QOTD

Some little tidbits for your consideration...

"Not to be confused with a republic, a democracy is a system in which, theoretically, what the majority says goes. The reality, however, is more complex and much uglier. In a democracy, various political elites struggle for control of the state apparatus by appealing to the material interests of large voting blocks with promises of legalized graft." - James Ostrowskie

and...

"The ultimate example of an effective message, is sticking metal tableware into an electrical outlet. The result is instant, jarring, and for all practical purposes, certain. Very, very few people do that twice. For an example at the other end of the spectrum, I guess we have President Obama and Afghanistan. What’ll happen next? Nobody knows. President Sort-Of-God has to go off and think some more. Over the past few days I’ve fantasized repeatedly about a world in which homicide is punished so rapidly, that the embalmer flies out to take care of the bodies of the victim and the murderer on the same trip. The point is — allowing that such a thing was possible, just imagine what would happen to the murder rate if we lived in such a world. By the same token, imagine how safe the country would be, if attacking us was an exercise similar to pissing on an electric fence. This is what is under assault right now: The clarity of the messages. Justice delayed equals justice denied. There has to be more time, more thinking, more complexity, more obfuscation, more apologia, more…whatever. More ingredients in the stew. More of anything but action." -- via Morgan @ House of Eratosthenes

Some Rights are Stronger than Others

I want to begin this evening writing about a subject that has been on my conscience for some time now after an in depth conversation with a close friend. He was of the opinion (or under the effects of reason gone wrong) that the redistribution of wealth is called for as a duty of all Christians. He reasoned that with rights come duties. It all seemed so innocent at first until he remarked that I should have my property taken from me in order to feed the hungry and care for the sick even against my will, or so it seemed from his fiery demeanor. He kept saying that people have a right to food and for care and that because of these rights that others have a duty to fulfill them.

At that time I told him that he was mistaken but I did not know why I thought that he was wrong in this manner. For most liberal leaning people, even some Christians, would most likely agree with him that those people must be helped. Yet, I knew deep down, even if I couldn’t vocalize it that this was wrong. As I lay in my bed preparing for sleep tonight it dawned on me why I thought that his reasoning was off and that he was wrong on this matter.

First, let’s get a few things straight before we go any farther. I do believe that people have a right to the minimal necessities in life (food, water, and shelter.) Yet, I also believe that people are also given free will by their Creator to choose to do the right or the wrong thing in any scenario. The rub is where these two rights meet. In having a right to free will I am given the right to make the choice for myself whether or not to help a starving man by giving him food or to save a man who is drowning that I happen across. The men have the right to life and to have the basic necessities of life – thus meaning that I have a duty to supply those so long as it doesn’t put me in the same predicament. Yet, I have the right to make whatever choice I choose to be appropriate, and the man has a duty to accept that choice. This is what Paul is talking about when he says work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

It is here that these two sets of rights and duties interact and where his mistake was made. You see, we were given free will for the purpose of choosing or not choosing God and His son Jesus Christ. In His infinite wisdom, God chose to give us free will to openly decide for ourselves whom this day we will serve because of His love for us. In giving us this choice – remember we are made for God alone and not for each other – we have been given the ability to also freely choose for ourselves in different matters as a side effect of having free will. C.S. Lewis says this is where evil comes onto the scene, that is, by the introduction of free will. He considered evil as a necessary consequence of free will because we are given the right to choose in others areas other than just saying yes or no to God as a result of having the right to choose or deny God. In any event, God still did not create evil, he just allowed it as a necessary evil so that the failed creation [us] might be ransomed by His love.

Therefore, we are exercising a right that comes directly from God to either help or ignore the starving or drowning men. The right given to us by God supersedes the duties placed on us by the rights of men because no one is higher than God and what comes from Him is above all others. The same right that allows us to choose between accepting God’s grace and forgiveness or denying it allows us to choose for ourselves in other areas of our life in matters that concern men and in those decisions that may affect our status as it relates to the afterlife. I am not rejecting the idea that those two men mentioned do not have a right to our aid but I am saying that we are given the stronger right to accept or ignore their pleas -- and this stronger right comes from God so that we can have the choice to decide how we are going to fare on the test that He has set before us.

These situations in our lives are by their very nature paradoxical and they only become issues because we are given the free will to decide the outcome. To the two men in mortal peril I can only say that without the right to free will, as given from God to all persons, they would have no possibility to go to heaven after their death. Because without free will they are not given the choice to choose or deny God and thus they cannot choose or deny Jesus thus condemning them to damnation as a failed and unworthy creation after the fall. (A failed creation still falls when not given free will because of the very definition of ‘failed’ creation.) The very same right that enables us to accept or deny God also gives us the right to help or not to help the two men mentioned earlier. The two men might not think very much of our right to deny them, but then again they are biased. The value of the right to free will (and to choose to help them or not to help them) has far more value than their lives or all of our lives put together. Without free will we would all be damned. Since we have free will those that choose may still gain entry to Heaven and eternal union with our Creator through His son Jesus who He sent as a ransom for us because of His love for us despite the fact that we are a failed creation. Does not a mother love her child even if it is deformed, dumb, blind, stupid, or lame?

Now I go back to the argument made by my friend. He is of the opinion that Christians should be made to do these good acts because of the duties placed on us. Being the communitarian that he is, he suggests a sort of theo-communism so that after wages are earned they are all deposited into one account and divided evenly to ensure that everyone has the basics. The wages of the doctors, the rocket scientists, the janitors, and those without gainful employment are to be put together and evenly distributed so that all may subsist and these wages are forcefully taken. Other than leaving a very bitter taste in my capitalist mouth I can also see that the doctors and rocket scientists of this community are no longer given incentive to fill those positions because there is less work to do by being a simple janitor. No need for all those differential equations or years of education. It would be far easier on the mind to just do some menial labor and be given the same amount to subsist on. (Also note that people are owed their pay for their labor. To deny them this is a sin.) Other than becoming a failed experiment, because it does not give proper incentives, the people of the community are no longer able to even subsist after a time. This is all about incentives. God gives us plenty of incentive to choose Him. Added to that, the free will of the inhabitants of this community, the same free will given by Almighty God, is denied to them by men. Sure the poor, orphans, widows, infirm, the diseased, the dumb, and others in need are provided for (for a time at least) by the duties imposed on men by mankind at the expense of a right given by God. Since when did men become mightier than God? Since when can we say that their will supersedes the will of God?

You might now be saying to yourself just the same thing that my friend said to me. He said that you can still choose to deny God in this scenario. It is obvious here that you are not being given a choice! If you are forbidden to deny God then how are you to be able to deny God? To make things clearer: the decision to not help all those in need is the choice to deny God. To willingly choose to help those people is to accept God. There is no choice in being forced to help those in need. You cannot choose to lie down if you are not able to stand up Mr. Lewis says, and I fully agree with him. Yet if the State, community, or other such principality of men does not permit you to deny God because of imposed fear, coercion, or force then what has happened to your right? It is simply gone in that situation. Your right to choose God in this scenario is also taken away. You are no longer freely able to choose God but rather your are forced, persuaded, or do these acts out of fear for whatever reason. If you had chosen to help these people from the outset it would not matter because you would have to help them anyway. In not being able to deny aid to those people, choosing to help them freely is not a choice: it is the only action possible. There are not at least two alternatives to choose from. Since God has not allowed Himself by His very nature to force us to love and follow Him we are given free will to make that very choice for ourselves. In the above situation, as proposed by my friend, such a decision to deny or accept God is impossible to make. Therefore forced communitarianism, communism, or socialism are by their very definitions and goals are opposed to Christianity. (Willful communitarianism such as exhibited in the early Church is quite different. Those people made the choice to enter into such a state and are in contrast to those forced against their will into one.) These institutions are not only sacra religious but are also heretical and constitute acts of idolatry because men or the State take the place of God and make the choices for you rather than you making the choices for yourself.

What I simply want to get across here is the fact that you have the right to make your own decisions. You were given this right so that you could choose between God and Satan. The bonus, curse, or necessary evil stemming from this right to choose is that you are also given the right to choose to not murder, cheat, steal, lie, covet, and disobey; or to murder, cheat, steal, lie, covet and disobey. The other little hitch is that you will reap what you sow and that one day justice will come for those who have been denied it.

Healthcare Bill Passes House, Thoughts

Well, now that my internet access has been restored I want to touch on this subject that is very much in the news now. The Health care bill passed the house and still has to go through the Senate. Personally, I think that a bill will be passed for health care unless something really radical happens which most likely won't happen.

I have a set of family friends that are all for the bill now that the abortion junk has been taken out of it. They are all hyped because poor people are going to get access to health care and they see health care as a right of all people. Other than trying to indoctrinate my fiance (which they did attempt subtlety with this rhetoric) I didn't care two flips what they think about the health care bill because they are communitarians and see the Ananias and Saphira thing (Acts Chapter 5) as meaning that Christians should be communitarian. I call bullshit on that as I have said before here and in other posts I'm not going to take the time to search for. Christianity supports personal property and I will leave it at that and if you want to argue in the comments knock yourself out.

And now here is the rub, I would be all for the health care bill (without the abortion support) so long as we (the US citizenry) were able to fund it. At this time that is not a possibility. With the outrageous levels of debt that we have we as a nation have to get down to the nitty gritty and work this debt off first before any more spending like this takes place. I can see what the same friends above would say to what I just said, they would say that we have a duty and yadda yadda to help these people. The thing that they do not understand is that we will hurt far more people than we will help by passing this bill at this time. We have a duty to hurt the fewest people in this situation and far more people will be hurt if their savings are wiped out and their wages become nothing because a small number of people to get health care that they do not have a right to. Already our money is being debased by inflation stemming from massive levels of money printing in our fiat money system. It is a grave injustice to deflate the value of money. We should still be on a gold or silver backed system to preserve the value of our money.

Plus, there is the reality that we need to face that the USA is really two countries. You have the coasts and you have the heartland. If things continue as they have I see no other inevitability than civil war, or in the best case a massive schism between the states. The united will be divided as they always have been. The culture is different and the values are different and thank God for that!

So if the health care bill causes the US to default on its debt or said levels of debt and differences cause a civil war far more people will be hurt than are to be helped in the long run.

I have forgotten to say one other thing and that is that I will reaffirm that people do not have a right to health care. Ever since the fall of Adam the Earth has been cursed. With that curse comes death, disease, laborious toil, and painful childbirth. We were in a world where our status had diminished and death and disease were allowed to touch us. Ever since that time health care and life itself have been luxuries bought by someone. That is the same Earth we live in and on today. Why should we expect to be treated any different by the curse than were Adam and Eve? From the fall health care was a commodity to be traded and sold much like gold. I can give what is mine (my time, my skill, my money to pay for the first two) to anyone I want and that is a good form of alms, but I am not to be compelled by the sword of the State to do such things. I am compelled by God to give to those in need but the State has not that power or privilege. It is near idolatry for the State to attempt to act as savior: and that is just what it is trying to do. It is trying to legislate morality. The downside of legislating morality is who's morality are you to legislate at any given time? Pagan morality? Muslim morality? Atheist morality? Global warming morality?

Christians are in the world but not of it. Therefore, we should not attempt to force our beliefs upon others. We are to woo, not ravish as C.S. Lewis would say. Mr. Lewis also has talked about this topic in the area of marriage. He suggested that Christian marriage be separate and different from secular marriage and there should be very obvious ways to tell which people subscribe to in order that true Christian marriage might be kept holy and true to the Savior's design. So I say the same needs to be instituted not only for marriage but for health care and other areas where Christian morals have a bearing.

But to the communitarians and pacifists out there I can only say that being either or both is a choice to be made by the individual and not by the society because neither position is grounded in the commands of the Bible (... a time for war a time for peace... , While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not at your disposal?) The positions go beyond what the Bible commands and therefore are optional. Just like marriage. Optional (so long as you are not living in sin).

Internet Problems Remain

It seems that I will have to start doing something I don't want to do and that is writing my posts in a word processor before I post here. It seems I will only get internet access one or two times a week until the issues are resolved and I wont have time to write during those instances (but I will have time to post really quickly). So hopefully on Thursday you will get a gem from me. Until then have a good week.

Internet Idiots

I really hate it when network administrators do not listen to sound adive because they are too proud to accept that their course of action is not working and will not work. So I have been unable to get internet access in my office for the past week and as soon as I find out where the router is hidden I will reset that will box myself. I'm sure that that will solve the problem, because as you see now I am using my computer to access the internet over another network. I will have something nice for you once this 'problem' is fixed. Have a good week.

School Has Started Again

As the title implies I am back to work and the higher ups have seen to it that I have a larger class load this semester than in the previous, how nice of them. I will have smaller chunks of time in which to post but I still hope to have some goodies coming your way before too much longer. In the mean time I wish you all the best.

What is a Man to Do?

[Warning: this post is one about my personal experiences of late and about my feelings that make me question the whole system around me.]

What am I to do? I, being a Christian male approaching the age of 25, see little value in the world of today. Everywhere I look I see people who are so deluded that are blindly following lies that are presented to them from all sides. I see people who have sowed but who are not permitted to reap, I see people who play with people's futures like they are nothing but chaff, and I see people who do not love anyone but themselves. I see it everywhere. I see justice being withheld in the name of affirmative action, white guilt, peace, rehabilitation, and happiness. I see women revolting from the authority of men and going into the loving arms of the welfare state. I see the people's idols everywhere, on every billboard and every movie screen, in many churches, and around every street corner. I see people playing with other people's lives and not giving two pence about the outcome.

In this world around me, given the things that I see, I can only say where is the justice? Where is the love? Where is the discipline? What do people see in this broken world where Jesus himself clearly told us that the poor will always be with us but in the humanist spirit people say that they will overcome poverty, AIDS, and even death. What foolishness. In this world the God given gift of reason is used to advocate everything from abortion to atheism. Science has become a mockery of God and now practices magic rather than the art of the discovery of God's design. Rapists and killers are not punished for their crimes but are released back into the public before their appointed time just to commit their crimes anew. People disregard the law as if it were nothing, in practice many Christians seeks to circumvent many just laws in order to help illegal immigrants. Shame on them. Justice used to be about making amends. These amends were designed to replace that which was lost. Victims should not hope in the state because it does not give them justice. It only gives criminals a middle class lifestyle albeit behind hidden steel bars while the victims are left without reimbursement when they have suffered loss of property, loss of liberty, or loss of person. The world has certainly changed, and I daresay not in the least for the better.

How I wish that I was born and lived in an earlier age where reason was reasonable and the faith of Christendom was still strong. Where wives were submissive to their husbands in everything and were soft spoken and gentile. Where children listened earnestly to their parents' teaching and applied it evenly in their life. Where the Church was a bastion of righteousness and a beacon to the masses. Where petty crimes were discouraged by serious penalties and serious crimes were settled by a quick hanging. Where one could have hope in ones savings because it was based on things of real value such as gold or silver. Where families we at the center of everyday life and life lessons could be transmitted from generation to generation. These times have long passed us by and the world is all the worse for the change.

Now I find myself engaged to a woman that has been led astray by the global warming crowd and who knows what else. Despite the proof (and truth) to the contrary everyone is hurrying about trying to stop the fallacy that is global warming by making the poor even poorer and the hungry even more hungry in an effort to stop the unstoppable. What other things will arise after we are married about more serious issues? We presently have a hard time talking to each other because whenever things turn serious she is unable to talk with me for some reason. She has told me that she gets the feeling that I am lecturing her, and I am, with good reason; and I am well within in my rights and responsibilities in that regard. She has only been exposed to Baptist teachings in her Christian life and I fear that there are many things wrong with that denomination. I came from those roots myself but I have grown and learned that things are not always as they seem and that once saved always saved was authored by Satan among other things. There are other problems with protestantism in general and I am by no means a Catholic - I have just as many quarrels with them as I do those on the other side of the schism, but how do I relate all of this to the woman who is about to become by wife? Will she follow the divine command given to her that she should be subject to me? Will I find myself able to love her like Christ loves the Church in light of these defects?

In short - these are the questions that I struggle with at this time, most of them at least for there are others; and they give me great pause.

Where Muslims Get Things Right

I know that I have been rather harsh on muslims in the past and to tell you the truth I am still harsh with them because of their actions in the aggregate. This harshness is similar to the harshness that I have for the black community but for different reasons, yet both groups are the way they are by an act of will, not by inevitability. Yet, muslims are not wrong on all fronts. In reality they get many things right and if there was not that whole Jesus problem we would most likely get along just fine just so long as they reformed their actions. The main areas where they get it right would be in the area of family, devotion, and prayer.

By family I do not mean the permitted wife beatings, but I can see where discipline is needed for an errant wife who should be subject to her husband in all things such as the Lord has commanded. The women show signs that they are not their own masters, this most commonly is observed in the head coverings. While I object to the covering of the entire face as to be unable to see only the eyes I do think that a very conservative dress is appropriate both women and men. Such actions used to be part of Church practice but they have fallen away with the westernization of the Church. See 1 Corinthians 11:3-10. Yet, we need to see the real purposes of these practices. They are intended to keep families together and to prevent what we see in the west that is commonly referred to as feminism which I call disobedience to proper authority. These efforts also reduce envy in society and make it more stable. Oddly enough it also serves to protect the women because authority is set up by God to provide protection. For example, look at government (most of them anyway, what they are supposed to do), the clergy, and the women.

By devotion I do mean the zeal with which they praise their god and how they eagerly seek to spread their faith. I do not approve of many of their tactics but if used in other ways they could be very effective in spreading and converting people. The one condemnation here is in their use of martyrs that initiate their martyrdom. It is one thing to be put to death at the whim of another and something totally different to be put to death by your own will to attack another.

The last point that I have time for is the purpose of prayer in the muslim life. These people pray unceasingly that is for sure. Some of us might look down on these prayers because they are pre-rehearsed and memorized but does this take away from their validity? Certainly not. Christians should strive to pray more often and more solemnly and respectfully.

Christians could stand to learn a few things from muslims so long as we learn the right things from them.

Quote of the Day

This quote brought to you by Maggie's Farm.

"Do not blame Caesar, blame the people of Rome who have so enthusiastically acclaimed and adored him and rejoiced in their loss of freedom and danced in his path and gave him triumphal processions. … Blame the people who hail him when he speaks in the Forum of the "new, wonderful good society" which shall now be Rome’s, interpreted to mean "more money, more ease, more security, more living fatly at the expense of the industrious.”

Marcus Tullius Cicero (106-43 B.C.)

Obama and the American people could stand to learn a real lesson from this one...

What a Revelation!

I stumbled upon something that I have searched for for some time while I was reading up on Christian movements on Wikipedia. The movement is called the New Perspective on Paul and without knowing it I find myself a member of the first class. Now I will let Wikipedia's babble inform you or you can read it for yourself here.

What is held in common is the belief that the "old perspective" (the Lutheran and Reformed interpretations of Paul and Judaism) is fundamentally incorrect. New perspective interpretations of Paul tend to result in Paul having nothing negative to say about the idea of human effort or good works, and saying many positive things about both. New perspective scholars point to the many statements in Paul's writings that specify the criteria of final judgment as being the works of the individual. New perspective scholars tend to place a higher value on the importance of good works than the old perspective does, taking the view that they causally contribute to the salvation of the individual. For in the old perspective, God graciously empowers the individual to the faith which leads to salvation and also to good works. While in the new perspective, God graciously empowers individuals to the faith and good works which lead to salvation. It is argued that because the idea of God's gracious initiative and empowerment is retained, the subsequent change in the relationship of faith and works in salvation is not so important. Many recent studies of the Greek word pistis have concluded that its primary and most common meaning was faithfulness, meaning firm commitment in an interpersonal relationship.^{[11][12][13][14]} As such, the word could be almost synonymous with "obedience" when the people in the relationship held different status levels (e.g. a slave being faithful to his master). Far from being equivalent to 'lack of human effort', the word seems to imply and require human effort. The interpretation of Paul's writings that we need to "faithfully" obey God's commands is quite different to one which sees him saying that we need to have "faith" that he will do everything for us. Old perspective writers have generally translated the Greek word charis as "grace" and understood it to refer to the idea that there is a lack of human effort in salvation because God is the controlling factor. However those who study ancient Greek culture have pointed out that "favor" is a better translation, as the word refers normally to 'doing a favor'. In ancient societies there was the expectation that such favors be repaid, and this semi-formal system of favors acted like loans.^[16] Therefore, it is argued that when Paul speaks of how God did us a 'favor' by sending Jesus, he is saying that God took the initiative, but is not implying a lack of human effort in salvation, and is in fact implying that Christians have an obligation to repay the favor God has done for them. However, this view then undermines the initial 'favor' - of sending Jesus - by saying that, despite his incarnation, life and death, Christians still have, as before, to earn their way to heaven.

The last reference there will give many people great pause and will generally push them towards the "old perspective." But think of this, even in the "old perspective" Christians have to earn their way into heaven by saying yes to Jesus and letting them into their hearts and lives. Jesus then gets to work on the works -- if you let Him. The "new perspective" is more realistic in the fact that we are not saved by faith alone, indeed God says that He will say that He did not know us if when we meet Him in the heavens at the end if we have not labored for Christ. Works are the fruit of the spirit and when Christians say that they have faith but they do not have any works to show for it then they do not have faith. Faith and works are needed to enter into the Kingdom of God. Those who tell or preach to you the lie that you need only acknowledge Jesus as your savior and then may carry on as you had before are not telling you the whole truth. You need the whole Truth to get into heaven. We try to make for ourselves an easier road if we follow the lies of faith without works. We only lie to ourselves and deprive ourselves of the real Christ and His power. Just as the tattoo on my arm says "slave of the God" (in Greek!) so too must we be slaves of God not only acknowledging that Christ is King but by following His commands. For even the demons believe that Christ is King, and shudder.

Finally, to sum up my thoughts on this and to further understand why I want to convert to Eastern Orthodoxy here is the Wikipedia author again:

The new perspective has, by and large, been an internal debate among Protestant scholars. Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox writers have generally responded favorably to new perspective ideas, seeing both a greater commonality with their own beliefs and seeing strong similarities with the views of many of the early Church Fathers. Passages in the works of many early Church Fathers show that new perspective interpretations were widely held among them. One of the many exceptions is the great and influential Augustine of Hippo. While most in the Catholic and Orthodox camp would see him as espousing a view of grace and justification in keeping with this new perspective, Augustine is often blamed by many new perspective writers for introducing incorrect ideas and assumptions into Christianity that led to the "old" perspective of Luther and Calvin.

The increased importance new perspective writers have given to good works in salvation has created strong common ground with the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches. Historic Protestantism has never denied the place of good and faithful works, but has always excluded them from justification, which Protestants argue is through faith alone, and in which good deeds are of no account, either within or without God's grace. This has, since the Reformation, been a line of distinction between Protestantism (both Reformed and Lutheran) and other Christian communions.

EDIT: I just stumbled upon Paleo-orthodoxy on Wikipedia and well it has what is above and more. I suggest you read up on it here. I am certainly a member of this group as well. Who would have ever thought that flipping the pages in an encyclopedia (even an online one) would ever be so fulfilling?

Thank you for reading and I hope this helps someone find their way home. Have a good day. [Text in bold is accented for effect by me and text in italics are direct, verbatim cut and paste from Wikipedia.]