Realmscapes

Pentecost - Ephesians 2:1-10

"But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—-by grace you have been saved—-and raised us up with Him and seated us with Him in the heavenly places..."

Rush: Liberal Dems are Like Political 'Suicide Bombers'

"All right, health care test vote on Saturday night. Let me explain why they're calling it a test vote. There are two stages to a piece of legislation in the Senate, and both stages require 60 votes. The first vote, which is what's going to happen tomorrow night, is being called a test vote because if it gets 60 votes, it then is moved to the floor and debate begins. The next vote after that requires 60 votes again to stop the debate. That's called cloture. And that vote, the cloture vote, tells us whether or not the bill will pass. The vote tomorrow night does not necessarily do that, although this vote tomorrow night is something about which we should all have great concerns. There are a number of ways this can go. He can get the 60 votes and start the debate and then start the media spin, "Well, they got 60 votes. It's just a matter of time." Then they limit the amount of debate and try to close cloture and get the final 60 votes before Christmas. If they don't get the 60 votes -- and a lot of people are worried about this. If they don't get the 60 votes -- and I, frankly, I can't read the tea leaves on this, and the reason I can't is Reid is buying votes.

He bought Mary Landrieu with $100 million provision in the health care bill. There are Medicare exceptions for the state of Louisiana, and it's a page-and-a-half long, and it allows states that have suffered a major natural disaster within the last four years, three days, and ten hours... I mean, it zeros in on Hurricane Katrina. Then you are eligible for $100 million additional in Medicare for the old folks and blah, blah, blah. Landrieu is in trouble for reelection down there and she needs to buy votes herself. Reid needs to buy votes. This is what Pelosi was doing over in the House. She was buying votes by giving individual members whatever they wanted. Ben Nelson's out there in Nebraska, and the way they're going after Ben Nelson... He comes from Nebraska. He has to make it look to his constituents like he is upholding his moderate conservative values, particularly on abortion. The abortion language in this bill is just like the Stupak amendment over in the House. It's all going to come out. Whatever is in there now to get Ben Nelson's vote will eventually come out.

Sola Scriptura

The Vatican requires legitimacy and value for its continued existence. They reject "sola scriptura" because they believe that their presence is necessary to correctly interpret the Bible for the masses.

Luther started the Reformation in large part because of this false teaching.

There is little difference between papal attitudes over the centuries to today and the Pharisees in Jesus day. Christ taught the OT freely to the people sans the Pharisaic additions and interpretations.

Jesus' ministry frequently showed that God's Word is sufficient for knowing God and His plan of salvation. Consider John 1:1-18 and Jesus statements later in that book, that "no one comes to the Father except through Me."

Paul also says in 2 Corinthians, "But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ."

Jesus frequently rebuked the Jewish religious leaders for placing the importance of keeping man-made traditions and considering their expositions over God's Word. That is the context of calling tradition and extra-Scriptural commentary a bad thing. (Matthew 15:10-20)

Both Protestants and Roman Catholics should remember Colossians 2:16-23 (and other verses) well when it comes to telling people what extra-scriptural behavior is supposedly necessary to live a Christian life. Lifestyle choices must be made solely within the context of Scripture and plain reason.

Finally, it is a matter of faith to accept Scripture alone as the source of salvation and knowledge of God. (1 Thessalonians 2:13)

Conservatism is Tops in U.S. ...Still (..No surpise to me)

According to a major new Gallup poll.

The wider numbers are more solidifying that America is consistently conservative. Since 1992, conservatism has never dipped lower than 37% and liberalism has never gotten higher than 22%.

So how does a liberal such as Obama win 52% of the vote? Because conservatives won't vote for a candidate like McCain, who had trouble articulating his commitment to conservatism (or explaining a Senate record that was center-right at best). I would be surprised if McCain received much more than two-thirds of that 40%.

For moderates, this meant a choice between liberal or liberal-light. The Obama team ran a tremendously charismatic campaign that moderates found it easy to get caught up in. Plus after eight years of Republican control the country wanted a full shift. This is a historical trend. It is also historical that Americans prefer one party to control the White House while the other controls Congress.

Much of Obama's supporters were college-age, meaning none of them experienced Jimmy Carter or Ronald Reagan beyond their text books and teachers (both of which easily trend left). These young liberals really energised the base and likely got many of their moderate friends to vote Obama.

There was also a small % of conservatives who voted for Obama with the purpose of deliberately recreating the Carter years in hopes a Reagan-type conservative will emerge in 2012.

Bottom line: When a Presidential candidate articulates conservatism, they will win. (Even if it's a liberal doing it better than his opponent.)

[For further reading: "Barack Obama has failed to defeat conservatism in America" by Nile Gardiner, UK's Telegraph]

Reagan: A Time For Choosing

Today marks the anniversary of one of Ronald Reagan's greatest and most memorable speeches. Titled "A Time For Choosing", but typically referred to as "The Goldwater Speech", this speech articulated what would become become both Reagen's and modern conservatism's political identity. Following are some excerpts:

..."I think it's time we ask ourselves if we still know the freedoms that were intended for us by the Founding Fathers. Not too long ago, two friends of mine were talking to a Cuban refugee, a businessman who had escaped from Castro, and in the midst of his story one of my friends turned to the other and said, 'We don't know how lucky we are,' and the Cubans stopped and said, 'How lucky you are? I had someplace to escape to.' And in that sentence he told us the entire story: If we lose freedom here, there's no place to escape to, this is the last stand on earth."...

..."This idea that government is beholden to the people, that it has no other source of power except the sovereign people, is still the newest and the most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man. This is the issue of this election, whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves. You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right. Well, I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There's only an up or down. Man's old age dream, the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law and order, or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism."...

..."Senator Clark of Pennsylvania, another articulate spokesman, defines liberalism as meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government. Well, I for one resent it when a representative of the people refers to you and me, the free men and women of this country, as the masses. This is a term we haven't applied to ourselves in America. But beyond that the full power of centralized government, this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize. They knew that governments don't control things. A government can't control the economy without controlling people and they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. They also knew, those Founding Fathers, that outside of its legitimate functions, government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy."...

..."We cannot buy our security, our freedom from the threat of the bomb by committing an immorality so great as saying to a billion human beings now enslaved behind the Iron Curtain, 'Give up your dreams of freedom, because to save our own skins we're willing to make a deal with your slave masters.' Alexander Hamilton said, 'A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master and deserves one.' Now, let's set the record straight. There's no argument over the choice between peace and war. But there's only one guaranteed way you can have peace, and you can have it in the next second. Surrender."...

..."No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. So government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth."...

..."You and I have a rendezvous with destiny. We'll preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth or we'll sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness."...

You can view, listen, or read/download a transcript of the speech at The Ronald Reagan Foundation & Library website.

Rant on Jeff Passan

Yahoo's Jeff Passan is exactly the kind of pharisaic, snobbish media type that I would give a million bucks to see given a professional over the knee. First he has the audacity to judge Josh Hamilton's demons, and now he is telling Mark Mcgwire what he apparently needs to do to save his legacy.. in the eyes of the Passan's of the sports media (no doubt).

I'll bet that Jeff Passan was a failed athlete, or didn't have the stones to be an athlete. But he happened to be good at stringing some sentences together and saw an opportunity to let loose his jaded pride on those he can never be like. Bravo, Jeff. I'll also bet that you drew out Hamilton because you are jaded on your Creator too and there's nothing better to those like you than seeing a Christian stumble from one's thorn in the flesh.

I believe I know what makes a hero far better than Jeff does. Mac and Josh are definitely heroes. Jeff is too.. to the fans of his own mental domain.

Quote for 2009, On Obama Admin

"The White House trying to dictate who's a news organization. Democrats out to gut a business group. Obama media allies damning Americans as racist, unpatriotic and treasonous. Is this the America Obama promised when he campaigned to end the cynical and divisive politics of the past?"

   - Steve Huntley

Right Christianity: A Brief Exposition

Approaching our faith from the standpoint that "I am right and you are wrong" misses the point, and will always result in a failed witness as you run headlong into your neighbor's wall of pride.

It's not about being right in the eyes of my neighbor. It is about Joy, and Peace.

This does not mean that sin isn't properly addressed, for it must be to maintain the proper balance of Law and Gospel. But the specific sin doesn't matter since sin is sin in the eyes of the Lord.

It is vital that those around us understand that it is our sin that separates us from the "peace that passes all understanding."--sin and pride. Through the "mystery work" of the Holy Spirit we come to know Christ. Sin is confessed, our false foundation of pride crumbles, and a new foundation is built by Jesus through our believing on His sacrifice for our sin so that we may know God's loving grace fully.

In this knowledge, Christians experience a Joy that cannot be taken away while we maintain our Faith through His Word and Sacraments.

Spreading the Joy and Peace of this good news is the ultimate loving your neighbor as yourself. These are our motivation to do good by our neighbors. These good works do not save us or contribute to our righteousness. They bring our neighbor into God's presence either to strengthen their faith or with the hope they will hear His voice calling them outside the door of their hearts.

This is being right... made so in the eyes of God only through justification by our faith in Christ, thus sanctified by the Holy Spirit through the Living Word of Scripture.

Here Christians must stand, we can do no other.

The Anti-America Prize

"The Nobel Peace Prize is a notoriously difficult award to predict, but yesterday's decision was clearly a political choice, with three of the past six peace awards going to Bush adversaries.

In 2002 the prize went to Jimmy Carter as an explicit rejection of the Bush presidency in the build-up to the Iraq war. In 2005 Mohamed ElBaradei, the UN atomic agency chief who had clashed with Washington over the search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, was honoured. In 2007 Al Gore received the prize for his warnings on climate change, denounced by President Bush as a liberal myth." --Catherine Philp (The Times)

Gorbachev... Carter... Arafat... Thọ... Annan... Gore... ElBaradei... just a few of the con artists, terrorists, and tyrants to receive the "honour" of being a Nobel Peace Laureate. (Did you know that ElBaradei recently named Israel as the primary nuclear weapon aggressor in the Middle East?)

The Nobel Peace Prize stopped being serious in 1990 when it was awarded to Gorbachev. (Interesting that it was awarded to the man who capitulated to President Reagan, but Regan was never awarded one.) It became a joke when Gore received his for promoting bogus science as fact.

One thing that all these (and other) recent winners have in common is that they need the award to to legitimise their purpose. Beyond that, the agendas of all of these figures have failed, been rejected, or been defeated. Meanwhile Reagan and Bush II and Netanyahu fight (or fought) the good fight despite their critics. Their prize is victory over evil and freedom from oppression for their people and those they fought for.

What scares me about Obama receiving this award is that he will surely turn his back on the surge proposition needed for Afghanistan. Carter has called Obama's winning of the prize "bold". Obama signing off on the troop surge in the aftermath of receiving this award would truly be bold.

But somehow I have no expectations for this. How can I expect such bold action from a President who punts an opportunity to meet the Dalai Lama (now a fellow Laureate) in a effort to appease the Chinese? Or more to the point, how can Obama be expected to do what is needed in the Middle East after his administration's most recent assessment of that region, which now envisions a "role for the Taliban"(!) if Afghanistan is to have a future?

If this world wants true peace the world must first calm the human soul. This can only be accomplished one way.

Invoking McCarthyism, Dixie-crats

Would it be fair to raise the spectres of the pro-segragation/anti-civil rights Democrats every time the libs compare conservatives to Joseph McCarthy?

The Spectre of McCarthy

“In August the lawmaker from Minnesota called on opponents of 'socialised healthcare' to 'pray to God' for Mr Obama to fail. Last year Ms Bachmann, a Christian conservative, provoked memories of the witch hunt days of Joe McCarthy when she called on the media to investigate 'un-American' sentiments in Congress.” --Financial Times (Online)

This paragraph from FT is a capsule of all the different accusations and misinformation that the left is guilty of, going all the way back to W.

Anyone calling to kill the nationalising of healthcare, or for Obama's socialist policy agenda to fail, is considered a racist (see Jimmy Carter) or a Nazi (see Nancy Pelosi).

And this fight over what is American or un-American clearly still sits in the craw of liberal Democrats--as if they have something to be guilty about to be so defensive.

Remember then Senator Hillary Clinton railing against her and the Dem party's critics over us calling said party "un-American" for their disrespectful and insensitive treatment of the U.S. Armed Forces in Iraq? She yelled back that it was very much American to be able to publicly oppose with a Presidential Administration.

First of all, the irony of that statement in today's political climate--when conservatives are being called (you guessed it) "un-American" by Pelosi and Steny Hoyer (see USA Today column) is so heavy one would think it is the premise to an episode of Alfred Hitchcock Presents.

But remember, the Democrat Party was blatantly undercutting the mission in Iraq and affecting the morale of American troops serving in that country in the pursuit of scoring political points with their radical left supporters in the blogosphere. In any decade, this behavior would be seen as un-American! The United States has always cherished its military heroes and any exploitation or criticism of these heroes for political gain has bordered on accusations of sacrilege.

Whenever liberals are afraid of conservatives they invoke the spectre of Joseph McCarthy. As overzealous as the he was, it's amusing to think just how some of these present-day Democrats would fare if Senator McCarthy was a contemporary. And even more amusing the thought of how President Obama do under the deceased Senator's accusations of Communism.

Yes, Senator McCarthy I think would not need to create any false cases against this Congress or Administration for un-American activity as they trample the Constitution in its pursuit of nationalising everything from health care to the banking industry, and all the while getting in bed with dangerous, anti-American foreign enemies as this Administration and Congress is blatantly doing.

9/24-9/28: Scary Run of Recent Int'l News Headlines & Quotes

Iran conducts third round of missile tests; 'Could reach Israel'...

U.S. commander in Afghanistan talked with Obama only once; Obama: 'Victory' Not Necessarily Goal in Afghanistan...

Venezuela exploring uranium deposits with Russia, Iran...

India raises nuclear stakes; Can make high-yield weapons...

Prez. Obama: 'We must never stop until we see the day when nuclear arms have been banished from the face of the earth.'; Prez. Sarkozy: 'President Obama dreams of a world without weapons but right in front of us two countries are doing the exact opposite.' ...

China to display upgraded missiles in parade...

Gadhafi Strengthens Ties With Chavez...

Obama heading to Copenhagen to fight for Chicago (to host Olympic Games)...

FBI arrests Jordanian for downtown Dallas bomb plot... TERROR RAIDS: Probe of DENVER cell planning 9/11-like ATTACK... Illinois man charged in plot to bomb federal offices... Terror suspects accused of targeting Marine base in Quantico...

Obama Administration Frees Three More Gitmo Detainees...

NYT: 'No Reason To Fear Terror Attacks'...

25 Best Film Sequels

Empire Online posted their 50, but here are ours since we either don't agree or haven't seen certain movies on their list; a film is on this list for plot not necessarily because we endorse a particular film's overall execution of certain elements e.g. violence, sexual material. Also, this list doesn't include films that are the first in a set of prequels (e.g. Star Trek) or meant to form one whole cohesive story e.g. (The Lord of the Rings). These aren't in any particular order ("*" means it was also included on Empire's list):

Redeemed Stewards

As you are likely aware, the better part of this decade has been especially politically charged in the direction of the environment. One big movement has embraced the 21st century theories of "man-made climate change" and turned this view into something very close to a neo-pagan religion where mankind is evil and must "repent" by doing what it can to "save Mother Earth" or perish in "judgment" via increased natural disasters. Some "Christian" churches may not embrace the God-less neo-pagan view, but do suggest that good works towards nature work for our salvation--thus they fall into the Roman Catholic trap of works righteousness.

I am confident there is a difference between good stewardship of this world (conservation) and the more recent outlandish ideologies of environmentalism, which often at its core is nothing more than a political vessel for socialism, or worse a strong central government--perhaps even a new world order where something like the United Nations replaces national sovereignty. Many countries (including ours) are seeing a decrease in individual liberty or governments that use extreme environmental ideologies to take wealth from its citizens for political ends (say for a national health care plan that allows coverage for abortions). The Christian community especially is feeling the vise of increasingly centralised governments worldwide.

The unequal distribution of wealth is another point often made in the political arena. I of course agree that greed or the hoarding of wealth is not proper stewardship by those whom God has blessed with wealth; and that those of us with liberty and means should be prepared to help those who are not so fortunate as appropriate--and this includes nations, not just individuals. However, it is my experience that there are plenty in poverty who remain in poverty (for whatever reason) out of choice or laziness; there are many others who do not use the talents that God has gifted to them to improve their situation OR their church's. I understand these to be just as disrespectful to God as a financial miser or an apathetic country.

I am concerned that people being exposed to these messages, especially from "Christian" churches, are concluding that faith in Christ is in line with the increasingly popular neo-pagan environmentalism or the view of "populist Christianity" that gained momentum in the early 20th century. These are both false doctrines.

Regardless what--in God's eyes--the correct view is on wealth distribution or environmental stewardship, the ways we fail to meet the needs of our neighbors, or maybe some other grave sin that we are all committing against God without our knowledge, repentance and faith in the saving work of Christ is what ultimately matters... that our failings to be the stewards God intended are already wiped away from God's sight. Thus we can look forward with confidence to being God's redeemed stewards in His new Heaven and Earth.

We should never use our sinful nature as an excuse to misuse God's creation or feign ignorance to the plight of our neighbor's needs when we have the means to help. Taking care of God's creation and our neighbor can only be the fruit of a heart that loves God, as is revealed through Christ and confirmed by the Holy Spirit through His Word. Yet that same Word says that Christ's righteousness given to us trumps failed human "good intentions" and stewardship that goes wrong.

Quote for 2009, On Discoveries

"My most valuable discovery was when I discovered that I was a sinner and that Jesus Christ was my Savior!"

   - Dr. James Simpson (pioneered chloroform anesthesia)

On Gandhi & Strength

“Strength does not come from physical capacity. It comes from an indomitable will.” - Gandhi

Faith in Christ means something far more than an indomitable strength or will: the indomitable God (Romans 8:18-39).