BibleGateway Verse of the Day (KJV)

Thursday, August 12, 2010

With a Smile and a Song

My favorite Disney movie, which I view as a Christian allegory (despite the fact that Walt Disney was not a Christian and did not make "Christian movies"), is Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. These are the lyrics from my favorite song from that movie:

With a smile and a song
Life is just a bright sunny day
Your cares fade away
And your heart is young

With a smile and a song
All the world seems to waken anew
Rejoicing with you
As the song is sung

There's no use in grumbling
When the raindrops come tumbling
Remember, you're the one
Who can fill the world with sunshine

When you smile and you sing
Everything is in tune and it's spring

And life flows along
With a smile and a song


Tuesday, August 10, 2010

Why Christians Have Not Been Successful in the Debate against "Same-Sex Marriage"

An excerpt from Mr. William O. Einwechter's 2006 article found here:


"Evangelical Christians are not doing very well in the debate over “same-sex marriage” and other issues in regard to “gay rights.” Why is this? Let us consider two factors.

First, Evangelicals do not appeal to Scripture in the public debate, but base their arguments on reason and “natural law.” By so doing they surrender the only real authority and power they have (Isa. 8:10; Eph. 6:17; Heb. 4:12) and are forced to stand on the same ground as their opponents. Not only does this method disarm the Christian, it is also disingenuous. The leading reason why Christians reject homosexual behavior is because the Bible teaches them to do so. In refusing to stand up and say this, especially since their opponents know that their chief objection is based on the Bible, they appear to be dishonest and ashamed of their faith. It is much better to be bold and forthright in defending biblical morality by using the Bible! Even if their enemies reject their arguments, Christians cannot help but gain a measure of respect for their honesty and courage.

Second, Christians seem blind to the hypocrisy of treating homosexual conduct so seriously and adultery and divorce so lightly. Evangelicals cry out that they must defend “traditional marriage” against the danger of “gay marriage.” But the greatest threat to traditional marriage is not from without but from within; from the rampant adultery and divorce that is found in heterosexual marriages. Churches preach against “gay marriage” (and rightly so), but tolerate adultery, divorce, and adulterous remarriage within their own memberships. The divorce rate among Christians is a disgrace. The church is so morally compromised by adultery and sexual sin (e.g., addiction to pornography and fornication) among its heterosexuals that it has lost its power to confront the plague of homosexuality."

Friday, August 6, 2010

Time to Impeach Judge Vaughn Walker


No doubt you've heard that a sodomite judge has tyrannically overturned Proposition 8 in California.

I've included a letter below sent out from American Family Association (AFA). How much better if they had included in their letter that Judge Walker is accountable not only to the U.S. Congress, but far more importantly, to the Judge of all, the Lord Jesus Christ. The written record of His accountability standards for civil magistrates? Christ's holy Scriptures, the Bible.

From AFA:

Time to impeach Judge Vaughn Walker

Contact your representative today and urge him to start impeachment proceedings

August 5, 2010


Dear Friend,

Yesterday (August 4), U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn Walker single-handedly overturned California's Prop. 8, which elevated protection for one-man, one-woman marriage to its state constitution.

In doing so, he frustrated the express will of seven million Californians who went to the polls to shape their state's public policy on marriage.

Since marriage policy is not established anywhere in the federal Constitution, defining marriage, according to the 10th Amendment, is an issue reserved for the states. Judge Walker never should have accepted this case in the first place.

Under Judge Walker, it's no longer "We the People," it's "I the Judge."

In addition, Judge Walker is an open homosexual, and should have recused himself from this case due to his obvious conflict of interest.

What can be done?

Fortunately, the Founders provided checks and balances for every branch of government, including the judicial branch. Federal judges hold office only "during good Behaviour," and if they violate that standard can be removed from the bench.

Judge Walker's ruling is not "good Behaviour." He has exceeded his constitutional authority and engaged in judicial tyranny.

Judges are not, in fact, unaccountable. They are accountable to Congress, which can remove them from office.

Impeachment proceedings, according to the Constitution, begin in the House of Representatives. It's time for you to put your congressman on record regarding the possible impeachment of Judge Walker.

A Response from a Theonomic Paedo-Baptist

I’m in the middle of reading Greg L. Bahnsen’s No Other Standard: Theonomy and Its Critics. What a dear Christian brother Dr. Bahnsen was! I look forward to seeing him in the resurrection.

And what a great and wonderful providence of God that I should read these words two days after hearing my pastor’s story.

An excerpt from No Other Standard:

“…to say that equal civil protection cannot and should not be afforded without qualification to any and all “religious” commitments is not at all to imply that the civil magistrate has the right to take unto himself ecclesiastical authority. Just as surely as the Old Testament forbade kings to arrogate priestly functions to themselves (e.g., the case of Uzziah in 2 Chron. 26), the New Testament separates “the keys” of the kingdom from the “sword” which the state bears (cf Matt. 16:19; Rom. 13:4; 2 Cor. 10:4). There is no Biblical warrant for thinking that the civil magistrate has either the competence or the divinely given authority to settle all religious matters of doctrine.

The law of God does not, contrary to popular misconception, allow the civil courts to judge heretics or resolve theological disputes between different schools of Christian thought. Thus theonomists readily and fervently insist upon the “pluralist” [GD: “pluralism” among Christian denominations] view of the state found in our best Reformed heritage and even the U.S. Constitution. Lutherans should not use civil power to persecute Presbyterians (and vice versa, etc.), and the federal government should not establish Presbyterianism (or Anglicanism, etc.) as the state church.

There is indeed a line to be drawn beyond which the civil magistrate is not to step in matters of faith and worship. But the theonomist would argue that this line is to be drawn by the exegesis of God’s written word—not by some authority higher than the Bible, nor by the equivocal slogan of “equal protection for all,” nor by some individual’s interpretation of the lowest common denominator in religion. Religious liberty is too precious a commodity to be grounded upon anything other than God’s authority, expressed in His infallible and unchanging, written word. It must be understood and applied in theonomic fashion.”


Bahnsen, No Other Standard, pdf version, Institute for Christian Economics, 1991, p. 188

An Open Letter to a Theonomist Paedo-Baptist

Dear Theonomist Paedo-Baptist:

I'm writing to you because I've read many of your books, ordered many CDs from you, and attended at least two conferences put on by you. I share a reformed viewpoint and a theonomic ethical viewpoint with you, and Theonomy in Christian Ethics by Greg Bahnsen is one of my favorite books after the Holy Bible.

I have looked for opportunities to support a variety of theonomic causes and organizations and speakers, and to speak a word about the authority of all of God's word and His righteous law as the standard for life and godliness first for Christians and then for all the world, as we believers, by God's grace, work out the Great Commission.

I belong to a reformed baptist church assembly.

Thinking highly of you and your ministry, I want to ask your opinion about something.

My pastor recently spoke against theonomy (and Christian reconstruction) to our congregation, and this talk is on our church's web site as well. In his teaching, he shared something that he said he knew for a fact actually happened (and I certainly believe him).

Apparently, a paedo-baptist theonomist brother told my pastor's baptist friend, that, although he loved him like a brother, if they (theonomists) ever gained power, he (the baptist brother) would have to be executed for heresy because he would not baptize his infant children. My pastor, thank God, did qualify his anecdote with the statement that it was only the "radical end of the theonomic movement spectrum" who believe this way, not all theonomists. Unfortunately, the damage is done.

Would you be willing to publicly take a stand against this kind of executing-brethren talk? I feel confident in stating that this kind of thinking and talk is most injurious to a theonomic revival ever taking place in American churches. Unfortunately, I do not know if this person was ever disciplined for his evil speech to his baptist brother, or what happened after this conversation took place.

What would you think if you heard that a reformed baptist theonomist told a paedo-baptist brother that if they ever gained power, the paedo-baptist brother would have to executed for heretically baptizing unbelievers because in the administration of the Old Covenant, Israelites were instructed to circumcise their (male) babies at 8 days of age?

Now, I don't think for a moment that God's law calls for executing baptist believers--no, not even of a dispensational stripe--or paedo-baptist believers, for that matter, of course. However, there are currently many who will never pick up any pro-theonomy book *ever,* and will shun theonomy as a grave error, and will teach others to do so, because there are people who claim to be theonomist who apparently actually believe that God's law calls for executing "heretical" baptist brothers (despite their oh-so-heartwarming regret at having to do so).

You may find this to be something worth addressing.

I do not run in paedo-baptist circles, and I have no idea how widespread this horrific misconception of God's law is among theonomic paedo-baptists. In your experience, do many theonomic paedo-baptists think this way?

Sincerely,
GentleDove

UPDATE: Please read A Response from a Theonomic Paedo-Baptist.

Thursday, August 5, 2010

"Home" by Edgar A. Guest


It takes a heap o’ livin’ in a house t’ make it home,
A heap o’ sun an’ shadder, an’ ye sometimes have t’ roam
Afore ye really ‘preciate the things ye lef’ behind,
An’ hunger fer ‘em somehow, with ‘em allus on yer mind.
It don’t make any difference how rich ye get t’ be,
How much yer chairs an’ tables cost, how great yer luxury;
It ain’t home t’ ye, though it be the palace of a king,
Until somehow yer soul is sort o’ wrapped round everything.

Home ain’t a place that gold can buy or get up in a minute;
Afore it’s home there’s got t’ be a heap o’ livin’ in it;
Within the walls there’s got t’ be some babies born, and then
Right there ye’ve got t’ bring ‘em up t’ women good, an’ men;
And gradjerly as time goes on, ye find ye wouldn’t part
With anything they ever used—they’ve grown into yer heart:
The old high chairs, the playthings, too, the little shoes they wore
Ye hoard; an’ if ye could ye’d keep the thumb-marks on the door.

Ye’ve got t’ weep t’ make it home, ye’ve got t’ sit an’ sigh
An’ watch beside a loved one’s bed, an’ know that Death is nigh;
An’ in the stillness o’ the night t’ see Death’s angel come,
An’ close the eyes o’ her that smiled, an’ leave her sweet voice dumb.
Fer these are scenes that grip the heart,
An’ when yer tears are dried,
Ye find the home is dearer than it was, an’ sanctified;
An’ tuggin’ at ye always are the pleasant memories
O’ her that was an’ is no more—ye can’t escape from these.

Ye’ve got t’ sing an’ dance fer years, ye’ve got t’ romp an’ play,
An’ learn t’ love the things ye have by usin’ ‘em each day;
Even the roses ‘round the porch must blossom year by year
Afore they ‘come a part o’ ye, suggestin’ someone dear
Who used t’ love ‘em long ago, an’ trained ‘em jes t’ run
The way they do, so’s they would get the early mornin’ sun;
Ye’ve got t’ love each brick an’ stone from cellar up t’ dome:
It takes a heap o’ livin’ in a house t’ make it home.

From Collected Verse of Edgar Guest
NY: Buccaneer Books, 1976, page 12