Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Obama has visited all 57 States and Two Left
I guess we now have 59 States according to Obama. Just too funny to not post. Maybe why he has to always have the teleprompter with him.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Catholics Get It Right
Though I am not Catholic in my religious practice, I had to put this video up, because they get it right. They do not promote a candidate by word, but definitely do a great job with the video. It always interested me how a practicing Catholic today could vote for Obama with his strong support of abominable abortion practices.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
What is Your Thorn?
2 Corinthians 12:7-9, “. . . to keep me from exalting myself, there was given me a thorn in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to torment me—to keep me from exalting myself! 8Concerning this I implored the Lord three times that it might leave me. 9And He has said to me, “My grace is sufficient for you, for power is perfected in weakness.” Most gladly, therefore, I will rather boast about my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may dwell in me.”
Upon waking every morning, you lie there and pray for a bit because you know that you are not going to be able to move right away. Your hands, knees and back are stiff, you still feel like a truck hit you. You cannot really remember the last time you actually slept through the night. Instead of complaining, you start to pray every morning for at least 10 minutes, or until you are able to get out of bed.
Just to make it through your day you take a combination of at least 6 pills a day that includes pain killers. Your body through out the day hurts in just about every joint, but you particularly feel it in your hands, knees, back and elbows. And the headaches, those are the worst, though not all the time. Then there is fog that seems to stick in your brain continuously that causes you to forget simple words, like ‘car,’ and remembering names and where you place things is very difficult. So not to make anybody queasy, you do not share how it effects you internally through out the week.
Because you deal with all these issues, your moods can swing very easily. Walking is very difficult, but is needed to keep your strength. After work, you have very little energy, but to just go home and go to bed would not be fair to your family, and you would not be able to sleep anyways because the pain keeps you awake. The 6 different meds you take only dulls the pain and does not take it away.
Some of you know, but many of you do not, that this is my thorn. I live with a condition that is labeled Fibromyalgia that causes all the symptoms above and many more. There is no cure for it and medications can only dull the pain. It gets worse as you get older, as either more symptoms start to show themselves or the pain gets worse and worse. There are many out there who suffer from this, and many who are debilitated in wheelchairs, unable to work. I am a lucky one for now, though my symptoms over the years have been slowly getting worse. I can no longer go through a day without being on some sort of pain medication.
What is your thorn? We all have one I believe in some way or another. It might not be as “bad” as mine, or it might be worse. But we all tend to have one, and I think for the same reasons as Paul in many ways, especially as believers. I prayed as Paul did many times for this to be taken away, but it has not.
What I have found is that like Paul it reminds me of who God is and who I am. It reminds me that I rely on Him and not myself. If I were fully healthy, then I might work myself to death, as I am a very driven and work focused person, but with Fibro, I have had to slow down, which has led to more time with family. What is more important then one’s family?
I spend more time in prayer, which is a great blessing. When you cannot move because of the pain, or you are up all night with insomnia, then there is not much to do and T.V. tends to get boring. I learned to pray more, deeper and more relationally. I have cried to God, praised Him, and just poured my heart out to Him, and not just for me but for my church family, my personal family, missionaries, and everyone else I come into contact with in life.
I write and read much more then I probably would if I was able to be as active as I would like. I have found that writing has become a great outlet and has helped people who read my blogs, my notes, and then hear my words through my teaching, my counseling and my preaching. God has used me in more ways then I could have thought and in more ways then I thought I was capable of doing.
Do I have days where I wish I could be “normal,” whatever that is? You bet, but would I want to trade what God has done in my life through this disease? No way! If I was told that I could be cured, but I would lose my relationship that I have now with God and the gifts that He has given me because of my lack of mobility then I would deal with the pain for the rest of my life.
Let us look at our thorns not as curses, but demonstration of God’s love for us. That He uses them to help us rely on Him even more. Being examples for others with the same conditions and feeling honored that Christ chose you and me to represent Him to people with this condition and those without.
2 Corinthians 12:10, “Therefore I am well content with weaknesses, with insults, with distresses, with persecutions, with difficulties, for Christ’s sake; for when I am weak, then I am strong.”
Upon waking every morning, you lie there and pray for a bit because you know that you are not going to be able to move right away. Your hands, knees and back are stiff, you still feel like a truck hit you. You cannot really remember the last time you actually slept through the night. Instead of complaining, you start to pray every morning for at least 10 minutes, or until you are able to get out of bed.
Just to make it through your day you take a combination of at least 6 pills a day that includes pain killers. Your body through out the day hurts in just about every joint, but you particularly feel it in your hands, knees, back and elbows. And the headaches, those are the worst, though not all the time. Then there is fog that seems to stick in your brain continuously that causes you to forget simple words, like ‘car,’ and remembering names and where you place things is very difficult. So not to make anybody queasy, you do not share how it effects you internally through out the week.
Because you deal with all these issues, your moods can swing very easily. Walking is very difficult, but is needed to keep your strength. After work, you have very little energy, but to just go home and go to bed would not be fair to your family, and you would not be able to sleep anyways because the pain keeps you awake. The 6 different meds you take only dulls the pain and does not take it away.
Some of you know, but many of you do not, that this is my thorn. I live with a condition that is labeled Fibromyalgia that causes all the symptoms above and many more. There is no cure for it and medications can only dull the pain. It gets worse as you get older, as either more symptoms start to show themselves or the pain gets worse and worse. There are many out there who suffer from this, and many who are debilitated in wheelchairs, unable to work. I am a lucky one for now, though my symptoms over the years have been slowly getting worse. I can no longer go through a day without being on some sort of pain medication.
What is your thorn? We all have one I believe in some way or another. It might not be as “bad” as mine, or it might be worse. But we all tend to have one, and I think for the same reasons as Paul in many ways, especially as believers. I prayed as Paul did many times for this to be taken away, but it has not.
What I have found is that like Paul it reminds me of who God is and who I am. It reminds me that I rely on Him and not myself. If I were fully healthy, then I might work myself to death, as I am a very driven and work focused person, but with Fibro, I have had to slow down, which has led to more time with family. What is more important then one’s family?
I spend more time in prayer, which is a great blessing. When you cannot move because of the pain, or you are up all night with insomnia, then there is not much to do and T.V. tends to get boring. I learned to pray more, deeper and more relationally. I have cried to God, praised Him, and just poured my heart out to Him, and not just for me but for my church family, my personal family, missionaries, and everyone else I come into contact with in life.
I write and read much more then I probably would if I was able to be as active as I would like. I have found that writing has become a great outlet and has helped people who read my blogs, my notes, and then hear my words through my teaching, my counseling and my preaching. God has used me in more ways then I could have thought and in more ways then I thought I was capable of doing.
Do I have days where I wish I could be “normal,” whatever that is? You bet, but would I want to trade what God has done in my life through this disease? No way! If I was told that I could be cured, but I would lose my relationship that I have now with God and the gifts that He has given me because of my lack of mobility then I would deal with the pain for the rest of my life.
Let us look at our thorns not as curses, but demonstration of God’s love for us. That He uses them to help us rely on Him even more. Being examples for others with the same conditions and feeling honored that Christ chose you and me to represent Him to people with this condition and those without.
2 Corinthians 12:10, “Therefore I am well content with weaknesses, with insults, with distresses, with persecutions, with difficulties, for Christ’s sake; for when I am weak, then I am strong.”
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Dr. Geisler on The Emergent Church
By Norm Geisler Posted: 09/22/2008
The Emergent Church: Emergence or Emergency?Copyright by Norman L. Geisler 2008www.normgeisler.com
The Background of Emergence Stated
There is one key influence on the Emergent Church movement—postmodernism. While not all Emegents accept all premises of post-modernism, nonetheless, they all breathe the same air. Post modernism embraces the following characteristics: 1) The “Death of God”—Atheism; 2) The death of objective truth—Relativism; 3) The death of exclusive truth—Pluralism; 4) Death of objective meaning—Conventionalism; 5) The death of thinking (logic)—Anti-Foundationalism; 6) The death of objective interpretation—Deconstructionism, and 7) the death of objective values—Subjectivism.
From post-modernism Emergents devise the following key ideas: They consider themselves: 1)Post-Protestant; 2)Post-Orthodox; 3)Post-Denominational; 4)Post-Doctrinal; 5) Post-Individual; 6) Post-Foundational; 7) Post-Creedal; 8)Post-Rational, and 8)Post-Absolute. It is noteworthy that “post” is a euphemism for “anti.” So, in reality they are against all these things and more.
Brian McClaren, one of the leaders of the emergent church stressed the importance of the postmodernism influence upon the movement when he wrote, “But for me…opposing it [Postmodernism] is as futile as opposing the English language. It’s here. It’s reality. It’s the future…. It’s the way my generation processes every other fact on the event horizon” (McLaren, The Church on the Other Side, 70).
“Postmodernism is the intellectual boundary between the old world and the other side. Why is it so important? Because when your view of truth is changed, when your confidence in the human ability to know truth in any objective way is revolutionized, then everything changes. That includes theology…” (McLaren, COS, 69).
Basic Works by Emergents ListedThere is an ever increasing flow of emergent literature. To date, it includes the following:
Brian McLaren, The Church on the Other Side, A Generous Orthodoxy, A New Kind of Christian, Everything Must Change
Stanley Grenz, A Primer on Post-Modernism, Beyond Foundationalism, Revising Evangelical Theology
Rob Bell, Velvet Elvis: Repainting the Christian Faith
Doug Pagitt & Tony Jones, An Emergent Manifesto of Hope Tony Jones, The New Christians: Dispatches from the Emergent Frontier
Donald Miller, Blue Like JazzSteve
Chalke and Allan Mann, The Lost Message of Jesus
Dave Tomlinson, The Post-Evangelical.
Spencer Burke and Barry Taylor, A Heretics Guide to Eternity See also: www.emergentvillage.com
Basic Beliefs of Emergents Examined
Of course, not all Emergents believe all the doctrines listed below, but some do, and most hold to many of them. And since they associate with others in the movement that do, it is proper to list all of them.Anti-Absolutism
McClaren insists that “Arguments that pit absolutism versus relativism, and objectivism versus subjectivism, prove meaningless or absurd to postmodern people” (McClaren, “The Broadened Gospel,” in “Emergent Evangelism,” Christianity Today 48 [Nov., 2004], 43). This is a form of relativism. Lets reduce the premise to its essence and analyze it by showing that it is self-refuting.
Relativism Stated: “We cannot know absolute truth.”
Relativism Refuted: We know that we cannot know absolute truth.
Anti-Exclusivism (Pluralism)
Pluralism is another characteristic of the emergent movement. McClaren claims that “Missional Christian faith asserts that Jesus did not come to make some people saved and others condemned. Jesus did not come to help some people be right while leaving everyone else to be wrong. Jesus did not come to create another exclusive religion” (McLaren, A Generous Orthodoxy, 109). In brief, ---1.
The Claim of Pluralism: “No view is exclusively true.”2.
The Self-Refutation: It claims that its view (that no view is exclusively true) is exclusively true.
Anti-Foundationalism
Foundationalism in the philosophical sense may be defined as the position that here are self-evident principles at the basis of all thought such as:
1. The Law of Identity (A is A).
2. The Law of Non-Contradiction (A is not non-A).
3. The Law of Excluded Middle (Either A or non-A).
4. The Laws of rational inference.
Inferences take several forms:
1. The categorical form includes the following necessary inference: a) All A is included in B; b) All B is included in C. Hence, c) All A is included in C.
2. Hypothetical inferences include the following: a) If all human beings are sinners, then John is a sinner; b) All human beings are sinners. c) Therefore, John is a sinner.
3. Disjunctive inferences are like this: a) Either John is saved or he is lost. b) John is not saved. c) Therefore, John is lost.
One of the fore-fathers of the Emergent movement was Stanley Grenz who wrote a whole book against Foundationalism entitled: Beyond Foundationalism. McClaren contents that: “For modern Western Christians, words like authority, inerrancy, infallibility, revelation, objective, absolute, and literal are crucial…. Hardly anyone knows …Rene Descartes, the Enlightenment, David Hume, and Foundationalism—which provides the context in which these words are so important. Hardly anyone notices the irony of resorting to the authority of extra-biblical words and concepts to justify one’s belief in the Bible’s ultimate authority” (McLaren, GO, 164). So, the claim and refutation of anti-foundationalism can be states like this:
1. The Claim: “Opposites (e.g., A is non-A) can both be true.”
2. The Self-Refutation: They hold that the opposite of this statement (that opposites can both be true) cannot be true.
Anti-Objectivism Another characteristic is the denial that our statements about God are objectively true. Grenz declared: “We ought to commend the postmodern questioning of the Enlightenment assumption that knowledge is objective and hence dispassionate” (Grenz, A Primer on Postmodernism, 166). 1. The Claim of Anti-Objectivism: “There are no objectively true statements.” 2. The Self-Refutation: It is an objectively true statement that there are no objectively true statements.
Anti-Rationalism (Fideism)
Most emergents have a strong doze of fideism. Grenz chided “Twentieth-century evangelicals [who] have devoted much energy to the task of demonstrating the credibility of the Christian faith…” (Grenz, Primer on Post-modernism, 160).
“Following the intellect can sometimes lead us away from the truth” (Grenz, PPM, 166). One might add, that not following basic rational thought will lead you there a lot faster! McClare adds, “Because knowledge is a luxury beyond our means, faith is the best we can hope for. What an opportunity! Faith hasn’t encountered openness like this in several hundred years” (McLaren, The Church on the Other Side, 173).
“Drop any affair you may have with certainty, proof, argument—and replace it with dialogue, conversation, intrigue, and search” (McLaren, Adventures in Missing the Point, 78).Donald Miller confessed that “My belief in Jesus did not seem rational or scientific, and yet there was nothing I could do to separate myself from this belief” (54). He said, “My most recent faith struggle is not one of intellect…. I don’t believe I will ever walk away from God for intellectual reasons. Who knows anything anyway? If I walk away… I will walk away for social reasons, identity reasons, deep emotional reasons…” (103).
“There are many ideas within Christian spirituality that contradict the facts of reality as I understand them. A statement like this offends some Christians because they believe if aspects of their faith do not obey the facts of reality, they are not true” (201).So the basic claim of anti-rationalism goes as follows:
1. The Claim of Fideism: “There are no reasons for what we believe.”
2. The Self-Refutation: There are good reasons for believing there are no good reasons for what we believe.
1. The Claim of Fideism: “Knowledge is a luxury beyond our means.”
2. The Self-Refutation: We have the luxury of knowing that we can’t have the luxury of knowing.
Anti-Objectivism (of Meaning)
Anti-Objectivism deals not only with truth (above) but with meaning (called conventionalism). Emergent embrace both. All meaning is culturally relative. There is no fixed meaning. Meaning is not objective.
1. The Claim of Conventionalism: “There is no objective meaning.”
2. The Self-Refutation: It is objectively meaningful to assert that there is no objective meaning.
Anti-Realism
Strangely, some emergents claim there is no objective world that can be known. Rather, “the only ultimately valid ‘objectivity of the world’ is that of a future, eschatological world, and the ‘actual’ universe is the universe as it one day will be” (Grenz, Renewing the Center, 246).
1. The Claim of Anti-Realism “There is no real world now that can be known.”
2. The Self-Refutation: We know it is really true now (i.e., true in the real world now) that there is no real world now that can be known.
Anti-Infallibilism
Not only can we not know absolute truth, but there is no certain knowledge of what we do claim to know, even of biblical truth. McClaren insists: “Well, I’m wondering, if you have an infallible text, but all your interpretations of it are admittedly fallible, then you at least have to always be open to being corrected about your interpretation, right?... So the authoritative text is never what I say about the text or even what I understand the text to say but rather what God means the text to say, right?” (McLaren, NKC, 50).
1. The Claim of Anti-Infallibilism: “My understanding of the text is never the correct one.”
2. The Self-Refutation: My understanding of the text is correct in saying that my understanding of the text is never correct.
Anti-Propositionalism
Emergents, along with post-modern, opposed propositional truth, that is that true can be stated in propositions (declarative sentences) that are either true or false. Grenz wrote: “Our understanding of the Christian faith must not remain fixated on the propositional approach that views Christian truth as nothing more than correct doctrine or doctrinal truth” (Grenz, PPM, 170).“Transformed in this manner into a book of doctrine, the Bible is easily robbed of its dynamic character” (Grenz, Revisioning Evangelical Theology, 114-115).
1. The Claim of Anti-Propositionalism: “Our view of the Christian faith must not be fixed on propositional truth (doctrine).”
2. The Self-Refutation: We must be fixed on the propositional truth that we should not be fixed on propositional truth.
1. Another Claim of Anti-Propositionalism: “Doctrinal truth is not dynamic.”
2. The Self-Refutation: It is a dynamic doctrinal truth (of the Emergent Church) that doctrinal truth is not dynamic.
They fail to recognize that doctrine is dynamic! Ideas Have Consequences! For example, Einstein’s idea that “energy equals mass times the speed of light squared”had consequences—the atomic bomb! Likewise, Hitler’s idea (Nazism) led to the holocaust and the loss of multimillions of lives.
Anti-Orthodoxy
The emergent movement is post-orthodox. Dwight J. Friesen suggests it should be called “orthoparadoxy.” He claims that “‘A thing is alive only when it contains contradictions in itself ….’ Just as he [Moltmann] highlights the necessity of contradictions for life, so I declare that embracing the complexities of contradictions, antinomies, and paradoxes of the human life is walking the way of Jesus” (in Pagitt ed., An Emergent Manifesto of Hope, 203).
“Jesus did not announce ideas or call people to certain beliefs as much as he invited people to follow him into a way of being in the world…. The theological method of orthoparadoxy surrenders the right to be right for the sake of movement toward being reconciled one with another, while simultaneously seeking to bring the fullness of conviction and belief to the other…. Current theological methods that often stress… orthodoxy/heresy, and the like set people up for constant battles to convince and convert the other to their way of believing and being in the world” (Friesen, in EMH, 205).
To summarize, --1. The Claim of Post-Orthodoxy: “We should not insist on being right about doctrine.”
2. The Self-refutation: We insist on being right in our doctrine that we should not insist on being right in our doctrine.
Anti-Condemnationism (Universalism)
Many emergents are not merely pluralist, but they are universalsts. McClaren affirmed that: “More important to me than the hell question, then, is the mission [in this world] question." (McLaren, Generous Orthodoxy, 114). Bell believes that Jesus reconciled “all things, everywhere” and that “Hell is full of forgiven people.” So, “Our choice is to live in this new reality or cling to a reality of our own making” (Bell, Velvet Elvis, 146). “So it is a giant thing that God is doing here and not just the forgiveness of individuals. It is the reconciliation of all things” (Bell in “Find the Big Jesus: An Interview with Rob Bell” in Beliefnet.com).Let’s analyze the claim of universalism:
1. The claim: “All persons (free agents) will be saved.”
2. The Self-refutation: But this is self-defeating for it is claiming that: All persons (free agents) will be saved, even those who do not freely choose to be saved.
C. S. Lewis pinpointed the problem with universalism when he wrote: “When one says, ‘All will be saved,’ my reason retorts, ‘Without their will, or with it?’ If I say, ‘Without their will,’ I at once perceive a contradiction; how can the supreme voluntary act of self-surrender be involuntary? If I say, ‘With their will,’ my reason replies, ‘How, if they will not give in?’” (The Problem of Pain, 106-107).
Anti-Inerrantism
Most emergent leaders are not inerrantist. They believe that “Incompleteness and error are part of the reality of human beings” (McLaren, COS, 173).“Our listening to God’s voice [in Scripture] does not need to be threatened by scientific research into Holy Scripture” (Grenz, Revisioning Evangelical Theology, 116). “The Bible is revelation because it is the [errant] witness to and the [errant] record of the historical revelation of God” (Grenz, ibid., 133). McClaren rejects the traditional view that: “The Bible is the ultimate authority…. There are no contradictions in it, and it is absolutely true and without errors in all it says. Give up these assertions, and you’re on a slippery slope to losing your whole faith” (McLaren, GO, 133-134). He adds, “Hardly anyone notices the irony of resorting to the authority of extra-biblical words and concepts to justify one’s belief in the Bible’s ultimate authority” (GO, 164). In brief, the problem with the errantists view is this:
1. The Claim of Errantists: “No extra-biblical words or ideas should be used to support the Bible.”
2. The Self-refutation: It is a truth (of Post-Modernism) that no extra-biblical words or ideas (like Post-Modernism) should be used to support the Bible. Yet this is self-defeating for If “No human writing is without error,” then emergent human writing is not without error when it claims that no human writing is without error.
Inerrancy is built on a solid foundation: 1) God cannot err. 2) The Bible is the Word of God. 3) Therefore, the Bible cannot error. To deny this, one must deny either: a) “God cannot error,” or- b) “The Bible is the Word of God,” or-c) both a and b.
However, God cannot err: Jesus declared: "Your Word is truth." (Jn. 17:17)Paul said, “Let God be and every man a liar” (Rom. 3:4). Indeed, “It is impossible for God to lie: (Heb. 6:18). And he Bible is the Word of God "If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken." (Jn.10:34-35) “Laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the traditions of men…, making the word of God of no effect through your traditions.” (Mk. 7:8, 13) "All scripture is given by inspiration of God…."(2 Tim. 3:16) “Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect.” (Rom. 9:6) “’It is written’…by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God.” (Mt. 4:4)St. Augustine's dictum is to the point: “If we are perplexed by any apparent contradiction in Scripture, it is not allowable to say, The author of this book is mistaken; but either [1] the manuscript is faulty, or [2] the translation is wrong, or [3] you have not understood.” (Augustine, Reply to Faustus 11.5)
Emerging Problems with the Emergent Church
Other Errors of the Emergent Movement
In addition to all the above self-defeating claims of emergence, there are some other crucial doctrinal and practical errors.
Here are some of them:
Anti-Substitutionism
Steve Chalke speaks of the Cross as “a form of cosmic child abuse” which contradicts the Bible’s claim that “God is love” and ‘makes a mockery of Jesus’ own teaching to love your enemies” (Steve Chalke, The Lost Message of Jesus, 182-183).
Anti-Trinitarianism
“I asked him if he believed that the Trinity represented three separate persons who are also one” (Donald Miller, Blue Like Jazz202).
Anti-depravity (Pelagianism)
Some (like Chalke and Tomlinson) reject depravity. The former said, “Jesus believed in original goodness.” (The Lost Message of Jesus, 67). The latter said it is “biblically questionable, extreme, and profoundly unhelpful” (The Post-Evangelical, 126).
Anti-Futurism (Amillennialism)
It has an overemphasis on the present spiritual kingdom to the neglect of Jesus’ future literal kingdom—an overrealized eschatology.
Anti-Vapitalism (Socialism)
It has a social Gospel, not a spiritual Gospel with social implications. It adopts the agenda of the political left. Tony Jones said on David Chadwicks show that he and most of the Emergents he knew were voting for Barack Obama (6/22/08).
Ecumenism
The Emergent movement is a broad tent which includes numerous heresies (see above), embracing Catholicism, and even pantheism (by some). Spencer Burke said, “I am not sure I believe in God exclusively as a person anymore either…. I now incorporate a pantheistic view, which basically means that God is ‘in all,’ alongside my creedal view of God as Father, Son, and Spirit.” (A Heretics Guide to Eternity, 195).
Difficulties with the Emergent Movement
There are many difficulties with the Emergent movement. Here are some of the main ones:
1. Its central claims are all self-defeating.
2. It stands on the pinnacle of its own absolute and relativizes everything else.
3. It is an unorthodox creedal attack on orthodox creeds.
4. It attacks modernism in the culture but is an example of postmodernism in the church.
5. In an attempt to reach the culture it capitulates to the culture.
6. In trying to be geared to the times, it is no longer anchored to the Rock.
7. It is not an emerging church; it is really a submerging church.
Answering an Anticipated Objection
Some emergents may wish to claim that: No self-defeating truth claims are being made. These are straw men set up by critics. In response we would reply that: Either they are making such truth claims or they are not. If they are, then they are self-defeating. If they are not, then why are they writing books and attempting to convince people of the truth of these views, if not always by affirmation, at least by implication? While directed to another view, C. S. Lewis made a insightful comment that applies here as well:
You can argue with a man who says, ‘Rice is unwholesome’: but you neither can nor need argue with a man who says, ‘Rice is unwholesome, but I’m not saying this is true.’ I feel that this surrender of the claim to truth has all the air of an expedient adopted at the last moment. If [they]…do not claim to know any truths, ought they not to have warned us rather earlier of the fact? For really from all the books they have written…one would have got the idea that they were claiming to give a true account of things. The fact surely is that they nearly always are claiming to do so. The claim is surrendered only when the question discussed…is pressed; and when the crisis is over the claim is tacitly resumed” (Lewis, Miracles, 24).
To re-cast the Emergent Movement, using titles from its own books, it is not- “The Emergent Church” but “The Submergent Church.” It is not “AManifesto of Hope” but is “A Declaration of Disaster.” It is not “Refocusing the Faith” but “Distorting the Faith.” It is not “Renewing the Center” but “Rejecting the Core.” It is not “Repainting the Faith” but “Repudiating the Faith.” The Emergent movement is not “A Generous Orthodoxy” but “A Dangerous Unorthodoxy.” It is not the “Church on the Other Side,” but it is on the “Other Side of the Church.” It is not “A Primer on Post-Modernism” but “A Primer on the New Modernism.” It is not going to “Produce a New Kind of Christian” but a “New Kind of Non-Christian.”
In short, the Emergent Church is the New Liberalism As Mark Driscol wrote: “The emergent church is the latest version of liberalism. The only difference is that the old liberalism accommodated modernity and the new liberalism accommodates postmodernity” (Mark Driscoll, Confessions of a Reformation REV, 21). To put it to poetry:The Emergent Church is built on sandand will not stand.Christ’s Church is build on Stone,And it can not be overthrown.(Matt. 16:16-18)
Works Evaluating The Emergents MovementSeveral works are emerging on the Emergent Church. The following is a select list containing valuable criticisms of the movment.
Adler, Mortimer. Truth in Religion.Carson,
D. A. Becoming Conversant with the Emerging Church.
Carlson, Jason. “My Journey Into and Out Of the Emergent Church” (www.Christianministriesintl.org)
*DeYoung, Kevin and Ted Kluck. Why We’re Not Emergent.
Driscoll, Mark. Confessions of a Reformation REV.
Howe, Thomas ed., Christian Apologetics Journal of Southern Evangelical Seminary (Spring, 2008, www.ses.edu)
Kimball, Dan. The Emerging Church.
Rofle, Kevin, Here We Stand.Smith, R. Scott Truth and The New Kind of Christian.
Geisler, Norman. “The Emergent Church” DVD(InternationalLegacy.org).MJ@InternationalLegacy.org
ConclusionOf course, not all emergent beliefs are bad. De Young and Kluck summarize the situation well. They “have many good deeds. They want to be relevant. They want to reach out. They want to be authentic. They want to include the marginalized. They want to be kingdom disciples. They want community and life transformation….” However, “Emergent Christians need to catch Jesus’ broader vision for the church—His vision for a church that is intolerant of error, maintains moral boundaries, promotes doctrinal integrity, stands strong in times of trial, remains vibrant in times of prosperity, believes in certain judgment and certain reward, even as it engages the culture, reaches out, loves, and serves. We need a church that reflects the Master’s vision—one that is deeply theological, deeply ethical, deeply compassionate, and deeply doxological” (Why We’re Not Emergent, 247-248).
Distributed by www.ChristianWorldviewNetwork.com
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Friday, September 19, 2008
Friday, September 19, 2008
MEDIA MATTERS
WorldNetDaily ExclusiveUltimate taboo hits big screen: Sex with childrenFamily advocate calls for boycott of promotions for 'pedophilia'
Posted: September 18, 20088:03 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh
WorldNetDaily
The founder of Movieguide, a top film-rating organization in Hollywood, is joining a growing call for a boycott of two new movies that feature pedophilia, warning of the dangers that come with themes involving sex with children.
"These despicable movies promote pedophilia, whether intentionally or unintentionally," said Ted Baehr, who's well-known for his Christian Film & Television Commission work. "There should be a massive public outcry against them. The inclusion of children in sexually explicit films is inappropriate. There also is no excuse for the authorities to allow such material to be shown publicly."
Baehr cited "Hounddog," a movie featuring a scene portraying the rape of actress Dakota Fanning, filmed when she was 12, and "Towelhead," which features 18-year-old actress Summer Bishil playing a 13-year-old Arab-American girl who portrays a "sexual obsession," experiences "grooming" and other scenes.
"We've got to have communities rescue these children. Where's the sense of shame, outrage, the sense of saying, 'We're not going to let this happen," Baehr told WND. "We cannot do this anymore."
"The thing we need to do is avoid it," he said. "These people need to be stopped."
Dakota Fanning in the controversial "Hounddog" film that features a child-rape scene
Baehr is being joined in the boycott call by a pro-family organization in North Carolina, the state where much of the "Hounddog" movie featuring Fanning's "rape" was filmed.
Under the headline "Child Pornography is Going Mainstream," on the website of the Concerned Women for America, Donna Miller, a chapter leader in the Fayetteville, N.C., area and director of the No More Child Porn Campaign, also said those who are concerned by the film's representation by Fanning of "a nine-year-old that is raped by a man in his late teens, after he tricks her into dancing naked," should protest to authorities.
"Our concern is that this film would say to other children that this behavior is acceptable. As taxpayers here in North Carolina, we're not happy about this," Miller said.
She suggested several actions, including contacting U.S. Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey and the Department of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, 20530 or 202-353-1555.
"Tell him that you have grave concerns that this film, with its visual representation of a child engaging in sexually suggestive behaviors and being sexually assaulted, opens the door for child pornography to be mainstreamed into the entertainment industry," she suggested.
She said people also should contact their local theaters and ask them not to show the film, set for release tomorrow.
Miller said her group asked for an investigation into the production of the movie earlier this summer after learning North Carolina taxpayers contributed $387,000 to the film's expenses.
"It's shocking that the state of North Carolina paid almost $400,000 in taxpayer credits for this movie," Baehr told WND. "I can't imagine the people of North Carolina want to pay out of their hard-earned tax dollars during an economic downturn money for a 21-year-old man to rape a 12-year-old girl."
Miller said she just wanted to make the public aware of the "mainstreaming of child pornography that is being achieved through the release of this movie."
Deborah Kampmeier, writer and director, explained in the film's press kit about Fanning, "She is simply and innocently experiencing and relishing the aliveness of her being, the life force pulsing through her body, celebrating the power and creative force of her sexuality that is her birthright."
"This movie is about a nine-year-old girl, not an adult woman. She should be outside skipping rope or riding her bike, not 'celebrating the power and creative force of her sexuality,'" Miller said.
Baehr was more direct. "For this gruesome director who has wallowed in perversion to say this is the child exploring her sexuality is insane. It's worse than insane. A child of that age doesn't understand the consequences," he said.
The movie triggered a furor at the Sundance Festival in 2007 because of the scene depicting a rape of Fanning. Others who have raised objections to the movie have included, according to Miller, radio and TV host Sean Hannity, Judicial Watch founder Larry Klayman and the Catholic League's Bill Donohue.
WND broke the story about the controversial movie when there were objections even while it was being made.
Kampmeier already had a reputation for controversial scenes, depicting a young girl who is raped but doesn't remember the attack and believes she is carrying the Christ child in her earlier work, "Virgin."
Although there was little interest in the distribution of "Hounddog" initially, it eventually was picked up by Empire Film Group. Spokesman Dean Hamilton-Bornstein called it a "coming-of-age drama that deals with serious issues that should resonate with audiences."
After its Sundance screening, Rex Gore, the district attorney in Bolivia, N.C., near where much of the movie was filmed, issued a statement to WND that he found "no violation" of the state's obscenity or sexual exploitation laws.
He said the movie was saved by its "artistic value." "I am aware that there is an outcry from some who find the content of the film disturbing and distasteful. However, public opinion is not the test we must apply as prosecutors; we must apply the law. North Carolina's child exploitation statutes do not apply because none of the acts depicted in the film meet the legal definition of 'sexual activity' under our current law," Gore said at the time.
Baehr didn't hesitate to respond. "For the state attorney to even suggest that this was art is absolutely insane. He should take a course in art," he said.
Dakota Fanning appearing in "Charlotte's Web"
Carla Roberts, who runs the Yahweh Center Children's Village for abused or neglected children in Wilmington, N.C., near where the filming took place, told WND at the time she would have to wonder about the adults responsible for putting a child in such a position.
The "Hounddog" script revealed the Fanning character's clothes dropping to the floor before she sings and an assailant unzipping his jeans.
World Entertainment News Network was one of the first to comment on the scene, calling it a shocker for Fanning's fans. "She has shot child rape scenes and appears semi-naked," the network said.
Fanning's behavior has been described as more explicit than what was required of Jodie Foster, who as a 12-year-old played a prostitute in "Taxi Driver," a 1976 Martin Scorsese production, or Brooke Shields, who was a New Orleans brothel worker in the "Pretty Baby" movie from 1978.
Baehr warned that unless the growing attack on those with faith and values is defeated, America soon will follow the course of other societies that have descended to the point of promoting sexual activity with children.
"We have to say, 'No, we cannot have a society that is destroying children,'" he said.
"There are things that are happening today that are not as egregious as [in the days of] Nero and Caligula, but they are pushing the envelope in some ways even further," he said. "History says that it was before the days of Noah when [society] last saw something on this order."
"Towelhead," directed by Alan Ball, is about "a young Arab-American girl [who] struggles with her sexual obsession." The character "navigates the confusing and frightening path of adolescence and her own sexual awakening," according to a promotional synopsis.
The Los Angeles Times' review said the movie includes a "discomforting anatomical 'grooming' incident between Jasira and the mother's sleazy boyfriend."
Blogger Steven Pill said it appears that the public is making its statement already.
"I received a somewhat rueful message of congratulations from Eric Parkinson, the CEO of distribution for Empire Film Group," he wrote recently. "According to him, more than 200 theaters across the country had cancelled their scheduled screenings of the motion picture 'Hounddog,' citing pressure from 'vocal groups.'"
MEDIA MATTERS
WorldNetDaily ExclusiveUltimate taboo hits big screen: Sex with childrenFamily advocate calls for boycott of promotions for 'pedophilia'
Posted: September 18, 20088:03 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh
WorldNetDaily
The founder of Movieguide, a top film-rating organization in Hollywood, is joining a growing call for a boycott of two new movies that feature pedophilia, warning of the dangers that come with themes involving sex with children.
"These despicable movies promote pedophilia, whether intentionally or unintentionally," said Ted Baehr, who's well-known for his Christian Film & Television Commission work. "There should be a massive public outcry against them. The inclusion of children in sexually explicit films is inappropriate. There also is no excuse for the authorities to allow such material to be shown publicly."
Baehr cited "Hounddog," a movie featuring a scene portraying the rape of actress Dakota Fanning, filmed when she was 12, and "Towelhead," which features 18-year-old actress Summer Bishil playing a 13-year-old Arab-American girl who portrays a "sexual obsession," experiences "grooming" and other scenes.
"We've got to have communities rescue these children. Where's the sense of shame, outrage, the sense of saying, 'We're not going to let this happen," Baehr told WND. "We cannot do this anymore."
"The thing we need to do is avoid it," he said. "These people need to be stopped."
Dakota Fanning in the controversial "Hounddog" film that features a child-rape scene
Baehr is being joined in the boycott call by a pro-family organization in North Carolina, the state where much of the "Hounddog" movie featuring Fanning's "rape" was filmed.
Under the headline "Child Pornography is Going Mainstream," on the website of the Concerned Women for America, Donna Miller, a chapter leader in the Fayetteville, N.C., area and director of the No More Child Porn Campaign, also said those who are concerned by the film's representation by Fanning of "a nine-year-old that is raped by a man in his late teens, after he tricks her into dancing naked," should protest to authorities.
"Our concern is that this film would say to other children that this behavior is acceptable. As taxpayers here in North Carolina, we're not happy about this," Miller said.
She suggested several actions, including contacting U.S. Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey and the Department of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., Washington, 20530 or 202-353-1555.
"Tell him that you have grave concerns that this film, with its visual representation of a child engaging in sexually suggestive behaviors and being sexually assaulted, opens the door for child pornography to be mainstreamed into the entertainment industry," she suggested.
She said people also should contact their local theaters and ask them not to show the film, set for release tomorrow.
Miller said her group asked for an investigation into the production of the movie earlier this summer after learning North Carolina taxpayers contributed $387,000 to the film's expenses.
"It's shocking that the state of North Carolina paid almost $400,000 in taxpayer credits for this movie," Baehr told WND. "I can't imagine the people of North Carolina want to pay out of their hard-earned tax dollars during an economic downturn money for a 21-year-old man to rape a 12-year-old girl."
Miller said she just wanted to make the public aware of the "mainstreaming of child pornography that is being achieved through the release of this movie."
Deborah Kampmeier, writer and director, explained in the film's press kit about Fanning, "She is simply and innocently experiencing and relishing the aliveness of her being, the life force pulsing through her body, celebrating the power and creative force of her sexuality that is her birthright."
"This movie is about a nine-year-old girl, not an adult woman. She should be outside skipping rope or riding her bike, not 'celebrating the power and creative force of her sexuality,'" Miller said.
Baehr was more direct. "For this gruesome director who has wallowed in perversion to say this is the child exploring her sexuality is insane. It's worse than insane. A child of that age doesn't understand the consequences," he said.
The movie triggered a furor at the Sundance Festival in 2007 because of the scene depicting a rape of Fanning. Others who have raised objections to the movie have included, according to Miller, radio and TV host Sean Hannity, Judicial Watch founder Larry Klayman and the Catholic League's Bill Donohue.
WND broke the story about the controversial movie when there were objections even while it was being made.
Kampmeier already had a reputation for controversial scenes, depicting a young girl who is raped but doesn't remember the attack and believes she is carrying the Christ child in her earlier work, "Virgin."
Although there was little interest in the distribution of "Hounddog" initially, it eventually was picked up by Empire Film Group. Spokesman Dean Hamilton-Bornstein called it a "coming-of-age drama that deals with serious issues that should resonate with audiences."
After its Sundance screening, Rex Gore, the district attorney in Bolivia, N.C., near where much of the movie was filmed, issued a statement to WND that he found "no violation" of the state's obscenity or sexual exploitation laws.
He said the movie was saved by its "artistic value." "I am aware that there is an outcry from some who find the content of the film disturbing and distasteful. However, public opinion is not the test we must apply as prosecutors; we must apply the law. North Carolina's child exploitation statutes do not apply because none of the acts depicted in the film meet the legal definition of 'sexual activity' under our current law," Gore said at the time.
Baehr didn't hesitate to respond. "For the state attorney to even suggest that this was art is absolutely insane. He should take a course in art," he said.
Dakota Fanning appearing in "Charlotte's Web"
Carla Roberts, who runs the Yahweh Center Children's Village for abused or neglected children in Wilmington, N.C., near where the filming took place, told WND at the time she would have to wonder about the adults responsible for putting a child in such a position.
The "Hounddog" script revealed the Fanning character's clothes dropping to the floor before she sings and an assailant unzipping his jeans.
World Entertainment News Network was one of the first to comment on the scene, calling it a shocker for Fanning's fans. "She has shot child rape scenes and appears semi-naked," the network said.
Fanning's behavior has been described as more explicit than what was required of Jodie Foster, who as a 12-year-old played a prostitute in "Taxi Driver," a 1976 Martin Scorsese production, or Brooke Shields, who was a New Orleans brothel worker in the "Pretty Baby" movie from 1978.
Baehr warned that unless the growing attack on those with faith and values is defeated, America soon will follow the course of other societies that have descended to the point of promoting sexual activity with children.
"We have to say, 'No, we cannot have a society that is destroying children,'" he said.
"There are things that are happening today that are not as egregious as [in the days of] Nero and Caligula, but they are pushing the envelope in some ways even further," he said. "History says that it was before the days of Noah when [society] last saw something on this order."
"Towelhead," directed by Alan Ball, is about "a young Arab-American girl [who] struggles with her sexual obsession." The character "navigates the confusing and frightening path of adolescence and her own sexual awakening," according to a promotional synopsis.
The Los Angeles Times' review said the movie includes a "discomforting anatomical 'grooming' incident between Jasira and the mother's sleazy boyfriend."
Blogger Steven Pill said it appears that the public is making its statement already.
"I received a somewhat rueful message of congratulations from Eric Parkinson, the CEO of distribution for Empire Film Group," he wrote recently. "According to him, more than 200 theaters across the country had cancelled their scheduled screenings of the motion picture 'Hounddog,' citing pressure from 'vocal groups.'"
Saturday, September 13, 2008
Morality or Money?
Luke 11:23, “He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters.”
Let’s set the record straight. Jesus was political and at times very political, though He never talked against a specific topic. He ran people out of the temple for using it for profit in Matthew 21:12, which would be seen as making a political statement as much as a religious statement. He went directly against rules set up and accepted by the government as it pertains to buying and selling within the walls of the temple. You don’t think the government made money off the taxes? In Matthew 22:19, He tells everyone to pay to Caesar what is his and give to God what is His. This is also political and a directed political statement in regards to paying taxes. These are just two examples of Jesus making political statements and there are many more, all one has to do is dig into the four Gospels and you cannot miss it.
Secondly, separation of church and state is the biggest hoax ever played on America. These five words are found nowhere in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence. It is based on a note Jefferson wrote to Darby and was then taken out of context. Not a law, or a foundational principal, but a letter to a friend. If the founders wanted us to be separate then why did they support Missionaries and start Churches with government funding? Why did they support Christian pastors? Why begin with prayer before meetings? The argument of separating faith from politics fails on all levels, both Biblically and foundationally. It also fails philosophically and logically, because every law is morally based, it is just a question of whose morals will be made to rule.
Interesting though, that the areas that Christ was interested in politically are almost the exact opposite of what some Christians today say as their reasoning for voting for a certain candidate. Read the Ten Commandments from Exodus 20 and you will see all the laws that God was concerned with were moral, and every time Jesus made a commandment it was moral, i.e. “Love your neighbor as yourself; go and make disciples of all the nations.” Neither seem to be concerned with money, economics, or the other. I believe the biggest reason why is if we are doing the others, those things tend to fall into place. If we are loving each other as described in the Bible then we would have a great educational system and health care would not be a worry, as neither would the poor.
Why is it then we worry more about money then morality when we elect someone to the highest office? Please do not tell me that our faith is not to be in politics, because if it isn’t then you are sinning. You are either for God or against Him in every area of your life. No part is hidden from Him and we are accountable to all areas, including politics. God does not hide when we decide a President, though He might if we keep sinning and not correcting our moral standard. Matthew 12:30, “He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters abroad.” This includes how you participate in your political life.
How can we trust a President to run our school systems correctly or help the children struggling if he votes to have them killed before they even have a chance to make it to school? How do we not know that he will then implement euthanasia for the older patients that are not “viable” anymore? That would help the healthcare system costs, right? Maybe he will hire Dr. Peter Singer to help him implement his health care plans, and if you do not know him you should look up what he feels about abortion and euthanasia.
If our next President does not line up Biblically in the realm of morals then there is no reason to trust him with anything else. President Bill Clinton proved this time and again with his immoralities. Has President Bush made mistakes? Absolutely, including not changing his V.P. last election and the next President that is elected will make mistakes, as we are all sinners. The point is that we can rest more assured that if they are following the Biblical standard for morals that when they are making decisions for our Country they will take into consideration what Christ would want done for His children. Whether that means defending us, leading us, or helping through government interventions, he/she will take into account the absolute truth through Scripture. Even more preferably they would be a strong Christian leader as defined in First and Second Timothy.
How in the world can a Christian vote for someone that is not a Christian? Why would you even begin to think that they are going to care about you or anyone else to the fullest, and not their own best intentions? Christianity is the truth and the only faith that is gained by faith and that teaches love in the essence of “loving as Christ loved us.” What other faith has a teaching that is based on faith and love and not works? The answer is none.
Want a great study on voting for money (economics) or education over morality, then study how Hitler came to power. Study how Stalin came to power, and study how Putin is now turning Russia slowly back into a communist state. They promise economic prosperity, education and health care for everyone. None of it happened, but people blindly followed because it sounded “great.” No one listened to the voices telling people not to vote for them, because nothing good would come out of it based on moral implications from Biblical truth. That is why one of the first things they do is try to silence the Church and Pastors from speaking out against such atrocities.
In my previous blogs I have already dealt with the abortion issue, which should be a very large factor for any Christian. I believe anyone that supports abortion should be negated from a Christian vote. It is murder and Christians are not to murder. The baby is a life and just as dependent on outside sources as you are, because you need the atmosphere, food grown by the earth and your brain (mind) while you sleep. The baby’s atmosphere is the amniotic fluid, their food is the umbilical cord, and their brain (mind) while they sleep. The only difference is location and growth.
If you believe we are to love, then what is more loving then to protect children that cannot protect themselves? How can anyone vote for someone that allows the killing of the innocent? They were formed by God and did not come by choice, yet instead of protecting them by our votes, some choose the candidates that vote to kill them for economic reasons. Meaning if you vote for his economic plan, then are you therefore voting for abortion? At least by his standards you are.
Please do not use the soldier theory, as that is a false syllogism, because soldiers choose to join the service and when they join they know there is the prospect of death, just as officers, firemen and even farmers (one of the most dangerous jobs in America) know there is the chance of death in their professions. Babies do not choose, someone is choosing for them. Choosing to kill is not love, it is hate and trying to avoid the topic by saying it is “Above my Pay Grade,” is not an answer we should expect from a potential President.
1 John 3:10, “In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is he who does not love his brother.”
How is killing innocent babies practicing righteousness?
Let’s set the record straight. Jesus was political and at times very political, though He never talked against a specific topic. He ran people out of the temple for using it for profit in Matthew 21:12, which would be seen as making a political statement as much as a religious statement. He went directly against rules set up and accepted by the government as it pertains to buying and selling within the walls of the temple. You don’t think the government made money off the taxes? In Matthew 22:19, He tells everyone to pay to Caesar what is his and give to God what is His. This is also political and a directed political statement in regards to paying taxes. These are just two examples of Jesus making political statements and there are many more, all one has to do is dig into the four Gospels and you cannot miss it.
Secondly, separation of church and state is the biggest hoax ever played on America. These five words are found nowhere in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence. It is based on a note Jefferson wrote to Darby and was then taken out of context. Not a law, or a foundational principal, but a letter to a friend. If the founders wanted us to be separate then why did they support Missionaries and start Churches with government funding? Why did they support Christian pastors? Why begin with prayer before meetings? The argument of separating faith from politics fails on all levels, both Biblically and foundationally. It also fails philosophically and logically, because every law is morally based, it is just a question of whose morals will be made to rule.
Interesting though, that the areas that Christ was interested in politically are almost the exact opposite of what some Christians today say as their reasoning for voting for a certain candidate. Read the Ten Commandments from Exodus 20 and you will see all the laws that God was concerned with were moral, and every time Jesus made a commandment it was moral, i.e. “Love your neighbor as yourself; go and make disciples of all the nations.” Neither seem to be concerned with money, economics, or the other. I believe the biggest reason why is if we are doing the others, those things tend to fall into place. If we are loving each other as described in the Bible then we would have a great educational system and health care would not be a worry, as neither would the poor.
Why is it then we worry more about money then morality when we elect someone to the highest office? Please do not tell me that our faith is not to be in politics, because if it isn’t then you are sinning. You are either for God or against Him in every area of your life. No part is hidden from Him and we are accountable to all areas, including politics. God does not hide when we decide a President, though He might if we keep sinning and not correcting our moral standard. Matthew 12:30, “He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters abroad.” This includes how you participate in your political life.
How can we trust a President to run our school systems correctly or help the children struggling if he votes to have them killed before they even have a chance to make it to school? How do we not know that he will then implement euthanasia for the older patients that are not “viable” anymore? That would help the healthcare system costs, right? Maybe he will hire Dr. Peter Singer to help him implement his health care plans, and if you do not know him you should look up what he feels about abortion and euthanasia.
If our next President does not line up Biblically in the realm of morals then there is no reason to trust him with anything else. President Bill Clinton proved this time and again with his immoralities. Has President Bush made mistakes? Absolutely, including not changing his V.P. last election and the next President that is elected will make mistakes, as we are all sinners. The point is that we can rest more assured that if they are following the Biblical standard for morals that when they are making decisions for our Country they will take into consideration what Christ would want done for His children. Whether that means defending us, leading us, or helping through government interventions, he/she will take into account the absolute truth through Scripture. Even more preferably they would be a strong Christian leader as defined in First and Second Timothy.
How in the world can a Christian vote for someone that is not a Christian? Why would you even begin to think that they are going to care about you or anyone else to the fullest, and not their own best intentions? Christianity is the truth and the only faith that is gained by faith and that teaches love in the essence of “loving as Christ loved us.” What other faith has a teaching that is based on faith and love and not works? The answer is none.
Want a great study on voting for money (economics) or education over morality, then study how Hitler came to power. Study how Stalin came to power, and study how Putin is now turning Russia slowly back into a communist state. They promise economic prosperity, education and health care for everyone. None of it happened, but people blindly followed because it sounded “great.” No one listened to the voices telling people not to vote for them, because nothing good would come out of it based on moral implications from Biblical truth. That is why one of the first things they do is try to silence the Church and Pastors from speaking out against such atrocities.
In my previous blogs I have already dealt with the abortion issue, which should be a very large factor for any Christian. I believe anyone that supports abortion should be negated from a Christian vote. It is murder and Christians are not to murder. The baby is a life and just as dependent on outside sources as you are, because you need the atmosphere, food grown by the earth and your brain (mind) while you sleep. The baby’s atmosphere is the amniotic fluid, their food is the umbilical cord, and their brain (mind) while they sleep. The only difference is location and growth.
If you believe we are to love, then what is more loving then to protect children that cannot protect themselves? How can anyone vote for someone that allows the killing of the innocent? They were formed by God and did not come by choice, yet instead of protecting them by our votes, some choose the candidates that vote to kill them for economic reasons. Meaning if you vote for his economic plan, then are you therefore voting for abortion? At least by his standards you are.
Please do not use the soldier theory, as that is a false syllogism, because soldiers choose to join the service and when they join they know there is the prospect of death, just as officers, firemen and even farmers (one of the most dangerous jobs in America) know there is the chance of death in their professions. Babies do not choose, someone is choosing for them. Choosing to kill is not love, it is hate and trying to avoid the topic by saying it is “Above my Pay Grade,” is not an answer we should expect from a potential President.
1 John 3:10, “In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is he who does not love his brother.”
How is killing innocent babies practicing righteousness?
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
All Babies Go To Heaven!!!!
John 14:6, “Jesus said to him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”
You are on your death bed and you know that in any moment you are going to see God. As a believer this is exciting, frightening and worrisome all at the same time, but we know where we are going.
Upon entering Heaven, you fall down and worship Christ, you are so excited to finally see your Savior face to face. He reaches down and helps you up and you fall into His arms, being enveloped. After what seems like an eternity of being in the arms of Jesus, you finally let go and start to look at your surroundings.
The colors, they are amazing and brilliant. There is every color you can think of, red, orange, maroon, aqua, peach and colors you have not ever seen before. The sounds of music and what seems to be notes that you never heard before in your life. And the smells, what wonderful smells, unbelievable!
Looking around you are just overwhelmed by all that you are taking in through all your senses, it is as if everything you drink in somehow effects all your senses at once. While you are looking, smelling, listening and what seems to be tasting Heaven, you look over to what looks like a grassy field. Are those Angels playing with children?
As you watch and enjoy the beautiful landscape and the amazement of Angels you see a child running toward you. Can it be? Could it be? Is that my child I lost? I never was able to see the child, but there seems to be a deep connection. The closer the child comes into view the deeper the connection seems to be. A joy seems to be overcoming your very being, a joy again that is like a tidal wave hitting your very soul. You almost cannot contain yourself. The child runs into your arms and hugs you and says, “Hello Mommy.” What a joy!! Next to meeting Jesus this is the next best event in your life. Your child is alive and in Heaven and now you get to spend eternity with them.
But wait a minute, back to reality. How do we really know that babies will go to Heaven? That is a nice picture, but babies have not had a chance to accept Christ, so how can we have faith that babies who die are in Heaven? Matthew 18:3 says, “Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.” Or Acts 4:12, “Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”
Can we really believe with certainty that babies are in Heaven? We are all born in sin according to Psalm 51:5, “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.” I deem that we can, established on the Bible and the person of God. Just as there is no direct statement regarding the Trinity, there is no direct statement that babies go to Heaven, but we can imply it through what is said in the Bible and what we know through the attributes of God.
Probably the best passage of babies going to Heaven is 2 Samuel 12:21-23, “Then his servants said to him, “What is this that you have done? You fasted and wept for the child while he was alive, but when the child died, you arose and ate food.’ And he said, “While the child was alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, ‘Who can tell whether the Lord will be gracious to me, that the child may live?’ But now he is dead; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.” David knows he is going to lose his baby, and he repents and fasts until the event occurs, as he was hoping for mercy, but he stops once the baby is confirmed dead. Why?
He knows that there is nothing more that can be done, but he makes a statement in the end that demonstrates that David believes his lost baby is with God when he says, “I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.” Meaning, David believes he will be with his child upon his death, and David is loved by God and we know that he will be with God when he dies, thus if he is with God and believes that he is going to his child, then his baby is in Heaven. God is impartial in His eternal person, meaning salvation is the same for all and not one way for one and one way for another. Thus, if David’s baby is in Heaven, then other babies that die must be in Heaven.
1 John 2:2 tells us, “And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.” Jesus died for the sins of the saved and unsaved, which is the mercy the unsaved acquire, because if we were punished for our sin immediately then none of us would be in Heaven, as the Psalm reminds us that we are in sin upon birth. Meaning, Jesus died for the sins of the babies that died as well, and if they did not have time to accept Christ then their responsibility is not there for accountability and Christ’s death on the cross covers their sins as well. His love covers every sin, but those who can choose and do not find themselves in Hell upon death, where babies do not receive a choice either by natural death, as in Erin’s and my child, or in murder from abortion mills.
Logically we can believe that babies are in Heaven because of what we know about God. 1 John 4:8, “He who does not love does not know God, for God is love.” If God is love then we can believe that a perfectly loving God would do the loving thing when a baby dies, and that is to be with Him. Also, God is the righteous judge, “which the Lord, the righteous Judge,” (2 Timothy 4:8). This means that God’s judgment is virtuous, blameless, and just. Being perfectly just, and blameless and virtuous, we can take comfort in the fact that a righteous God will judge accordingly when it comes to the death of a child. He will demonstrate His perfect love and righteousness.
Where we would have to admit that there is not a direct verse in the Bible that tells us babies go to Heaven, we can certainly build our faith around the many verses that tell us of our loving, perfect, righteous God. Then we can base our faith upon one of the great men of God, David, who believed his baby was in Heaven. Just as we base our faith on the Trinity from implied verses, and as we base substitutionary atonement on verses of the Bible, we can base our faith of babies in Heaven from verses in the Bible.
I relish the fact that God might not have given a straight verse that Tobiah, our lost child, is in Heaven, but that He has given me verses that demonstrate this belief and I can know from evidential support that Tobiah is in Heaven playing with Angels and worshiping God. Those of you who have lost a child and/or aborted a child and wonder can rest assured that our God has called our babies home. Our faith is based on the evidence of things unseen as it says in Hebrews 11:1, “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” One day I will hold and play with my lost child and if you lost a child and know Christ as Savior and Lord you too will be able to see, hold and hug your child. Another reason, though not needed, to long for Heaven!
My belief that babies are in Heaven is based on evidential facts based on Biblical evidence and study of God and His attributes. My faith then based on this evidence can rest assured that I will see Tobiah one day! Again, if you are a Christian you can rest assured as well.
I will end with the words of Paul: Ephesians 3:14-19, “For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with might through His Spirit in the inner man, that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the width and length and depth and height—to know the love of Christ which passes knowledge; that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.”
You are on your death bed and you know that in any moment you are going to see God. As a believer this is exciting, frightening and worrisome all at the same time, but we know where we are going.
Upon entering Heaven, you fall down and worship Christ, you are so excited to finally see your Savior face to face. He reaches down and helps you up and you fall into His arms, being enveloped. After what seems like an eternity of being in the arms of Jesus, you finally let go and start to look at your surroundings.
The colors, they are amazing and brilliant. There is every color you can think of, red, orange, maroon, aqua, peach and colors you have not ever seen before. The sounds of music and what seems to be notes that you never heard before in your life. And the smells, what wonderful smells, unbelievable!
Looking around you are just overwhelmed by all that you are taking in through all your senses, it is as if everything you drink in somehow effects all your senses at once. While you are looking, smelling, listening and what seems to be tasting Heaven, you look over to what looks like a grassy field. Are those Angels playing with children?
As you watch and enjoy the beautiful landscape and the amazement of Angels you see a child running toward you. Can it be? Could it be? Is that my child I lost? I never was able to see the child, but there seems to be a deep connection. The closer the child comes into view the deeper the connection seems to be. A joy seems to be overcoming your very being, a joy again that is like a tidal wave hitting your very soul. You almost cannot contain yourself. The child runs into your arms and hugs you and says, “Hello Mommy.” What a joy!! Next to meeting Jesus this is the next best event in your life. Your child is alive and in Heaven and now you get to spend eternity with them.
But wait a minute, back to reality. How do we really know that babies will go to Heaven? That is a nice picture, but babies have not had a chance to accept Christ, so how can we have faith that babies who die are in Heaven? Matthew 18:3 says, “Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.” Or Acts 4:12, “Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”
Can we really believe with certainty that babies are in Heaven? We are all born in sin according to Psalm 51:5, “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, And in sin my mother conceived me.” I deem that we can, established on the Bible and the person of God. Just as there is no direct statement regarding the Trinity, there is no direct statement that babies go to Heaven, but we can imply it through what is said in the Bible and what we know through the attributes of God.
Probably the best passage of babies going to Heaven is 2 Samuel 12:21-23, “Then his servants said to him, “What is this that you have done? You fasted and wept for the child while he was alive, but when the child died, you arose and ate food.’ And he said, “While the child was alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, ‘Who can tell whether the Lord will be gracious to me, that the child may live?’ But now he is dead; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.” David knows he is going to lose his baby, and he repents and fasts until the event occurs, as he was hoping for mercy, but he stops once the baby is confirmed dead. Why?
He knows that there is nothing more that can be done, but he makes a statement in the end that demonstrates that David believes his lost baby is with God when he says, “I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.” Meaning, David believes he will be with his child upon his death, and David is loved by God and we know that he will be with God when he dies, thus if he is with God and believes that he is going to his child, then his baby is in Heaven. God is impartial in His eternal person, meaning salvation is the same for all and not one way for one and one way for another. Thus, if David’s baby is in Heaven, then other babies that die must be in Heaven.
1 John 2:2 tells us, “And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world.” Jesus died for the sins of the saved and unsaved, which is the mercy the unsaved acquire, because if we were punished for our sin immediately then none of us would be in Heaven, as the Psalm reminds us that we are in sin upon birth. Meaning, Jesus died for the sins of the babies that died as well, and if they did not have time to accept Christ then their responsibility is not there for accountability and Christ’s death on the cross covers their sins as well. His love covers every sin, but those who can choose and do not find themselves in Hell upon death, where babies do not receive a choice either by natural death, as in Erin’s and my child, or in murder from abortion mills.
Logically we can believe that babies are in Heaven because of what we know about God. 1 John 4:8, “He who does not love does not know God, for God is love.” If God is love then we can believe that a perfectly loving God would do the loving thing when a baby dies, and that is to be with Him. Also, God is the righteous judge, “which the Lord, the righteous Judge,” (2 Timothy 4:8). This means that God’s judgment is virtuous, blameless, and just. Being perfectly just, and blameless and virtuous, we can take comfort in the fact that a righteous God will judge accordingly when it comes to the death of a child. He will demonstrate His perfect love and righteousness.
Where we would have to admit that there is not a direct verse in the Bible that tells us babies go to Heaven, we can certainly build our faith around the many verses that tell us of our loving, perfect, righteous God. Then we can base our faith upon one of the great men of God, David, who believed his baby was in Heaven. Just as we base our faith on the Trinity from implied verses, and as we base substitutionary atonement on verses of the Bible, we can base our faith of babies in Heaven from verses in the Bible.
I relish the fact that God might not have given a straight verse that Tobiah, our lost child, is in Heaven, but that He has given me verses that demonstrate this belief and I can know from evidential support that Tobiah is in Heaven playing with Angels and worshiping God. Those of you who have lost a child and/or aborted a child and wonder can rest assured that our God has called our babies home. Our faith is based on the evidence of things unseen as it says in Hebrews 11:1, “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” One day I will hold and play with my lost child and if you lost a child and know Christ as Savior and Lord you too will be able to see, hold and hug your child. Another reason, though not needed, to long for Heaven!
My belief that babies are in Heaven is based on evidential facts based on Biblical evidence and study of God and His attributes. My faith then based on this evidence can rest assured that I will see Tobiah one day! Again, if you are a Christian you can rest assured as well.
I will end with the words of Paul: Ephesians 3:14-19, “For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named, that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with might through His Spirit in the inner man, that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the width and length and depth and height—to know the love of Christ which passes knowledge; that you may be filled with all the fullness of God.”
Sunday, September 07, 2008
Murderous Intentions
Psalm 139:13-16, “For You formed my inward parts; You covered me in my mother’s womb. I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Marvelous are Your works, And that my soul knows very well. My frame was not hidden from You, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed. And in Your book they all were written, The days fashioned for me, When as yet there were none of them.”
Do you feel safe in your home? Most of us do. When we are at home, we feel that no one can hurt us. We have food, shelter and security. At night we lock our doors, curl up in our blankets and sleep soundly because we feel that no one can get to us. We are at home! What if while you are at home, sleeping soundly, or relaxing with a book or watching your favorite show, suddenly your life is completely devastated.
While you are relaxing or sleeping and feeling completely secure, your mom has unlocked your door and another has come up behind you and before you know it they have cut you into pieces and individually thrown each part out the door to their cohort who disposes of your body parts into the dumpster. Better yet, they dump acid all over you and let you die from severe burn, or at least dead enough to drag you out and throw you in the dumpster. You will die eventually from starvation or your injuries, so no worries.
Upon your removal your mom pays the person for having you removed from her house. You were draining her financially and have become a burden, so rather then let someone else carry the burden or deal with you, she felt it better to have you dismembered and thrown into the trash. Probably for the better anyway, as you were most likely unable to live on your own. Seriously, you were eating her food, living in her house and doing nothing of importance, except maybe going to school. Who will miss you?
I bet you know where I am headed. You are sleeping soundly in your mother’s womb, feeling safe and protected. I did not ask to be here, so if I am here, I bet they will take care of me. You have food and you are able to live in the warm fluid that surrounds you. All you need now is time and food and you will be just like everyone else on the outside, but otherwise there is no difference. Those on the outside cannot live on their own. They eat food not grown by them, breathe oxygen not made by them, and live in shelters that most of them did not create themselves. What is safer then your Mommy’s womb?
Wait! What is that suction thing coming at me? Stop!! That hurts! Mommy! What is happening? My limbs are being pulled apart and the pain is unbearable. Make them stop.
Wait! What is this new liquid being injected? It Burns! Stop!! Mommy! What is happening? Is someone hurting you? Now, what is happening, someone is pulling me out. I am not ready, I am only an inch long and I have not developed my lungs. Mommy!
Wait! You had this done, Mommy? Why? What did I do? I am still alive, someone help me. The burning, make it stop, please! Help me.
Why would anyone call the first a murderous intention and not the second? There is no difference except your location. Neither one of you can live on your own, that is just a philosophical fallacy. Both require pre-meditation to be executed and a person that does not care about life, except selfishly theirs. Each person described has the same amount of chromosomes and genetics and so in both cases are equal. One lives dependently on their family outside the womb and the other lives dependently inside the womb, otherwise exactly the same.
The only objections that can be made are by those whose parents have decided their lives were worth living dependently outside the womb. They gave them life so they could hate life inside the womb.
It takes a murderous mindset to kill, no matter where the child is located. You have to plan for it and then you pay for it. The only difference in society today is that the first mother will go to jail and possibly be executed for her crime and the other will go home and, by Obama, be congratulated for murdering their child.
Yes, you have a choice. You have your child murdered in your house, you go to jail when you are caught. It should be the same with an unborn baby. You freely choose to pay to kill your child then you go to jail when you are caught. Not only you, but in both cases the person who performed the murder.
You also have a choice whether to vote for a President that allows for profit murder (Obama), or a President that does not (McCain) and for that matter a V.P. that does not (Palin).
Exodus 21:22-23, “If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life,”
Do you feel safe in your home? Most of us do. When we are at home, we feel that no one can hurt us. We have food, shelter and security. At night we lock our doors, curl up in our blankets and sleep soundly because we feel that no one can get to us. We are at home! What if while you are at home, sleeping soundly, or relaxing with a book or watching your favorite show, suddenly your life is completely devastated.
While you are relaxing or sleeping and feeling completely secure, your mom has unlocked your door and another has come up behind you and before you know it they have cut you into pieces and individually thrown each part out the door to their cohort who disposes of your body parts into the dumpster. Better yet, they dump acid all over you and let you die from severe burn, or at least dead enough to drag you out and throw you in the dumpster. You will die eventually from starvation or your injuries, so no worries.
Upon your removal your mom pays the person for having you removed from her house. You were draining her financially and have become a burden, so rather then let someone else carry the burden or deal with you, she felt it better to have you dismembered and thrown into the trash. Probably for the better anyway, as you were most likely unable to live on your own. Seriously, you were eating her food, living in her house and doing nothing of importance, except maybe going to school. Who will miss you?
I bet you know where I am headed. You are sleeping soundly in your mother’s womb, feeling safe and protected. I did not ask to be here, so if I am here, I bet they will take care of me. You have food and you are able to live in the warm fluid that surrounds you. All you need now is time and food and you will be just like everyone else on the outside, but otherwise there is no difference. Those on the outside cannot live on their own. They eat food not grown by them, breathe oxygen not made by them, and live in shelters that most of them did not create themselves. What is safer then your Mommy’s womb?
Wait! What is that suction thing coming at me? Stop!! That hurts! Mommy! What is happening? My limbs are being pulled apart and the pain is unbearable. Make them stop.
Wait! What is this new liquid being injected? It Burns! Stop!! Mommy! What is happening? Is someone hurting you? Now, what is happening, someone is pulling me out. I am not ready, I am only an inch long and I have not developed my lungs. Mommy!
Wait! You had this done, Mommy? Why? What did I do? I am still alive, someone help me. The burning, make it stop, please! Help me.
Why would anyone call the first a murderous intention and not the second? There is no difference except your location. Neither one of you can live on your own, that is just a philosophical fallacy. Both require pre-meditation to be executed and a person that does not care about life, except selfishly theirs. Each person described has the same amount of chromosomes and genetics and so in both cases are equal. One lives dependently on their family outside the womb and the other lives dependently inside the womb, otherwise exactly the same.
The only objections that can be made are by those whose parents have decided their lives were worth living dependently outside the womb. They gave them life so they could hate life inside the womb.
It takes a murderous mindset to kill, no matter where the child is located. You have to plan for it and then you pay for it. The only difference in society today is that the first mother will go to jail and possibly be executed for her crime and the other will go home and, by Obama, be congratulated for murdering their child.
Yes, you have a choice. You have your child murdered in your house, you go to jail when you are caught. It should be the same with an unborn baby. You freely choose to pay to kill your child then you go to jail when you are caught. Not only you, but in both cases the person who performed the murder.
You also have a choice whether to vote for a President that allows for profit murder (Obama), or a President that does not (McCain) and for that matter a V.P. that does not (Palin).
Exodus 21:22-23, “If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. 23But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life,”
Friday, September 05, 2008
How Do I Fix This?
As many of you know, I am very open in my blogs, in particularly my http://www.aleris.blogspot.com/ blog. This topic is posted on both our India journey blog and my personal blog just mentioned. If you are a continued reader then you know that I write as an open book. I have been loved, hated, and all there is in between for my topics. Again, this will be my life opened up for you to join me in a journey.You’re sleeping next to your pregnant wife and she gets up to go to use the bathroom, which is nothing new for a pregnant woman. The more pregnant they seem to get the smaller their bladders seem to become. You think nothing of it and rollover and try to go back to sleep, but as you are trying to fall back asleep you hear a whimper in the bathroom. Your mind immediately rewinds to the morning when you received a phone call.
Your wife told you there was some spot bleeding, but there was no pain. As you are talking to her you are quickly looking up on medical websites to see what this could be and if it is normal. Everything you read said that if there was no pain then there was nothing to worry about in regards to the baby. You both are satisfied, as there was no pain, and she was scheduled to see the doctor the very next morning for a scan.
Your mind then remembers that getting adjusted to India food has caused some stomach problems for all of us, and being pregnant may enhance this condition, especially with spicy food. All this is rushing through your head a little after midnight, and then the whimper turns into a cry.
Immediately you ask what is wrong and your wife is crying and bent over in pain saying she is bleeding and screaming and crying “My baby, My baby!” What do you do, you think? Rushing to her side you try to calm her any way possible, rubbing her back and head. She is bent over in pain that she describes is like labor. “My babies, My babies” she cries again, now worried that there could also be something wrong with her. What is happening? How do I fix this? You can’t, you are helpless, except for the favor of God, but He seems silent as well. Then you as you are rubbing her back, you look down and see blood. Your wife notices that you have stopped rubbing her back and asks, “What?” You play it down, because you do not want her to worry, but there is a lot of blood. “Nothing, honey, just a little blood.” But you can tell that is not true.
You run to the phone and call a friend, because you do not have a car to use, and would not even be sure if you could get her to the hospital yourself. You are in India, and you have two little girls who you do not want to wake up, as you do not want them to see their mother in so much pain. Your friend rushes over and you are hoping he brings his daughter to stay with the girls. . . . My girls, you think of the baby again and almost lose it, but you have to stay strong for your wife and children. If she sees you panicking then she may panic more, stay calm.
There is nobody with your friend, and you do not want to wake the girls, as you do not wan them to see their mother like this. Your friend promises to take special care and you trust him, so you have no choice but to let them go. As she drives away, it feels like your throat is going to just rip out of your neck. There is no longer any strength left to hold back the tears and you rush upstairs. As anyone knows the person you call first is your mother, as moms seem to be the ones we want when we hurt. Calling her, you cry over the phone forever and she helps you calm down for the children and for your wife.
As you talk you become angry, saddened, and horrified all at once. You want to vent, but who do you vent on? Then your mind fills again with all these events that may have stressed her that would end with the death of your baby. Working through the events of the past few weeks, you start to blame and become irate with situations and think about taking all your anger out in retaliation. The Holy Spirit intervenes and reminds you that you are a child of Christ and that would not be the appropriate response, and of course confirms it through your mother.
No what? Just sit and wait!! This sucks, I want to fix this. God, please take the pain away, give it to me, but be with my wife and baby. Save our baby Lord, but anything that happens, I will never deny or leave You. During this time, you know you will need His grace more then ever. You just taught on faith and tests. How will I respond during this time? There is no doubt, as you know from the bottom of your heart and soul that Christ is Lord and even if He takes our baby home, you know you are His and all we can do is ask.
That is what I can do!! You call family members and ask your mother to call others to request prayer. Jumping on your computer, you start emailing everyone. Please pray for my wife and our baby. In between emails you are receiving updates via your friend and talking to your wife. She is checked in and they are going to help her sleep and nothing can be done till morning. Morning, wake someone up now and fix this. Unfortunately, you are not in control, so there is no choice. It is past 3am and you decide to try to get a couple of hours of sleep so you are able to get the girls up and functioning.
After two hours of sleep, because you spent the first two praying, your eldest daughter comes into your room and wakes you looking for her mother. She walks out and you hear her little footsteps going from room to room and then you realize what she is doing. She is looking for her mother. What am I going to say? As she walks up to you she asks, “Where’s Mommy?” You just hug her, as you almost lose it, but you swallow hard and you tell her mommy had to go to the doctors. She asks if it is for the baby. Again, you swallow hard and take a couple of deep breaths, and then redirect. Thankfully, she dropped it.
Amazingly, both children are great. Your friends agree to watch the children and take you to the hospital to be with your wife. There are no phones in the hospital rooms, so you have not heard anything. Feeling like you are walking in a haze you go through the motions so you can get to the hospital. Just get me there. Asking questions about other subjects and topics to your friend in the van to think about anything else, but it is just vain. All you can think about is your wife and baby.
Finally, you are at the hospital. Rushing to the enquiry desk you find where she is and you race, or speed walk, to the labor unit. As you walk through the first door to the reception area with your friend, you see your wife and she looks at you and you know. “The baby is gone. We lost the baby.” Then . . . . Tears flow!
You cry together and start to process and talk. We talked about how we both prayed and were comforted by the hand of God, and we know that even in this tragedy God will use it, though at this moment we are not sure how.
When we thought the trauma was over, it only was the beginning. Your wife has to go to the bathroom, so you wait, and then you wait, and wait. What is going on? She comes out of the door and almost collapses. She delivers the baby, dead. She goes into basic shock. “I saw his fingers, his head, legs, everything.” This is a baby!! You always knew, then you see and it is just amazing and devastating at the same time. Our baby is gone!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)