Just another day: Is there anybody out there?

Yeah, you can bet that when a major quake smacks the earth, I'll be posting another "Just another day."  Just consider me that quaint, long-haired maniac walking the streets of the blogospherre toting my big sign and crying "The end is near!" except that my hair is really short and I don't have very much of it anymore.  With that, away we go.

• Right in the middle of someone's Chile.  8.8 on Herr Richter's scale.  That's a whopper.  So much so that the folks across the Pacific in Japan (!) are concerned about a tsunami. 
• Not to be outdone.  Japan had their own rocker earlier in the week.  They tagged 7.0 which is itself a doozy but nothing compared to 8.8.  Consider, too, that Japan's construction is a lot more high tech compared with most of Chile's construction.  Japan fared pretty well, overall.  Chile's going to be a mess.  Is the earth burping more than normal?
• Blizzard after blizzard after blizzard.  Few on the east coast are singing, "Let it Snow."  It's been snowing there since December.  We should have had the Winter Olympics in D.C.
• Drudge.  None of these events are new.  It seems every week some "natural" phenomena grab the headlines.  Drudge linked an article to MSNBC asking the question, "Is Nature Out of Control?"  Last year we had tornadoes as abundant "dudes" in a snowboard half-pipe interview.  This winter it's winter capturing everyone's attention.  Then Haiti, Japan, and Chile in the span of a month.  While the article deals with earthquakes (here), all of nature has been heaving. 
  
  What gives?  Roland Emmerich might want us to believe it's because of "2012" or perhaps some bizarre cyclical upheaval that gives rise to "The Day After Tomorrow."  Jesus had other ideas.  He said,
  

  For nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, and there will be famines and earthquakes in various places. All these are but the beginning of the birth pains.

  Nations have been hammering nations for a couple centuries, but the whole deal with the troubled earth seems awfully recent. Some writer at MSNBC seems to think so, too.
• Money, money.  The head of the International Monetary Fund has joined a growing choir calling for a global currency (here).  With the shrinking of international distances, economies seem to be more and more intertwined, like it or not.  Should we move to a global currency, it's a very small step toward nations asking for an international government with oversight over global interactions.  A very small step.  All of this on the heels of the euro's disintegration (here) and America's lethal national debt.
• Animals.  God forgive them.  A dog bites a man, it's put down.  If it does it once, it's likely to do it again.  So will someone please explain to me why an orca that's been involved in three human deaths would be allowed to swim leisurely in its pool (here)?  The supreme idiocy of "animals are people, too" fleshed out for all to see.  One man kills three, he'll be facing lethal injection.  Shamu does it?  He gets an extra-large bucket of herring.  What gives?

Last one, turn the lights out.

Healthcare: The unconstitutional juggernaut

"Healthcare is your basic right."  Sure sounds good as a political promise, but I couldn't find it in the Declaration of Independence.  That dusty, old document says something antiquated about God being the one who gives man his rights.  Among them, it avers, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (which has a far different meaning in the minds of the peripheral coasts than it did in the minds of our founders).

Since the Big Three are "among" those unalienable rights, there must be other unspecified rights "among" which the Big Three find themselves.  Healthcare must be one of those, loitering in some unspecified location between the penumbra of the Declaration and the Constitution.  So if healthcare is "among" the rights alongside the Big Three, surely there must be other important rights that have not yet been brought to the fore of congressional or presidential minds. 

That got me thinking.  (Cue the ominious "Twilight Zone" music.)

Shelter's pretty important.  I should have a right to shelter.  And since we've already noted the high standing of healthcare with the "among" rights, my home should be toasty in the winter and nicely chilled in the summer.  That means it should have good insulation and energy efficient windows.  To save American money, I'd be willing to take a hit for the team and live in San Diego where the temperatures remain at 75-degrees give or take 3-degrees throughout the year.  It's my right, afterall.

I need to work, too.  Therefore, employment is a right.  But I'll need to take care of my kids, too, so I'll only be able to work between 8:30 a.m. and 2:30 p.m. because I need to drop my kids off at school and pick them up in the afternoon to get them to play practice, football practice, bassoon lessons and their Feng-Shui classes.

If I'm going to work, because it is my right, you know, I'll need to get to work.  Therefore, with the logic of a Sicilian when death is on the line, having a car must be a right, too.  Since there is some question as to whether or not the environment is in jeopardy, nuts to the green cars.  Gimme a hot Porsche.  And since I'll be pooling my kids to school and all events extra-curricular, I'll need a family vehicle.  How about a Yukon with DVD's for the kids (educational videos, you know).

I must certainly have a right to eat as well.  Since I'll be so busy commuting my kids all over town, I'll need someone to prepare the food.  I guess that means I have a right to live-in home service, too.  Perhaps a personal cook and maid and a masseusse to take care of the stresses of my day.

And...and...and...

Whoa.  Hey, was I sleeping? 

You get the idea, though, don't you?  If we take "healthcare as a right" to its logical conclusion, we will be required nothing.  We will be handed everything.  My rootbeer induced delusion speaks of human needs NOT human rights.  The rights (and God-given they are) provide us the freedoms to live our lives as we see fit to meet our needs.  Success or failure?  They are up to us.

When Ma and Pa Ingalls headed out of the big woods and onto the prairie, they didn't lean on the hope or change of Grover Cleveland to bail them out if their buckboard sank into Plum Creek.  Their success came about because of the blood, sweat, and tears of Charles and Caroline.  What role did the government play?  It stayed completely out of their vittles.

Healthcare is not a right, it's a need.  And thereby, it's no business of the government to provide it except to protect my God-given rights to try and procure a livelihood for my family and me.

I don't think Congress or the President will listen to me.  Maybe they'll listen to US?

Curious: Texas church fires

Jay Nordlinger relays questions posed by his readers in his weekly Impromptus about the dozen arsons in east Texas (here).  They ask:

What if the churches had been abortion clinics? Or mosques? Wouldn’t the burnings have been national news then?

Good point.  Let's go a step further.  If the crimes had been against abortion clinics or mosques, would the crooks have been guilty of hate crimes?  Yes, I do believe they would have been so indicted.

It seems that the only specific people group against which hate crimes do not apply are Christians.

(By the way, hate crimes are stupid.  If a dude torches a house for the insurance or because the folks in it are Yankees fans and he loves the BoSox, the penalty should be the same.  I hope the arsonists get the full extent of the law piled upon their backs.  No more.  No less.  No cherry-on-top required.)

Still, all in all, the media has been pretty quiet about the arsons.  Pretty quiet.

(Photo from KLTV video)

Thank you, Dr. Dobson!

This Friday, James Dobson retires from his post at Focus on the Family.  He will be missed.

Dobson had a thriving role at USC's Children's Hospital in the 1970's as a PhD in clinical psychology.  He shelved it all to meet a growing need of ministering to families through radio.  Oh, what a need!  His radio program grew from a tiny little rented office in southern California to an enormous complex in Colorado Springs with a far-reaching ministry.  Dr. Dobson unapologetically took God at his word and shared with families across America how Jesus Christ was the solution to man's and the family's most desperate need.

His works have been translated into dozens of languages.  His program is heard around the world.

And he is hated.

Had Dr. Dobson remained a man talking about parental discipline, healing marriages, and the like, he may have faded from radio and gone back to teaching.  He didn't.  He couldn't.  Families have to deal with homosexuality.  Families have to deal with abortion.  Families have to deal with pornography.  Dr. Dobson would not bury his head and pray they went away.  He spoke plainly into his microphone that such things stood in direct opposition to God and his word.  Many felt he drifted too far into politics, and in an increasingly secular America, thou shalt not mix God and politics.

I will always thank God for how he used Dr. Dobson within our nation, but I thank God for how he used Dr. Dobson in my family most of all.

Beginning in the early 1990's, God began to prod my wife, Tracy, and me toward adoption.  We ignored him, but he kept prodding.  One evening in 2001, Tracy headed to town.  It was a half an hour drive.  She turned on the radio and heard Dr. Dobson and Steven Curtis Chapman discussing the Chapman's adoption of their little girl, Shoahannah, from China.  My bride's heart stirred like never before.  She mentioned hearing it to me, but our conversation went no further.

The next day, she had to go back into town, thought little of the time, and when she clicked on the radio, she was startled to hear Chapman and Dr. Dobson discussing adoption, again.  It was a two-day program.  When she returned home that night, our conversations grew more passionate.  We had four sons already and our living space seemed full, but there was obviously more room in our family.

On August 4th, 2003, an orphaned, little, Chinese girl got herself a dad, a mom, and four new brothers.  Emma became our daughter.

God wasn't done.  On July 6th, 2005, we welcomed Kara into our family, too.

Thank you, Dr. Dobson, for serving your Lord and Savior in this ministry for the last thirty-plus years.  Thank you for the many ways you have blessed me and my family.

Thank you, Dr. Dobson, for Emma and Kara.

Well done!

But a vapor

In the drizzly pre-dawn of January 16th, 37-year old Terri left home for her morning run.  She died when struck by a pick-up driven by a man on his way to work.  He never saw her.  A tragic accident.

Late in the evening of February 9th, Kevin went to work on his job as a cable repairman.  While hoisted high in the air to work on an elevated line, a drunk driver struck his truck and threw Kevin from his bucket.  He died from the fall.  Kevin was 38.  It was his son's birthday.

Last fall, Jim retired from a distinguished career in our nation's Air Force.  On Friday night February 12th, he went to bed but did not wake up on Saturday morning.  Jim was 49. 

Remember how short my time is;
For what futility have You created all the children of men?
What man can live and not see death?
Can he deliver his life from the power of the grave?

~ Psalm 89

When we lived in Arizona, the locusts would shed their skins all over the side of our stucco home.  They looked substantial, but pinch them between your fingers and they disintegrated.  How fragile our lives.  How thin the veil between life and death.  We appear so strong, but in a moment...

He remembered that they were but flesh,
a wind that passes and comes not again.

~ Psalm 78

 
On March 13th, my second son will marry the love of his life. One month and four days later, my eldest son will tie the knot with his beloved.  I have not been promised to see the joy that will spread across their faces when they behold their brides bedecked in white, prepared specially for them.  Nor have they been promised to see that day.

For he knows our frame;

he remembers that we are dust.
As for man, his days are like grass;
he flourishes like a flower of the field;
for the wind passes over it, and it is gone,
and its place knows it no more.

~ Psalm 103

If you have not gone through such seasons, you will.  They cannot be escaped.  What will the seeding of such sorrow precipitate in our lives?  Will we reject our God?  Will we turn to sex or scotch?  Will we withdraw or lash out?  God himself, through a psalm penned by Moses, guides us in the dark night of our grief.

So teach us to number our days

that we may get a heart of wisdom...
...Satisfy us in the morning with your steadfast love,
that we may rejoice and be glad all our days.

~ Psalm 90

Such have been my days of late.  Not complaining.  That's just the way it is.

I look forward to the morning.

-------------------------------------------

The ninetieth is a breathtaking Psalm to meditate upon if you happen to find yourself in such a season (here).

Photo by Tyler Pond

Tiger & such

Really, no cohesive theme today, but it's been such a long time since I regurgitated the ruminations of my mind that I felt compelled.  Can you believe I do this to relax?

• Tiger.  I'm surprised by the spears that the PGA's greatest philanderer has taken for his recent confession.  I confess I did not watch his public penance.  I did read the transcript, and it seemed pretty sincere to me.  "My fault," rang throughout.  "All my fault."  I did catch a bit of his delivery on the Olympics.  Considering his material, I thought he delivered it pretty well.  I'm dropping my stone.
  
  
  Expect there to be no criticisms from the talking heads for Woods mentioning the role his Buddhist beliefs would play in his restoration.  Had he appealed to Christ (and found forgiveness for his sin and the strength to overcome future sin), as suggested by Brit Hume, he would have been labeled as weak for needing such a crutch or as a hypocrite for dallying and then repenting.  Alas.
• Olympics.  I wasn't going to watch the Olympics this time around.  Problems swirled around these games what with global warming focusing its sole attention on Vancouver, the muffed torch lighting and the luge track tragedy on opening day.  The whole thing seemed doomed before it even began.  Then I got hooked.  Shawn White soared as high out of the half-pipe as the stadium lights that lit up the British Columbian night.  Lindsey Vonn pounded down a mountain that ate half the girls for lunch to clinch gold.  Shani Davis became the first man to win 1000-meter gold back to back in speed skating.  Watched a gut-wrenching fight for a bronze medal in cross-country skiing that went down to a photo finish.  I wish you could have seen these women gut-out those last two miles up hills and then sprinting side-by-side toward the finish line.  They knew they would not win but a medal was at stake.  Then a bit later, skiers sprinted to the line side-by-side for no medal but to earn one higher place when all was said and done.  And for their country. 
  
  Yeah, I'm watching the Olympics.  I even watched the men's figure skating, Rachel, an event where there do seem to still be a few men involved (Johnny Weir notwithstanding).
  
  
• Gaffes.  If you collected all of the public-speaking blunders of past presidents and played them across the airwaves far and wide, folks would believe America plucked its presidential candidates from the detention room of the local junior high school.  That's just the cost of doing business.  You dare to open your mouth in public and you'll find your tongue becoming dyslexic.  Is Joe Biden a moron because he recently spoke of America leading the world into the twentieth century?  I believe he knows full well what century we are in.  Chalk it up to a misspeak (though, our Veep could stand a little more of the proverb "Thinkest before thou openest thy pie-hole").  When queried about the attack on the IRS building in Texas, Massachussetts' newest Senator, Scott Brown, talked himself into an oral half-nelson.  Imbecile?  Purposefully hateful?  I don't think so.  Does Katie Couric really believe that Sarah Palin reads no magazines?
  
  
  
  I remember once being interviewed for a community member position for our newspaper's editorial board.  They asked me which columnists I most followed.  My brain locked.  I read the paper every day in those days, and I read most of the columnists.  The only one I could recall wrote inane articles about meaningless topics.  Because of the awkward silence and before my mind could stop them, my lips uttered her name.  I sounded like a dope and didn't get the position.
  Perhaps the Olbermann's of the world would be well served to cut a larger swath of slack toward such folks who have to make their living giving round-the-clock public proclamations.  If Joe Biden continues to state that we're leading folks into the twentieth century, and if pressed, he thinks we are moving into the twentieth century, then we might question whether his synapses have begun to misfire.  Now, let's see if I can heed my own advice.
• Twilight.  Mark Steyn's recent column bode's ill for the west.  A great read, but that is most often the case.  A snippet. 

On the one hand, governments of developed nations micro-regulate every aspect of your life in the interests of “keeping you safe.” If you’re minded to flip a pancake at speeds of more than four miles per hour, the state will step in and act decisively: It’s for your own good. If you’re a tourist from Moose Jaw, Washington will take preemptive action to shield you from the potential dangers of your patio in Arizona.

On the other hand, when it comes to “keeping you safe” from real threats, such as a millenarian theocracy that claims universal jurisdiction, America and its allies do nothing.

Read the rest of the piece here.

•  Big Al.  No, not Gore this time.  Haig.  Alexander Haig died today.  As we move further and further from the 1980's, many forget that he served as Secretary of State under Ronald Reagan.  No doubt his steely demeanor had much to do with the dismantling of the Iron Curtain.  Few remember that he was also a decorated four-star general.  If any remember him at all, they remember him as attempting to "Al Haig" presidential powers unto himself during the attempted assassination on President Reagan.  A funny annecdote if one had the inclination to study it through.  Anyway, many thanks to our Lord for providing our nation such a man at such a time as his.
  

• Larry Talbot.  Hollywood's newest attempt at resurrecting an old movie is out.  It's "The Wolfman."  Growing up, I loved the horror classics.  As I grew, I learned about how such literary works provided a peek into the dark side of man by transferring that sin into the character of the monster.  Larry Talbot was no exception.  An innocent, humble man gets struck by a beast and as such, becomes a beast himself.  Part-time.  Most of the time, he's just Larry.  When the moon goes full, he becomes unleashed.  A good story forces questions.  The Wolfman follows that rule.  How is it that such ordinary folks (Ted Bundy, Malik Nadal Hassan) can unleash such evil?
  
  
  I didn't see it, but from the reviews, one gets hammered with such visual depictions of animalistic brutality as to be wrenched of any questions that might have surfaced.  So macabre and horrifying has Hollywood become because they can, that the outstanding stories that may have been conjured in the minds of the writer get lost as the director unleashes a fury of graphic sex, grisly violence, or sensibility-assaulting profanity that any nuanced message is lost in translation. 
  Thank you, Lon Chaney (and Junior, pictured above).  Thank you Mr. Legosi.  Thank you Mr. Stoker and Mrs. Shelly.  Thanks for a story that addresses the plight of God's creation as we struggle within a fallen world and with our fallen nature.
• Jesus.  I've heard this before, so what came out of Elton John's mouth the other day is no surprise.  He contends Jesus Christ was a homosexual man.  It seems that most who make those assertions are homosexual men or women or strongly favor such relationships.  The simple fact that Christ had twelve male disciples does not make him homosexual any more than it makes Peyton Manning gay for putting his hands under the fanny of his center for twenty plays every game.  Sad to hear folks say such things in their ignorance.

Let's end on a high note.  Jesus told his disciples on the night before his execution, "I have said these things to you, that in me you may have peace."  What things?  The things he told them that night (John 14-16) and the things he told them for their three years together.  And wherein could his disciples, many of whom went to their own executions, find peace?  In their Christ, their Messiah, their Savior, Jesus himself.  Dead he would be in twenty-four hours, but alive he would be three days later.  He explained.

 "In the world you will have tribulation.  But take heart; I have overcome the world."

Amen!  On that note, I'm out.

The source of your beef

You want to set off fireworks outside the 4th of July?  Bring up the topic of "submission" in the church today.  A couple of preachers are in deep haggis for asserting that a number of the societal problems within Great Britain are due to women not submitting themselves to God's word by submitting to their husbands in marriage.  Color me startled that any churches remained within Reformation Europe that still taught out of the Bible.

...Three...two...one...BOOM!

One woman churchgoer said she was ‘disgusted’ by the sermon, adding: ‘How can they talk that way in the 21st Century?’  Another, who also did not want to be named, said: ‘We’re supposed to let our husbands talk for us and remain silent? What kind of medieval sermon is that?

From the rest of the news story, the Daily Mail didn't get it either (read it here).  In an era when women can be found most anywhere except an NFL offensive line (maybe the Lions?), the idea of biblical submission conjures images of doormats and servitude.  The one brief comment the article allowed in defense of the rectors was:

People misunderstand the word “submit”. In this context it means saying how can I be most beneficial in this relationship as a helper. To submit does not make you an inferior being.

Here's the deal.  That's what the Bible says.

• Ephesians 5:22 - "Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord."  (Get full context here) 
• Colossians 3:18 - "Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord."  (Again, context here)

Peter did not counter Paul's writing, either.

• 1 Peter 3:1-2 - "Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct."

Now, my point in lighting this powderkeg is not to highlight what the Bible says about the role of men or the role of women within marriage.  I do so to highlight the absolute ignorance of those who claim to be Christians but think the Bible is some Burger King drive-thru menu from which they can pick and choose.  You don't like it, become a Druid, but understand this: rejecting the God of the Bible is a very serious decision, indeed.

God made us.  He knows how best we function as individuals, as societies, and as married folk.  He went so far as to take on human flesh and to undergo a most barbaric death to redeem those who choose to accept the free gift from the maw of hell.  Why do we kick against the goads?

There are plenty of churches across our country and across Europe that will let you have your religion your way.  In favor of homosexual marriage?  You can find a church.  All in favor of abortion?  You can find a church?  Women in the pulpit?  You'd be hard pressed not to find a church.

But to find an uncompromising, Bible-teaching church is becoming more challenging with each new day.

Let me encourage you to hang around a church that actually preaches and teaches from the Bible for a month or two.  You just might find your life changed...forever. 

If you don't like what you hear and if what you hear is coming out of the pages of Scripture, your beef is not with the man in the pulpit.

Just another day: Let it snow

Lots and lots of disparate musings rattling my cage, and they want out!

• Winter.  The absurd amounts of snow in north Texas do not make me fear global cooling any more than the heat wave in Rio makes me fear global warming.  Weather is cyclical.  God made our planet habitable.  He'll make sure we don't fry/freeze, apologies to Nobel Prize winners and data doctors.
  .
• Winter, of the nuclear variety.  The Persian Madman has announced Iran's entry into the nuclear world.  Does that make you as toasty inside as it does me?  I'm sure the folks on the outskirts of Tel Aviv are just giddy.
  .
• Arson.  East Texas church torchings nears a dozen (here).  Would we be hearing more about it if said places of worship were mosques?  Methinks so.
  .
• Freedom.  As I drove home from work yesterday, I heard Dennis Prager discussing employment law on AM radio.  The gist of the conversation delineated the legal differences in hiring between for profit businesses and organizations and nonprofits.  For example, a religious organization does not have to hire an avowed atheist because it runs contrary to their fundamental convictions and the very purpose of their existence.  Then I wondered, why should any business owner have to hire someone they find objectionable?  Shouldn't a business owner be free to hire whom they please to work for them?  Why would you want to work for a businessman who has some major beef with you but was made to hire you through government strong-arming?  Just thinking.
  .
• Olympic-sized mess.  Who thought to have the Olympics in some place that his miniscule amounts of snow during their winters?  Lots of rain.  Not so much snow.  Alberta?  Great idea.  Pacific coast.  Um...
  .
• Number two.  How many of you can name the #2 golfer in the world?  Anyone?  Steve Stricker.  How do I know that?  He lives two miles from my mom, and Mom's a golf junkie, not to mention that my son has his autograph tacked to his bedroom wall.  Anyway, the man cries after winning every tournament.  Eight for eight.  What's up with that?  For him, every win is a dream come true, and I believe he is utterly aware of that a golf swing can leave a golfer faster than Larry King can leave a wife. 
  
  An interesting insight into #2.  Jay Nordlinger asked him a question after he won his first tournament back in 1996.  Here's Nordlinger's take on the Q & A.
  

  “How old were you when you figured you would go on to win a PGA tournament? Were you in junior high, high school? College?” Stricker answered, “I never realized I would win until this very day.”

  And so on Sunday when Roger Maltbie met up with him for the greenside interview, Stricker again shed his tears, amazed that he would once again be atop the leaderboard after 72 holes.  You don't find many like that anymore.  (Nordlinger's "Impromptus" here with Stricker bit on pg. 2 and a nice link to a Forbes article on Stricker.)
  .
• Tremblers.  Didja hear about the earthquake Chicagoans endured yesterday?  Normal?  Methinks not.  Tons of snow.  Quakes leveling Haiti and tapping Chicago on the shoulder.  An odd season, this winter of 2009-2010.
  .
• Truth.  Speaking of odd, why do folks no longer--generally speaking, mind you--no longer believe what the Bible says?  The further down the timeline we travel, fewer and fewer will even take God's challenge ("Taste and see that the Lord is good, " says Psalm 34:8.  "Blessed is the man that trusts in him").  Is it any wonder our society, culture, and government are sliding down the commode?

That's it for now.  I hope that clears my head.  Until next time, I'll be gazing toward the sunrise.

Lest we forget...

These photos were released today, previously unreleased from the NY Police Authority.  Interesting that these would come out on the eve of Iran's threats against the free world.

Study them.  And REMEMBER!

"On September the 11th, enemies of freedom committed an act of war against our country."  ~President Bush

"They want to drive Israel out of the Middle East. They want to drive Christians and Jews out of vast regions of Asia and Africa."

"Our nation has been put on notice, we're not immune from attack."

"We're in a fight for our principles, and our first responsibility is to live by them."

"I will not forget the wound to our country and those who inflicted it. I will not yield, I will not rest, I will not relent in waging this struggle for freedom and security for the American people. The course of this conflict is not known, yet its outcome is certain. Freedom and fear, justice and cruelty, have always been at war, and we know that God is not neutral between them." ~ President Bush

QotD: Poster-style

Words mean things.  To most people, anyway.

Husbands: According to her

I remember loving Harry Chapin's "Cat's in the Cradle" as a kid.  You could understand the lyrics, but the depth of their meaning went clean over my head.  At 46, the lyrics sting and sober like an unforeseen slap in the face.

Lyrics have always hung with me.  No doubt, the melody will hook your ear, but it's the lyric that keeps me coming back for more.

Today, I caught a recent release for the second time.  The first time I heard it, the tune didn't overwhelm me.  Palatable like a decent PB and J.  I caught most of the lyrics, but with the canned and grungy, techno-pop, I didn't pay them much heed.  Today, though, the lyrics barged into my man-space with as much notification as Israel will get when Iran sends its Valentine's greeting.

Grant me a bit of liberty.  "According to You" by Orianthi seems to be about relationships in 21st century America, volatile, fluid, moving from whichever partner deems you significant at the moment.  As such, it's bereft on a couple of levels.

But hear the first verse.

According to you
I'm stupid
I'm useless
I can't do anything right
According to you
I'm difficult
hard to please
forever changing my mind
I'm a mess in a dress
can't show up on time
even if it would save my life
According to you, according to you.

Where "Cat's in the Cradle" stuck a finger in the eye of dads who chose the job over the kids, "According to You" targets the liver of the man who takes for granted the girl at his side.  Let me barb the harpoon a bit more.  Focus the bullseye upon we husbands who do not treasure the wife of our youth.

It's easy.  The woman you rely upon to be there through thick and thin, you think she can take it 'cause you don't really mean the jab, right?  She knows you really love her, doesn't she?  A callous word here.  An insensitive joke there.  A shake of the head and a roll of the eyes with "I can't believe it" muttered under the breath can easily be translated into, "YOU NIT!!"

How many wives hear that first verse day after day after day?

Flip the switch.  Chorus.

But according to him
I'm beautiful
incredible
he can't get me out of his head
According to him
I'm funny
irresistable
everything he ever wanted
Everything is opposite
I don't feel like stopping it
so baby tell what i got to lose
Hes into me for everything Im not according to you

What's this guy tell her?  Without saying, "I love you," he tells her over and over again, "I LOVE YOU!"  The soul-starved woman craves to hear such things from the lips of her man. 

The end of the chorus points toward the ditching of the one for the other, a tragedy in the era of disposable relationships, but if you cut off the last three lines, who could be singing the lyric?  Who sings into the soul of a woman to her absolute satisfaction?  Her God and Savior, Jesus Christ.  "You're beautiful" (Song of Solomon 1:15), "Incredible" (SoS 4:9), "I'll not forget you" (Isaiah 49:15).  He loves her with a love far more fulfilling than the satiation of the sexual appetite.

So ought a husband to love his wife, not like verse two.

According to you
I'm boring
I'm moody
and you can't take me any place
According to you
I suck at telling jokes 'cause I always give it away
I'm the girl with the worst attention span
you're the boy who puts up with that
According to you, according to you.

Ouch.  Day after day after day.

Unfortunately, most of the readers to this blog are women.  Please don't rub this under the nose of your man.

But men, stick this message in the ear of your compadres.  "He who finds a wife finds a good thing and obtains favor from the Lord" (Proverbs 18:22).  That is truth!  We may not see it, but that's because we're looking through the jaded and sin-stained eyes of the world.  God has given us a precious woman with which to walk a few days upon this earth before we cross the veil into eternity.  Cherish her with your words...and mean them.  Cherish her, value her, as the priceless gift from God to you that she is.

Husbands, love your wives as Christ loved the Church and gave himself up for her.  Maybe start with your words.  Maybe start on Valentine's Day.  Maybe start today.  Sing her the chorus.

The Look

Many are familiar with John Newton, a slave trader whose life changed from darkness to light when he met Jesus Christ and became confronted by the wretchedness of his own life.  Most know him through his most famous poem, a lyric we sing as Amazing Grace.

I did not realize Mr. Newton penned other poems as well.  Tonight, for the first time, I heard The Look.  Here it is.

THE LOOK

In evil long I took delight
Unawed by shame or fear;
Till a new object struck my sight
And stopped my wild career.
I saw One hanging on a tree
In agonies and blood;
Who fixed His languid eyes on me
As near His cross I stood.

Sure never till my latest breath
Can I foget that look;
It seemed to charge me with His death
Though not a word He spoke.
My conscience felt and owned the guilt
And plunged me in despair;
I saw my sins His blood had spilt
And helped to nail Him there.

Alas, I knew not what I did
But now my tears are vain;
Where shall my trembling soul be hid?
For I the Lord have slain.
A second look He gave which said
"I freely all forgive;
This blood is for thy ransom paid
I died that thou mayest live."

Thus while His death my sin displays
In all its blackest hue;
Such is the mystery of grace,
It seals my pardon too.
With pleasing grief and mournful joy
My spirit now is filled;
That I should such a life destroy
Yet live by Him I killed.

Wow.  "Yet live by Him I killed."  Oh, my.  Grace.  Amazing grace.

Some good news for a change

I came across this nugget at the end of my morning reading.

Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life...

That sounds great, but that's only the first part of the verse.  It's an idea that 99% of Christians can abide.  I will go so far as to assert that most folks with a theistic worldview could agree with the premise.  For many within Christendom, though, believing in the Son is akin to believing in Santa Claus.  They have shifted the mythology of their childhood to a more mature mythology in their adulthood.  He's like a supernatural rabbit's foot, certainly not something real that needs to be feared or reverenced.

Others believe in the teachings of Jesus.  That Son of God stuff is a little hard to get your arms around, but they love those love your neighbor and judge not ideas. 

Others who have different thoughts about getting right with the cosmos or with their god-idea won't besmirch the Christian their belief in the Son.  What works for one might not work for the other, as though the aeronautics that lift my airplane is somehow different than their aeronautics.  Spiritual equivalence.  Unfortunately, it doesn't get close to passing the reality test.

The problem with these three groups comes with a proper understanding of belief.  R.C. Sproul aced the hole this week when, on his radio program, he argued that many who believe in Jesus, do not believe in the biblical Jesus.  This has two prongs.  You have the content of belief and you have the impact of that belief upon your life.  You might like some of the teachings of Jesus, but to believe in the Son, means to believe in the true testimony about him as contained in the Bible.*  And if I really believe in something, like gravity, I will live my life in accord with that which I believe to be true, and in accord with how much that thing matters to me.  If I step off the top of a building, I know I will plummet to the concrete.  As such, I honor gravity though I cannot see it because I know the consequences of ignoring it are mighty steep.  I see the evidence of gravity in the world around me though I cannot see, taste, touch, smell or hear gravity.  And so with God.  Those who have believed him to be true in his word and who have lived their lives in devoted submission to him have experienced him to be reliable (trustworthy, faithful) in their lives as well.  He is true to his word.

That takes me to the second half of the verse, and therein we find good news and bad news.

...whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him.

Wow.  That looks mighty bleak.  So what's the good news?  Look back to the top.  Accepting the free gift of restoration to God through the sacrificial work of Jesus Christ moves one from being under God's wrath to being an adopted child and the recipient of eternal life into fellowship with him.  The wrath of God is not upon the one who has eternal life.  That is really good news.

Now for the bad news, and the bad news shatters all the delusional and nonsensical ideas about Jesus.  A mythological Jesus is not one whose lordship you are likely to accept.  And to assert him to be a good teacher and not to follow his teachings to the letter still leaves one guilty before a holy God.  Paul made the point in his letter to the brand new church in Rome that even the most meticulous law-keeper could not attain to perfection through the law.  James, Jesus' brother, said the same thing. 

It rips a hole in the "that's okay for you" mentality, too.  The Bible draws a stark line in the cosmic sand.  In a nutshell, you're either in with the eternal-life crowd or you're in with the wrath-of-God crowd.  What's the delineator?  A biblical belief in the Son.

Let's pretend that the Bible is utterly false and Christianity is a nonsensical belief system.  The line in the sand would not dissolve.  It still asserts that the only acceptable doorway through which to pass for eternal life is the Son.  Folks who believed in the Son would be a camp full of sorry loons.  An aside, If Christianity was a false religion, why would the non-Christian say that it's okay for you to believe it when the "it" is utter nonsense?  That's worse than giving the alcoholic keys to the liquor store.

But God has spoken to man plainly, clearly, and accurately in his word.  The good news?  He still holds out the free gift (Romans 6:23) to any who would turn to him believing on and in his Son.  The bad news?  It's no joke.  The consequences, not seeing life and dwelling with the wrath of God upon you, are most severe.

Forgiveness, fellowship and adoption into God's family or eternal separation and ever crushed by a wrath for which I am most deserving?  For many this is great news.  For others...

---------------------------------------
*I did not intend in this post to get into the issue of the Bible's veracity (truthfulness and accuracy), but it is relevant to the discussion.  Most denominations do not hold the Bible to be inspired and inerrant or if they do, they have so neutered down the definitions of inspired and inerrant to mean anything but.  I offer here some aspects of the unique nature of God's word.

• Authorship:  Penned by God through the hands and minds of some 35+ different men (2 Peter 1:21, 2 Timothy 3:15-17) 
• Claim:  It claims to be true (Psalm 119:160, Proverbs 30:5).  That doesn't necessarily make it true.  If I assert to you that I am a truth-telling man, the proof is in the pudding.  Do I bear that out in your experience?  So it is with God's word.  Is it accurate in its history?  Crazier still, the Bible is a prophetic book.  Did those prophecies bear out?  In vivid and literal detail.
• The historical accuracy of God's word:  One brief example.  Sir William Ramsay, a prominent British chemist, set out to prove Luke's accounts in the book of Acts to be inaccurate from an archaeological point of view.  This would render the rest of the Bible nothing more than a book of fairy tales.  What he found turned the skeptic into a believer.  The artifacts of Greece and Turkey bore out the veracity of Luke's accounts in Acts in breath-taking detail.  He wrote, "Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy...this author should be placed along with the very greatest historians."

Many look at the "numerous" contradictions within the Bible.  A modicum of willingness to examine the passages within their contexts and with reasonable amount of textual criticism melts away those apparent contradictions.

Rainbows and olive drab

AP ran this yesterday:

The Defense Department starts the clock next week on what is expected to be a several-year process in lifting its ban on gays from serving openly in the military.

I don't know about you, but that wording makes it sound like it's a done deal.  The impetus behind the article (you can read the rest of the article here) was President Obama's State of the Union Address where he stated,

This year ..., I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are. It's the right thing to do.

First things first.  Barack Obama commands our military.  One of the little-honored aspects of our nation's greatness is that our military is run by civilians.  At the tippy-top of the chain of command in every service branch is a civilian Secretary (Secretary of the Army, Secretary of the Navy, etc.).  Over those folks is the POTUS.  The civilian says, "Jump!" and the general with his entire service behind him says, "How high?" as they're already getting into their pre-leap crouch. 

So if the Commander in Chief of the military, Barack H. Obama, tells the military that homosexuals will now be allowed freely and without retribution, that's the way it is.  You don't need some high fallutin study to figure out how to implement it.  Officers carry out the orders of their commanders...whether they agree with the order or not.

Now that I've acknowledged that the CinC can do as he pleases (for the most part), let's move on to green-lighting homosexual behavior in the military.  It is dumber than a pile of rocks.  That said, bring it on!  Whoa.  Yeah, that was a bit abrupt on the turn reversal.  Sit with me a spell.  Here's why I believe it to be crazy.

Our national defense is not the place to experiment with social mores.  Culture can vascillate from chastity belts to Chastity Bono, but that doesn't mean that our military should follow suit.  It must maintain the core character necessary to defend our nation.

An example of such tinkering was Bill Clinton's opening up more front-line roles for women.  With the job market wide-open for women, it seemed a natural progression to put Tanya in a tank.  So thinking that flying fighters and fomenting filibusters was no different, we now have women carrying rifles wearing flak vests in Iraq.  Some problems have surfaced, known for millenia by men of the military but unforeseen by myopic politicos.

1. Men and women are different - Strength.  Yes, Virginia, a few women can lift more and run farther than their peers of the testicular gland, but they are the rare exception.  Most women do not come close to the sheer strength or stamina of a man.  What's that mean to a combat unit?  A handicap.  Here's the deal.  We don't need women in those roles.  So why put them there at all except for the fact that Helen Reddy is woman.  Hear her roar.
   . 
2. Men and women are different - Making babies.  Leftist sophisticates look down their teleprompter raised noses at those who would suggest that men and women in high-stress, close-quartered jobs with little by way of recreation in their off-duty hours will end up making babies.  Generals and admirals agonize over what to do to prevent copulating within their commands.  One poor general went so far as to prohibit it under penalty of UCMJ action.  That went over like a SCUD missile (here).  Still, pregnancies are epidemic (but we do know what causes it).  A woman in a combat environ or aboard ship who winds up with a little swabbie in the galley oven will soon find herself with a one-way ticket stateside.  Her replacement?  Hah!  With as thin as Congress has cut our military, most positions are barely one-deep as is.  The unit will be left one man short.  Twice over.
   . 
   
3. Men and women are different - Chivalry is not dead.  If Billy Hank and I share a fox hole, when shells start exploding a sand wedge to our right, Billy Hank is going to be concerned for his posterior and I will be concerned with mine.  That innate fear and self-preservation will serve to make us a lethal tandem.  Substitute Billy Hank for Billy Jean and I'm more apt to be looking over my shoulder at how she's doing.  Why?  Because man, by his nature, will seek to protect the filly's posterior than he will his own.  No, it's not environmental.  It's natural.  It's how we are created.  By my flinching toward Billy Jean, I put the both of us at greater risk.  It doesn't matter if she's in the fox hole next to me or in the airplane at one-mile line abreast in an air combat element.  Do we want to improve combat lethality or women's self-esteem?

Those three little items, seemingly as obvious as the difference between boy and girl, received no attention when President W. J. Clinton deemed the lassies fit for more rigorous military positions.  Inserting women into such positions has caused some problems within combat and near-combat units.  And here's another point.  Because someone can does not mean someone should.

Turning toward the homosexual question, the same leftist ignorance surfaces.  No, we don't have to worry about pregnancy (though that does cause issues with trying to call such a union a family, doesn't it?).  We don't have to worry about strength, either, but there are issues.

1. Habitation.  Enlisted troops within all services are bunked en masse.  Barracks full of dudes.  Hot bunks stacked within the confined spaces of naval vessels.  How are these quarters divided?  Boys and girls.  Pray, tell, how do you divide them when men can live out their sexual urges?  How do you separate homosexual partners?  Do you ask them to simply curtail their hunger?  How has that worked with men and women?  How comfortable will guys be with guys with homosexual appetites living in close proximity?  If you say they shouldn't have an issue with it, then men and women who are not involved in a relationship should be able to cohabit, too.  It's a ludicrous rationale.  When you begin to tear down one wall, you put the entire structure in jeopardy.
   .
2. Sexual creep.  An eighteen-year old, male private loves another eighteen-year old male private.  Cool, says the CinC.  But what if the first private loves a male from his high school who happens to be seventeen years, three hundred days old?  Is that a crime?  What difference does two months make?  Two years?  What if the 35-year old major loves the thirteen-year old boy in his neighborhood?  Where do you now draw the line?  Why?  If Lois can love Louise, why can't Larry love his labrador?  You may say that's extreme and hyperbolic reasoning, but when any sexual appetite outside the natural appetite between man and woman gets blessed by the government, every other group will want recognition.  Ask the polygamists in southern Utah.
   .
3. Discipline.  Serving in the military in times past meant saying "no" to your libido.  Going away to war meant leaving the ladies behind.  While raping and pillaging has been the way of conquering militarys in past centuries, that was not how the American military began.  Such conduct flew in the face of Washington's General Orders and in the early army's idea of good order and discipline.  The man who could discipline himself in small things could be trusted to discipline himself with greater responsibilities.  With "Don't ask/Don't tell" in place, the soldier with homosexual proclivities subordinated his appetites for something greater, serving his country, moreso than the airman who was making it behind the hangar with another airman and ended up getting her pregnant thereby hurting the entire unit.
   .
4. Him.  There's another problem, one we don't like to talk about.  It's God.  Rather, he's not the problem but our ignoring his directions and designs is a problem.  He created Tab A to fit into Slot B.  He states that misusing that glorious design is a serious offense to Him.  That would indicate that while I might have a particular desire, dwelling upon it and acting upon it become the problem.  It is interesting to note that past civilizations that have embraced homosexual normalcy have gone the way of the dodo.

With that kind of pile, why do I think the military should dispense with its sexual distinctions?  Because they haven't kept their own UCMJ for years.  Adultery is punishable under the UCMJ (here).  When's the last time you've heard anyone hit for such an offense?  We have erroneously come to believe that what takes place in the bedroom has no impact upon what I do on the battlefield.  The ancients of the military (those who crafted the UCMJ) think it bears directly.  The occasional colonel will get a slap on the wrist for a dalliance with an enlisted troop, but adultery?!?  The masses titter.

Drinking and driving?  Huge punishments here, but with the number of kegs that flow at parties, you have to wonder what's going on.  Drunkenness?  Not a problem as long as you don't drop trou in the middle of the street.  If you're an "ugly" drunk, then and only then will you get conduct unbecoming.

And what about "carnal knowledge"?  Was a time when that was seen as an affront to military integrity.  It's still on the books.  Sex outside of marriage as punitive?  How Ozzie and Harriet!  No, how biblical.

Our military's law is rooted in Judeo-Christian morality.  Since our nation continues to divorce itself from God Almighty, why would we expect the military to follow suit?  Who cares whether such restrictions improve their ability to meet the enemy in battle, we want to appease the loins of the masses, don't we?

So where to from here?  As Archie Bunker would say, "Right down the terlet, Edith.  Right down the terlet."  Homosexuality will be blessed within the military within a year.  No surprise.  But if we're going to drop the moral pretense regarding homosexuality, let's drop the moral hypocrisy in other areas.  Why are strippers forbidden at the clubs?  Why can't General X romance Technical Sergeant Y as long as they're both happy?  Who cares what their families think?  We'll let them use medicinal pot to get over it.

Or perhaps the military could simply honor the God who made them.  No, he has been dismissed from the discussion long ago.