A quote extracted from Jon Stewart's hosting of the latest Oscars:
"I have to say it is a little shocking to see all these big names here, these huge stars. The Oscars is really, I guess, the one night of the year where you can see all your favorite stars without having to donate any money to the Democratic Party."
A little black comedy from the Associated Press to start your day off right, Lords and Ladies:
CHICAGO "” Nation of Islam officials on Tuesday said Jewish leaders who resigned from a state hate crimes commission rather than serve with one of their members should rejoin the panel or quit criticizing it.
Two former commission members said they had no intention of returning to the Governor's Commission on Discrimination and Hate Crimes because Sister Claudette Marie Muhammad refused to repudiate the religious movement's leader, Minister Louis Farrakhan.
In her first comments since four commissioners resigned last week, Muhammad said it was ridiculous that she has been condemned for Farrakhan's remarks.
Gov. Rod Blagojevich's appointment of Muhammad to the commission in August drew no public attention until she invited commissioners to attend a speech given by Farrakhan, who is known for his disparaging remarks about Jews, whites and gays.
Some commissioners began criticizing her presence on the panel after Farrakhan's speech Feb. 26 in Chicago that included references to "Hollywood Jews" promoting homosexuality and "other filth."
On Tuesday, Farrakhan's chief of staff, Brother Leonard Muhammad, said the Nation of Islam forgave the former commissioners because they "left out of confusion."
"You misunderstand what the commission is all about," Leonard Muhammad said on WVON-AM. "Come back to the commission and debate your point."
He later issued a stronger challenge for them to return.
"They need to come back or shut up," Leonard Muhammad said.
Claudette Muhammad urged her critics to leave her alone.
"For those who try to condemn me because of the honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan's remarks," she said, "it's ridiculous, absolutely ridiculous."
Claudette Muhammad said she and her family have been victims of hate crimes and discrimination, and that she has Jewish family members, has traveled to Israel and has worshipped in synagogues.
"Please know I am not the victimizer here, OK, but instead I am the victim," she said. She refused to repudiate Farrakhan and recommended that people who disagree with him, speak with him.
"I have no intention of returning to the commission until it is cleansed of the stain and stench of bigotry caused by Sister Claudette's continued presence," said Hirschhaut, executive director of the Illinois Holocaust Museum and Education Center.
As a cherry on this little sunday, the governor has stated that he didn't actually have any idea that he hired a Nation of Islam follower for his commission, apparently thinking that this would make everyone feel better.
This entry was tagged. Ethics Government Morality Philosophy
Some sad news came down the pipeline today, at least for those of us who count ourselves closest in agreement, of all the United States' political parties, to the Libertarian Party. That is to say, the LP's presidential candidate in 1996 and 2000, Mr. Harry Browne, has died. According to an AP article:
[Harry] Browne, an author and investment adviser, died at his home Wednesday night, family friend Jim Babka said. He died of Lou Gehrig's disease.
Browne received 485,134 votes, or 0.5 percent, for president in 1996 and 384,431, or 0.367 percent, in 2000.
A few of you out there may remember (yeah, sure you do) that Mr. Browne wrote How You Can Profit From The Coming Devaluation, in which he predicted powerful inflation and the dollar's losing its power. It's a good book.
While I'm mentioning Libertarian candidates, however, I have to ask: is the Libertarian Party's battle to wrestle one-half of one percent of the vote away from the dominant political parties here in America worth its trouble? Might the resources (and I really am just pontificating here, I don't know) not be better used in securing more and higher municipal offices than in playing the national gadfly?
Consider New York City or Chicago. A large percentage of the population know the names of these cities' mayors; more than know the names of their senators or governors, I'd be willing to bet. What if the Libertarian Party just threw its back one year into getting one of its people in such an office? I know the Libertarian Party's pollsters consistently find that more people would vote for them if they thought the Libertarian Party had a chance of winning. Seeing a viable Libertarian Party candidate-who does not owe his name recognition to celebrity status, like Clint Eastwood-in a serious office would go a long, long way to meeting that goal.
So I suppose what I'm saying here is, maybe an extremely impressive man like Mr. Harry Browne was wasted on a national platform.
This entry was tagged. Libertarian
A quote I think could very well summarize what the methodology of any follower of the LORD should be:
"In discussing questions of this kind two rules are to be observed, as Augustine teaches. The first is, to hold to the truth of Scripture without wavering. The second is that since Holy Scripture can be explained in a multiplicity of senses, one should adhere to a particular explanation only in such measure as to be ready to abandon it if it be proved with certainty to be false, lest Holy Scripture be exposed to the ridicule of unbelievers, and obstacles be placed to their believing." - Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica
Read the first two chapters of Pastor Bob Roberts, Jr.'s new book Transformation: How Glocal Churches Transform Lives and the World today. I received an advance copy of it free of charge at the Glocal Conference in Rome back in January, due to my being so blessed as to be a pastoral intern who gets free goodies like this, but it didn't come off my shelf 'til now (which I grant you kinda defeats the purpose of having an advance copy).
Anyway, it's out now and it's very good, so I thought I'd share a few quotes from the first chapters with you here. Away we go:
"When people say the name of your church and the church you attend or in which you serve, what do they think?" (p.24)
"Being centered on Christ isn't just part of our statement of faith, but a recognized practice of that fact to which the world and community of nonbelievers can attest." (p.25)
"Someone is 'called of God' not because of the way the person lives but because of the way the person speaks!... In the Western church, few are remarking about our current leadership style, 'If only I could know Jesus as he or she does.' Neither have I heard... the performers say like Paul, 'Imitate me.' We talk about the qualifications for ministry in terms of education, ordination, rules and regulations. However, isn't the main qualification for ministry the ability for a person to say, 'Imitate me'?" (p.26-27)
Do you realize Gandhi spent an average of two hours per day meditating on the Gospels? By his own admission, Jesus's teachings in the Sermon on the Mount became the basis for a large portion of everything he did... Something is tragically amiss when a man without Christ can change a nation and Christians who possess the Holy Spirit can't." (p.33)
If the church in a local community were gone, who besides its adherents would miss it?" (p. 36)
"The kingdom means that we are committed to being salt and light whether the people we serve all become Christians or not. Today's notion of 'us against them' Christianity would be foreign to the early church." (p.36)
"During my seminary days, planting a church actually meant you couldn't land a position with a 'real' church, so you had to go start one." (p.39)
If you are sufficiently enticed, go thumb through a copy at your local bookstore and maybe plop it down on the checkout counter.
The following's an excerpt from Mark Joseph's most recent column, entitled 'A&E;'s faith problem':
My wife and I sat riveted the other night, watching Larry King Live as he showed clips from A&E;'s made-for-TV version of the events of September 11th on board Flight #93. Among King's guests was Lisa Jefferson, the Verizon operator who stayed on the phone with one of the flight's heroes, Todd Beamer. It was Jefferson who documented Beamer's last words, which, depending on the account, went either "Help me God, help me Jesus," or "Help me Jesus."
The actors on the show made a point of telling King how accurate and true to the transcripts this movie was, so I was curious to hear how they handled Beamer's last moments. As I suspected would happen, Beamer's final prayer to his God was excised. Although A&E; did allow the two to repeat the Lord's Prayer together, when it came time for Beamer's final, fateful appeal to God, it dropped Beamer's sectarian prayer...
"Jesus, help me," Beamer said. He recited the 23rd Psalm. Then Jefferson heard him say: "Are you guys ready? Let's roll."
The main thrust of the article is, of course, why A&E; chose to delete Beamer's prayers, but to be honest this subject of why the establishment is resistant to broadcasting Beamer's Christianity doesn't really interest me (and neither do these other stories: "Sun still shining", "Scientists say we breathe oxygen"). Today's Christians are way too shocked about things they were warned about by our Christ Himself, in the Gospels.
This may surprise, but despite being a church-attending son of God, this is the first I've heard of Beamer calling on the Messiah prior to his attacking the hijackers, and I'm thrilled.
I'm always the last to know these things.
Fun fact: For about a year now, I've heavily suspected Goliath never had a chance against David, even from an atheistic perspective.
S'like this: Back in the Olden Days, killing people with a sling was actually a highly-refined art. I admittedly got this second-hand from historical novelist Michael Curtis Ford (good writer), but I'm told that we know from the Spartan mercenary Xenophon's autobiography _The Anabasis _ that a slinger could kill a sheep at 200 yards with just a rock he found lying about on the ground, 300 yards if he had one of his specially-made lead bullets handy.
Christian apologists have often spoken excitedly of the fact that modern giants' foreheads have soft spots. Personally, I don't see the reason; if David had-as he quite obviously did-skill with the slingshot, then he might as well have pulled out a .22 Magnum and capped his giant adversary. The fight wouldn't have been much more lop-sided.
So, this begs the question, of course: What's the point of the story if David just ran out onto the field and smote a hapless foe?
A few thoughts on the subject:
(1) Tactics aside, no member of the army of Israel nor the army's king challenged the blaspheming Philistine, and David did. That David then proceeded to shoot Goliath doesn't take away from the fact that he was the only person with enough conviction to do something about the problem.
(2) The one-on-one duel for the fate of Israel was the Philistines' idea, not the LORD's; indeed, the LORD never suggests such a method of solving Israel's war problems in the Old Testament, and no attempt to do so ever works out. God is not interested in having terms dictated to Him. Why should He respect the honor code devised by a bunch of pagans? From this perspective, David's response was absolutely perfect: come out onto the field for the "honor duel" and then gun down their prize fighter, sending a loud and clear message that he wasn't interested in playing the game.
(3) One of the reasons I think the Jews have throughout history held a reputation among Western peoples as "dishonest" is because Westerners had (and have) a different sense of honesty than the Bible seems to. From what I'm reading in 1st Samuel, no rule save that one warrior should face another was instituted for the battle; David simply worked creatively within that framework. To the outwitted, of course, this is always "cheating"; to those of us who prize wit and do not hold others accountable for rules that never existed, it is clever and perfectly fair. David's smarts may thus be on display here.
Something to consider. Lata.
Thank goodness for modern news media or we followers of the Christ would not be aware of this sort of thing: it's Sex Week, everybody!
At least, it is at Yale University, where students have coordinated one heck of an "educational event": a sex-themed week including stripping classes and a lingerie show in order to-and I quote Dain Lewis, its director here-"reconcile these issues in their own lives".
"I can justify to my mom every decision that's been made [about Sex Week]," Lewis says in his defense (Justify it to mine, Dain...).
Believe it or not, the FOXNews.com's Fox & Friends video clip on this story is absolutely worth watching. Even the panel of reporters assigned to interview Mr. Lewis can't take this guy seriously and start breaking out laughing about halfway through Lewis's speech. It's a wonderfully refreshing reaction to this kind of "Ivy League" (heh) caca, sure to put a smile on your face.
OK; I'm going back to studying now.
UPDATE (from Joe): I dug up a direct link to the video itself.
Recently I've been looking over my notes from an assisted study on the Biblical book of Galatians (The Glory of the Gospel: Studies in Paul's Letter to the Galatians is the name of this thing; I don't have the name of the author). I don't usually enjoy assisted Bible studies; the study guides almost always strike me as insipid and condescendingly vapid. I wouldn't have read The Glory but a good friend recommended it.
And thanks be t'God for him doing so, because The Glory of the Gospel doesn't mess about with peripheral nonsense; the sole subject broached is the central tenet to The Way of the Christ, and it is discussed directly and with intelligence. Which is its stated purpose: the writers of The Glory kick off their whole book with an introduction excerpted from A Passion for God, by Raymond C. Ortlund Jr., who writes,
"Imagine the evangelical church without the gospel... What might our evangelism, without the evangel, look like? We would have to replace the centrality of the gospel with something else, naturally. A number of things, conceivably. An introspective absorption with recovery from past emotional traumas, for example. Or a passionate devotion to the pro-life cause. Or a confident manipulation of modern managerial techniques. Or a drive toward church growth and success. Or a deep concern for the institution of the family. Or a fascination with the more unusual gifts of the Spirit... Or a determination to take America back to its Christian roots through political power... But not only is this conceivable, it is actually happening among us right now...
"Rather than carelessly assume the Gospel, we must aggressively, deliberately, fully and passionately teach and preach the gospel. All the treasures of wisdom and knowledge are hidden in Christ. If we do not intentionally search them out, we will miss them."
I'd like to share some notes and transcriptions from the first chapter of the study (concerning Gal. 1-2:10) with you here.
The Glory of the Gospel supplies as commentary on the first passage Martin Luther's own words, naturally paraphrased and abridged. The Reformer writes as follows (and I'm editing for space):
"Now it is right to be a good citizen, to be loved and respected by your social group, and to be a morally upright person. So all these may be received without danger, if we attribute to them no power to satisfy for sin, to please God, or to deserve grace... These kinds of righteousness are gifts of God, like all good things we enjoy...
"Yet there is another, far above the others, which Paul calls 'the righteousness of faith!'--Christian righteousness... God imputs it to us apart from our works--in other words, it is passive righteousness, as the others are active. For we do nothing for it, and we give nothing for it--we only receive and allow another to work--that is God...
"This 'passive' righteousness is a mystery that the world cannot understand. Indeed, Christians never completely understand it themselves, and thus do not take advantage of it when they are troubled and tempted. So we have to constantly teach it, repeat it, and work it out in practice. For anyone who does not understand this righteousness or cherish it in the heart and conscience, will continually be buffeted by fears and depression.
"Nothing gives peace like this passive righteousness... For human beings by nature, when they get near either danger or death itself, will of necesity view their own worthiness. We defend ourselves before all threats by recounting our good deeds and moral efforts. But then the remembrance of sins and flaws inevitably comes to mind, and this tears us apart, and we think: 'How many errors and sins and wrongs I have done! Please God, let me live so I can fix and amend things.'
"We become obsessed with our active righteousness and are terrified by its imperfections. But the real evil is that we trust our own power to be righteous and will not lift up our eyes to see that Christ has done it for us... So the troubled conscience has no cure for its desperation and feeling of unworthiness unless it takes hold of the forgiveness of sins by grace, offered free of charge in Jesus Christ, which is this passive or Christian righteousness...
"If I tried to fulfill the law myself, I could not trust in what I had accomplished, neither could it stand up to the judgment of God. So... I rest only upon the righteousness of Christ... which I do not produce but receive; God the Father freely giving it to us through Jesus Christ...
"It is an absolute and unique teaching in all the world to teach people, through Christ, to live as if there were no Law or Wrath or Punishment. In a sense, they do not exist anymore for the Christian, but only total grace and mercy for Christ's sake... There is no other alternative to Christian righteousness but works-righteousness; if you do not build your confidence on the work of Christ you must build your confidence on your own work... So you who would be teachers and counselors of others, I admonish to exercise yourselves continually in these matters through study, reading, meditation on the Word and prayer--that in the time of trial you will be able to both inform and comfort both your consciences and others, to bring them from law to grace, from active/works-righteousness to passive/Christ-righteousness.
"For in times of struggle, the devil will seek to terrify us by using against us our past record, the wrath, and law of God... So learn to speak to one's heart and to the Law. When the law creeps into your conscience, learn to be a cunning logician-learn to use the arguments of the gospel against it. Say: 'O law! You would climb up into the kingdom of my conscience, and there reign and condemn me for sin, and would take from me the joy of my heart which I have by faith in Christ, and drive me to desperation, that I might be without hope. You have over-stepped your bounds... You are a guide for my behavior, but you are not Savior and Lord of my heart... So trouble me not!'"
"This then is the argument of this Epistle, which Paul expounds against the false teachers who had darkened the Galatians' understanding of this righteousness by faith."
P. 78 of The Glory of the Gospel adds that "If I am saved by my works, then I can either be confident but not humble... or humble but not confidence... In other words, apart from the gospel, I will be forced to be superior or inferior or to swing back and forth between the two... So I am continually caught between these two attitudes because of the nature of my self-image. But the gospel creates a new self-image. It humbles me before everyone, telling me I am a sinner saved only be grace. But it emboldens me before anyone, telling me I am loved and honored by the only eyes in the universe that really count.
I'm not sure there's a lesson out there which we're more likely to forget or that's more important for us all to remember.
This entry was tagged. Christianity