow window of time between now and when the Senate needs to spend floor time confirming Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court in April.

So, let’s fulfill our promise to repeal Obamacare immediately and then take our time and make sure we get health care reform right. Let’s pass the 2015 repeal bill that Republicans in both houses of Congress voted for just 15 months ago.

Once Obamacare has been properly sent to the dustbin of history, then we can begin a deliberative, open, and honest process to reform our nation’s health care system.

[bold and italics emphasis mine]

Mike Lee is a Republican senator from Utah.
"We Can Do Better." - Rep. Jeff Duncan / March 15, 2017; http://dailysignal.com/2017/03/15/house-leaderships-health-bill-is-not-what-republicans-promised-we-can-do-better
....On the evening of March 6, House leadership rolled out the American Health Care Act, a reconciliation bill aimed at making changes to Obamacare. Many have dubbed the bill “Obamacare Lite” since it does not repeal the Affordable Care Act, but instead nibbles around the edges in an attempt to make Obamacare less harmful.
    House leadership promises a multipronged legislative process involving three phases: Phase I, the reconciliation bill; Phase II, the top-down repeal of regulations by Secretary Tom Price at the Department of Health and Human Services; and Phase III, additional bills that will make the necessary reforms to how insurance is sold across America.
The problem with Phase III, as many conservatives like Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., have pointed out, is that it will be a general bill that requires 60 votes to pass in the Senate.
This is a heavy lift for Senate Republicans and a deal-making president, who will need to win over eight Democratic senators to pass such legislation.

What the House Bill Does (And Doesn’t Do)
     First and foremost, the American Health Care Act does not repeal Obamacare. The bill does repeal some facets of Obamacare, and there are some things to like about the bill. These include:
     Defunding of Planned Parenthood, something Republicans should have already been able to do.
     Repeal of the individual mandate, which requires everyone to purchase health insurance or pay a gradually increasing fine.
     Repeal of the employer mandate, which subsequently changes the definition of full-time employment.
     Repeal of the medical device tax and other taxes on health insurance premiums and pharmaceuticals, while increasing the expense threshold for medical expense deductions.
Ending the Medicaid expansion after three years.
     Repeal of the government subsidy for health insurance premiums.
These are good things that were all included in the 2015 budget reconciliation bill, which passed both houses of Congress.
     ..... But the House GOP plan replaces the individual mandate with its own penalty—a 30 percent penalty to the insurer if there is a lapse in coverage. In essence, this is requiring people to have health insurance or risk paying more when they do obtain it. The penalty will just be retained by the insurance companies instead of being collected by the government in the Obamacare tax.
     The biggest question to ask ourselves is: Is this the best that we can do? And, is this bill what Americans expected Republicans to do with their control of government? Is this the bold effort so many across America have expected?...
"Unpacking the Complexity of Repeal and Replace," by MICHAEL A. NEEDHAM & JACOB RESES, March 15, 2017; http://www.nationalreview.com/article/445767/obamacare-repeal-replace-unpacking-complexities

Wednesday, March 15, 2017

#1889 (3/15) "Questioning Jesus’ Existence - An Eastertime Media Tradition"

"QUESTIONING JESUS' EXISTENCE - AN EASTERTIME MEDIA TRADITION" - by: John Stonestreet; Breakpoint.org : March 14, 2017; http://breakpoint.org/2017/03/questioning-jesus-existence/ [AS I SEE IT: As a follow-up to yesterday's post, here is an annual tradition in the mainstream media that even the skeptics of Christianity must get tired of. Every year, it seems the usual suspects keep trying to present this fake news, somehow believing people will continue to buy into their false allegations. Let's pray that one day they will themselves meet the Jesus they so pathetically try to disavow. - Stan]
Ah, springtime. Flowers blooming, birds singing, and articles questioning the historicity of Jesus hitting the newsstands.

Insurance company Geico has done a lot of funny commercials, but our editor at BreakPoint has a favorite. A group of teenagers are running through a dark forest being chased by a killer. After debating whether to hide in the basement, the attic or make a quick getaway in the nearby running car, they decide to hide behind dozens of chainsaws dangling from a barn door.“When you’re in a horror movie, you make poor decisions,” says the narrator. “It’s what you do.” And this week I found myself paraphrasing: “When you’re CNN, you publish annual articles suggesting Jesus never existed. It’s what you do.”

Every year around March and December, this and other news outlets exhume the long-dead thesis that the New Testament is based on a mythological figure, not a Man who really lived, died, and rose from the grave two-thousand years ago. This year, CNN even republished an article from 2012 at CNN.com. In the piece, entitled, “Decoding Jesus: Separating Man from Myth,” John Blake suggests that Christ’s historical existence is an open question. CNN featured it at the top of their homepage as part of the push for their new series, “Finding Jesus: Faith, Fact, Forgery.”

Blake quotes the likes of Timothy Freke, author of “Jesus Mysteries” and former Baptist pastor Robert Price, author of “Deconstructing Jesus,” who both claim that the Gospels are forgeries or misunderstood allegories, and that the story of Jesus was copied from legends about pagan deities.
“In the age of the Internet and self-publishing,” writes Blake, “these arguments have gained enough traction that some of the world’s leading New Testament scholars feel compelled to publicly take them on.”

Now let me be clear: This is the very definition of fake news: No credible historian believes Jesus is a myth. Even among skeptics of religion, that theory has been abandoned. None other than Bart Ehrman, the agnostic biblical scholar and fierce critic of the New Testament, calls Jesus-deniers Internet conspiracy theorists trying to sell books, and compares them to Holocaust-deniers.

Dominic Crossan, another scholar who would never pass for an evangelical apologist, says he’s “certain” that Christ existed, and chalks up alternative theories to disdain for the Prince of Peace. Keep in mind, neither Ehrman or Crosson would affirm anything historically Christian, such as that Jesus was not just a man but God—that He performed miracles, died for the sins of the world, and rose from the dead for our justification. But if anything, this fact makes their agreement on His existence even more powerful, not less.

On this issue, they represent the broad consensus among scholars that Christianity began with the life and death of a real and extraordinary Man. Of course, we Christians don’t believe that’s all there was to it. But when our neighbors tell us over the backyard fence that they’ve watched a documentary or read an article claiming Jesus is a myth, we have to be able to respond gently but confidently.

Even ancient writers hostile to Christianity like Josephus, Tacitus, and Pliny the Younger, confirm the existence of a Man from Nazareth who preached throughout Galilee and Judea, ran afoul of the authorities, was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and sparked what would eventually become the world’s largest religion.

And let’s not forget the New Testament itself, manuscript fragments of which date to the early second century. Ravi Zacharias, who’s speaking at our Wilberforce Weekend in May, points out that the evidence for the life and words of Jesus is stronger than the evidence for Plato. Classicist Michael Grant sums it up best when he writes that “we can no more reject Jesus’ existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned.”

Look, though many scholars who affirm Jesus’ existence still reject the supernatural claims that make Him worthy of our worship, one thing is certain: Headlines do not equal history. And serious media should stop giving air-time and credibility to Jesus-deniers.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

Further Reading and Information - Even scholarly non-believers, as John has mentioned, recognize the historicity of Jesus. So should serious media. To get equipped to present the truth of Christ and His resurrection, check out the resources linked below.
"Horror Movie: It's What You Do - GEICO Commercial - Youtube video;" -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rp3hud-jZYc

"Did historical Jesus really exist? The evidence just doesn’t add up." - Raphael Lataster Washington Post December 18, 2014; https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/12/18/did-historical-jesus-exist-the-traditional-evidence-doesnt-hold-up/?utm_term=.475f4f92c865
"'Jesus is a MYTH': Christ stories appeared decades after his 'death' - and he was probably many people rather than just one, atheist writer claims"Richard Gray Dailymail.co.uk April 3, 2015; http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3018471/Jesus-MYTH-Christ-stories-appeared-decades-death-probably-people-just-one-writer-claims.html
"Decoding Jesus: Separating man from myth"John Blake CNN.com March 7, 2017; http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/15/living/jesus-debate-man-versus-myth/
"Why trust the Bible?"Ravi Zacharias RZIM.eu April 4, 2012; http://www.rzim.eu/why-trust-the-bible
"He Has Risen: The Worldview of Easter, DVD"John Stonestreet, T. M. Moore Colson Center; http://www.colsoncenterstore.org/Product.asp?sku=2191_HHRISEN
The Case for Easter: A Journalist Investigates the Evidence for the Resurrection
- Lee Strobel, Zondervan Publishers, February 2014; http://www.colsoncenterstore.org/Product.asp?sku=9780310339502

Tuesday, March 14, 2017

#1888 (3/14) "20/20's Blurred Vision of Sexual Reorientation Therapy"

"20/20's BLURRED VISION OF SEXUAL REORIENTATION THERAPY" - Tony Perkins, Washington Update, March 13, 2017; http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=WA17C29&f=WU17C09 [AS I SEE IT: Here is another example of how media programs with a certain agenda and the ability to sensationalize irresponsible reporting are more concerned with television ratings than with the truth. Sadly, too many who should know better than to swallow these media stories whole cloth do so so often. It's about time we reject these biased news reports by simply refusing to watch them. - Stan]
Here's a quiz for you: What's the difference between: a) Christian churches and schools that teach the historical orthodox consensus that the Bible says homosexual conduct is not God's will; b) Well-trained, compassionate professional therapists who help clients with unwanted same-sex attractions achieve the client's own goals; c) Loving parents making careful and responsible decisions about health care for their children; and d) a couple of fly-by-night "boarding schools" for "troubled youth" of all kinds in Alabama that physically and emotionally abused children? If you answered, "There's a huge difference," you would be correct. But if you answered, "They're all the same thing -- gay 'conversion therapy camps!'" then you might have a future ahead of you as "Chief Investigative Reporter" for ABC News.

The man who currently holds that title, Brian Ross, put together a completely irresponsible and grossly misleading hour-long report on what LGBT activists and ABC call "conversion therapy camps," which aired Friday night on the news magazine 20/20. It focused primarily on two unregulated, unaccredited boarding schools (not "camps") in Alabama, and the personal testimony of one self-identified gay teenager named Lucas who told Ross he had the misfortune of being physically beaten at both of them. (In fact, the hour-long episode depended so much on this single personal testimony that it was titled, "A Boy Named Lucas.")

Despite ABC's breathless commentary, this was hardly breaking news -- Alabama media have had many reports on these schools, and the three leaders of one facility were recently convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison for child abuse. However, if you listened very closely, you would have noticed that even on 20/20, neither the police investigator, the prosecutor, nor the judge ever mentioned sexual orientation as being a factor in the abuse. Nor did half a dozen local news reports, adding up to thousands of words. While we have no reason to doubt Lucas' testimony, ABC presented no evidence that the percentage of the "troubled youth" in these facilities who identified as "gay" was any larger than the percentage in the general population who do so.

That's why FRC's Peter Sprigg, who gamely attempted to inject some reason and accuracy during his interview with 20/20, stands by his belief that the idea of a shadowy network of "camps" focused primarily on forced "conversion therapy" for youth is largely a myth. What does exist are responsible, professional, compassionate therapists and counselors who are available to help youth and adults with unwanted same-sex attractions who voluntarily seek help. The fact that 20/20 did not even interview a single actual therapist for a story about "therapy," or a single ex-gay person for a story about sexual orientation change, shows that they had little interest in the truth.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

Monday, March 13, 2017

#1887 (3/13) "Defense Leaders Agree: US Military Readiness Is at a Dangerous Low"

"DEFENSE LEADERS AGREE: US MILITARY READINESS IS AT A DANGEROUS LOW"John Cooper / February 10, 2017 / http://dailysignal.com/2017/02/10/defense-leaders-agree-us-military-readiness-is-at-a-dangerous-low/
Of the U.S. Army's 58 total brigade combat teams, only three are considered ready for combat. (Photo: iStock Photos)

This week on Capitol Hill, several top U.S. military leaders from across the armed services presented a sobering case to Congress: U.S. military readiness is the lowest it has been in decades, leaving it unprepared to defend America’s interests at home and abroad.

In testimony before the Senate and House Armed Services committees, the vice chiefs of staff of the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force articulated pressing concerns about the state of their branchs’ readiness to respond to conflicts overseas or attacks on the homeland. The hearing highlighted substantial readiness and capacity issues within each of the services:

*Army: Of 58 total brigade combat teams (the Army’s main combat building block), only three are considered ready for combat.
*Navy: The Navy’s fleet is the smallest it has been in nearly 100 years. This makes ship repairs harder to complete, as those vessels are needed on the waterways.
*Marine Corps: Eighty percent of Marine aviation units do not have even the minimum number of aircraft they need for training and basic operations.
*Air Force: The Air Force is the smallest and, in terms of many of its aircraft, oldest it has ever been. 
*The service had 8,600 aircraft in 1991 while today it only has 5,500, and those aircraft are an average of 27 years old. Worse, fewer than half of those aircraft are prepared to take on and defeat our adversaries.

... What was noteworthy about the vice chiefs’ testimony beyond these startling numbers, however, was their brutal honesty. For eight years under the Obama administration, top defense officials were largely silenced and prevented from articulating their concerns about budget cuts and decreased readiness to policymakers with the ability to reverse undeniable decline.

What this hearing and other recent public statements are showing, however, is that defense leaders believe they can now begin to speak openly about the challenges they face, and that Congress and the administration can address these negative trends—especially those caused by diminishing resources.

Make no mistake—budget cuts, especially sequestration cuts implemented indiscriminately across the board beginning more than five years ago, have been devastating to the U.S. military.

Look at flying hours, for example.
     Navy, Marine, and Air Force pilots have all seen their flying hours substantially reduced because there simply is not enough money to fly sorties. This has led to pilots being unable to maintain cockpit skills, which like everything else, will atrophy without constant tuning and training.
     Worse, this inability to maintain proficiency has led to lethal accidents and loss of aircraft, which may have been preventable—to say nothing of the danger of thrusting our service men and women into combat without giving them the opportunity to train and maximize their readiness.
     John Venable, a Heritage senior research fellow for defense policy and retired F-16 pilot with more than 4,400 hours in the cockpit, has written that the 2015 Air Force average of 150 flight hours per year per pilot (just under three a week) means “the most current and qualified Air Force fighter pilots are flying at a rate so low that we would have considered them unfit for combat in the 80s and 90s.”
     And this is 20 to 30 years later, in a world where our enemies have become stronger, more advanced, and more aggressive. Even if the budget for flight hours existed, however, in many cases it simply would not matter, because the majority of the services’ aircraft are not even considered flyable.
     According to multiple reports just this week, about two-thirds of the Navy’s fighter/attack aircraft and more than half of the Marine Corps’ total aircraft fleet are unable to even get off the ground.

These problems are merely the tip of the iceberg. The American people can expect to hear more accounts like these in the coming months as we learn more about the declining state of U.S. military readiness. However, hope is not lost. Congress and the Trump administration can act to begin reversing this trend. Eliminating sequestration cuts implemented by the Budget Control Act is a necessary first step.

Congress should also allocate more resources to the military in the fiscal year 2018 budget. Commanders must be given the ability to both field a potent fighting force today, and invest in modernizing aircraft, weapons, and equipment for tomorrow. Both must be priorities for this administration, and under the leadership of Secretary of Defense James Mattis—who declared in his confirmation hearing, we can “afford survival”—there is hope for such a balance.

Much of my service on active duty was spent under the burden of sequestration, and while I can attest to the “can do” mentality, in spite of the challenges, of those with whom I served, we should never have placed such a burden on them to begin with.

The Trump administration and Congress have a chance to reverse the decline in America’s military. The only thing that remains to be seen is whether or not they will capitalize on it.

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

John Cooper is the senior communications manager for the Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy at The Heritage Foundation. He served as an active duty officer in the U.S. Air Force from 2010-2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"New Numbers Show Continued Decline of US Military"Rachel Zissimos / Brian Slattery / November 16, 2016; http://dailysignal.com/2016/11/16/new-numbers-show-continued-decline-of-us-military/ 

Sunday, March 12, 2017

#1886 [3/12] SUNDAY SPECIAL: "Blessed Are the Neighborly -Connect with the Folks Next Door"

"BLESSED ARE THE NEIGHBORLY - CONNECT WITH THE FOLKS NEXT DOOR" - by Eric Metaxas, Breakpoint.org; March 9, 2017: http://www.breakpoint.org/2017/03/blessed-are-the-neighborly/ [AS I SEE IT: I myself know many of my neighbors but have not had opportunities to engage much with them lately. This article is convicting and I know I need to be more proactive in doing more. Let's pray that we can each do more to find creative ways to BE Jesus to our neighbors with the hope that we can each have many opportunity to SHARE Jesus with them. - Stan]
When a lawyer asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?,” the Lord told him to be a neighbor. And He still does!

Over two decades ago, Robert Putnam’s ground-breaking book “Bowling Alone” warned us of the alarming trend of Americans becoming isolated from one another, and how time-honored social institutions in our communities, such as the PTA, political parties, and even the church, have been devastated. Chuck Colson said this trend was “in part a result of our relentless pursuit of what political scientist Michael Sandel calls ‘the unencumbered self.’” Mind you, this was even before we all retreated to our cell phones and computer screens.

So how are we doing today? The latest statistics say: not so hot. According to the General Social Survey, only about 20% of Americans spend time regularly with their neighbors, while a third say they’ve never interacted with them. Just four decades ago, however, one-third of Americans hung out with neighbors at least two times a week. Only a fourth reported having no interaction. The Pew Research Center in 2010, meanwhile, found that while 43% of Americans know most or all of their neighbors, nearly a third say they know none of them by name.

For whatever reason, it appears that fewer of us are able to answer the old question, “And who is my neighbor?” How do we Christians overcome this growing cultural tide of isolation and obey our calling to be witnesses to Jesus Christ?

Ed Stetzer, who, among many other things, is co-host with John Stonestreet of “BreakPoint This Week,” provides an amazingly simple way that we can be a neighbor to our neighbors. In an article posted for Christianity Today, Ed tells about how he moved from Nashville to Wheaton, Illinois—often called the “evangelical mecca”—and received a four-page letter from some longtime Wheaton residents who live across the street.

The letter, titled “In Our Humble Opinion,” starts off by saying, “I know you are going to find it to be a wonderful community to live in BUT it can be a little daunting at first. I moved into the brick house across the street from you when I was 12. Now we have lived in the cream house next door to that house for 23 years. I guess we like it here…” Then the neighbor starts sharing tips for living in Wheaton—the best places for pizza—three of them, it turns out; the best chocolate, the best popcorn—found in “a covered alley between two stores on Front Street” under a “red and white striped awning”; the best movie theater; the best grocery store; and the best doughnuts, “apple cider sugared,” which are available at the downtown French Market between April and October.

The neighbor then closes the list, tongue in cheek, with the “best church” and tells Ed and his family that they are most welcome. Ed says, as a new Wheaton resident, he consulted this four-page letter regularly and saw the invitation each time. “Their list made us know,” Ed says: “1. They were glad we were here. 2. They took time to welcome us and care (and we just had dinner with them). 3. They invited us to church.”

What a great idea! Now, we don’t each of us have to type a four-page letter to our neighbors in order to establish a friendship and invite them to church. We all have different strengths, different gifts. But the point is, we need to actually be a neighbor, to step away from our natural tendency to isolate ourselves or just hang out with people we know, and maybe extend a hand of help and friendship to those around us.

God designed humans to live in community. All of us, believers and non-believers, desire some kind of fellowship and connection. Maybe the first step is simply learning our neighbors’ names—and using them!

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]

Further Reading and Information Start (or continue) your neighborliness–we have a great example to follow in Christ. He demonstrated who our neighbor is, and how we are to treat our neighbors. For some great ideas, check out Ed Stetzer’s article in Christianity Today, and click on the links below for other suggestions. Just walk across the yard!

"How to Welcome New Neighbors and Invite Them to Church at the Same Time"
Ed Stetzer Christianity Today February 10, 2017; http://www.christianitytoday.com/edstetzer/2017/february/welcome-to-wheaton.html?utm_content=bufferd5a00&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer 

"Why Won't You Be My Neighbor?"Linda Poon citylab.com; August 19, 2015; http://www.citylab.com/housing/2015/08/why-wont-you-be-my-neighbor/401762/

The Sacrament of Evangelism- Jerry Root, Stan Guthrie, Lyle Dorsett Moody Publishers, April 2011; http://www.colsoncenterstore.org/product.asp?sku=9780802422880

Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community- Robert D. Putnam Simon & Schuster Publishers, August 2001; http://www.colsoncenterstore.org/Product.asp?sku=0743203046

"Bowling Alone: Are We Isolating Ourselves?"Chuck Colson BreakPoint.org, May 30, 1996; http://archive.breakpoint.org/bpcommentaries/breakpoint-commentaries-search/entry/13/%20%2013221

Saturday, March 11, 2017

#1885 [3/11] PRO-LIFE SAT: "Hawaii Senate Passes Bill Forcing Pregnancy Centers to Promote Abortions"

"HAWAII SENATE PASSES BILL FORCING PREGNANCY CENTERS TO PROMOTE ABORTIONS"JAY HOBBS; MAR 9, 2017; http://www.lifenews.com/2017/03/09/hawaii-senate-passes-bill-forcing-pregnancy-centers-to-promote-abortions/ [AS I SEE IT: First of all, I was shocked to learn that my home state had only 5 pregnancy centers offering women alternative help to an abortion. Then to learn that even with literally no opposition, the pro-abortion forces want to shut down the free speech of those few places is outrageous. It all serves to show how brazen such groups are. It emphasizes even more why Christians need to stand with such pregnancy centers as many are TODAY with the Walk for Life being held here in Orlando. I praise God for all who have given towards helping girls and women so desperate they would otherwise choose abortion. - Stan]
Sailing through the Democrat-controlled senate on a 22-3 tally, a Hawaiian bill that would force the state’s five pro-life pregnancy centers to advertise taxpayer-funded abortions was sent along to the house Tuesday in Honolulu.

Patterned along similar lines with a 2015 law in California that is likely headed to the U.S. Supreme Court as soon as this year, the Hawaiian senate bill (SB 501) was originally introduced with a parallel house bill, which was on hold as the senate bill went through. Planned Parenthood Northwest and Hawaii—which is currently suing an Idaho pregnancy center over use of a shared parking lot—has been a vocal supporter of the legislation

“In its rush to appease Big Abortion, the Hawaii legislature is running roughshod over the First Amendment rights guaranteed to its own citizens,” Jor-El Godsey, president of Heartbeat International—an affiliation network that includes Hawaiian centers—said. “If the state can force its own people to violate their own deeply held religious convictions by advertising for abortions, then free speech and free religious exercise are effectively dead.”

Leaders at pro-life pregnancy help organizations on the islands—who receive no state funding whatsoever—had testified against the bill at an earlier senate hearing, but their written testimony was held back from the senate’s Ways and Means Committee ahead of its vote last week. Pro-life advocates, including National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA) vice president Anne O’Connor, said the breach of protocol ahead of the Ways and Means Committee vote indicated the state’s disregard for the First Amendment’s guarantee of citizens’ rights to “petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Ironically, that breach underscores the law’s clear intent to trample on the First Amendment rights of free speech and free exercise of religion, O’Connor argued, calling the censorship—intentional or not—“mind-boggling in our democracy.” The bill as it currently stands would threaten pregnancy centers with a $500 first-time penalty and a $1,000 penalty for future infractions, forcing them to post or disseminate the following notice to women seeking care at their facilities:

“This clinic does not provide abortion services or abortion referrals.  Only ultrasounds performed by qualified healthcare professionals and read by licensed clinicians should be considered medically accurate.Hawaii has public programs that provide immediate free or low-cost access to comprehensive family planning services including all FDA-approved methods of contraception, prenatal care, and abortion for eligible women..." Adopted in the fall of 2015, California’s law similarly mandates that pro-life pregnancy help medical clinics post signage and/or online notices advertising state taxpayer-funded birth control and abortions...

In addition to the law in California and the bill in Hawaii, the state of Illinois gutted its Healthcare Right of Conscience Act in 2016 to allow pro-life medicos of all stripes—including those at pregnancy centers—to be liable to civil penalties if they refuse to counsel on the so-called “benefits” of abortion and refer their patients directly to local abortion businesses...While at least one state—Connecticut—is also considering attacking the free speech and religious liberty rights of pro-lifers involved in pregnancy help work, the strategy has failed repeatedly at the local level. Past attempts by local authorities to compel pro-life pregnancy centers to post signage either declaring the services they do not offer or referring patients—even indirectly—to abortion providers have been struck down in New York City, Austin (TX), Baltimore (MD) and Montgomery County (MD), the latter of which cost taxpayers $330,000 in attorneys fees.

Godsey has urged pregnancy help centers and medical clinics in Illinois to refuse compliance, but has stopped short of doing the same for California and Hawaii, where the issue of referral for abortion services is less direct than its Illinois counterpart. “Hawaii’s pregnancy help organizations are delivering caring, compassionate help for women and families at absolutely zero cost to the state’s taxpayers,” Godsey said. “No woman should ever feel so alone or trapped that she feels abortion is her only option, but this is exactly the situation laws like these create. Every woman deserves to have all the information she needs to make the healthiest choice for everyone involved in an unexpected pregnancy.”

[bold, italics, and colored emphasis mine]