Monday, November 17

Are Stores Open Thanksgiving Deserving Of Wide Scale Divine Retribution?

Granted, retailers opening on Thanksgiving might not have been the most family-friendly or magnanimous gesture in relation to their employees. However, the response on the part of certain theologians and critics might have gone a bit overboard.

In particular, one such condemnation intoned that from this alteration in commercial operational policy that America is an evil nation worthy of God's judgment.

So because Walmart was either open on Thanksgiving or opened their doors later that evening, nuclear destruction and annihilation or something comparable should rain down across the nation. That is, of course, what is usually meant by the euphemism of “God's judgment”.

To justify this hardline response to opening stores on Thanksgiving beyond simply frowning upon the decision to actively wanting to see lives ruined because of it, Biblical prohibitions regarding the Sabbath are often invoked.

The intentions might possess a nobility in that these sentiments attempt to construe all of reality through the light of God's word and theology derived from it. However, in terms of religious jurisprudence, the position falls a bit short in terms of serving as a platform upon which one can stand to look righteous in calling for blatant ruination and upheaval.

God no doubt delights when His children offer up gratitude for what He has provided and is angered when this appreciation is not evident. However, it does not follow that one cannot express gratitude in a scheduled ritualized manner prior to engaging in orderly commerce later that same day.

One might even claim that God does not really care one way or another to a great degree about the statutory observance of Thanksgiving Day. It may come as a surprise, but there is nothing found within the pages of the canon of Scripture demanding the observance be commemorated a particular Thursday in November.

It must also be asked to what extent do those enforcing Thanksgiving Day under the Mosaic regulations upholding the Sabbath want these punishments and prohibitions enforced? From Exodus 20:9-11, it is learned that the Sabbath is the seventh day of the week. Jehovah is quite explicit about this.

In our system of chronometric tabulation, Saturday is the Sabbath. What the vast majority of Christians celebrate each Sunday (especially in the morning) is technically not the Sabbath but rather the Lord's Day to commemorate the bodily Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

These have been conflated in the minds of many, especially those under the sway of a strict legalism. However, these days are not the same.

So are those demanding compulsory observance of the Sabbath willing to turn themselves over for execution should they find themselves violating the extensive prohibitions regulating the day? For according to Exodus 31:14, that is the stipulated punishment for those failing to observe the Sabbath of the seventh day if such a regulation still applies beyond Deuteronomical Israel.

When those attending compulsory Sabbath observations return home, do they intend to walk rather than operate a vehicle? For that is the extent to which the most observant Orthodox Jews adhere to the exactness of that divine decree. Senator Joseph Lieberman would not even place his own subway fair card into the electronic ticket-taker.

Furthermore, do those deliberating to make such a chore of relaxation intend to only eat leftovers from the night before or unheated prepackaged foods? Because if the true believing Christian must abide by every Biblical decree in excruciating detail for fear of befalling God's indignation, the preparation of consumables is forbidden as well.

Those more interested in ruining everyone else's celebration rather than simply maximizing their own will respond that simply pointing out what is said plainly in certain passages of Scripture downplayed as a result of those advocating them not wanting a greater majority of Christians to grapple with what is being said actually obscures the greater truth of the principle that is being conveyed. Fair enough.

If not for the principles conveyed by God to the Hebrew forefathers of the need for rest and reflection, mankind might have never comprehended the need for a work environment beneficial for all sides of the economic transaction. Before this revelation, for the most part laborers were little more than fodder to be worked until they dropped and quickly discarded.

However, are those insisting up a slavish adherence to the letter of the law really getting that point across when their homiletical formulations cause the listeners to stop and wonder if what really gets the motors of these scriptural exegetes running is rather body counts, the destruction of property, and overall social upheaval. For are not these in some form or another what is meant by the phrase “God's judgment”?

In these times of widespread debauchery and systematic subversion of Western culture, one usually tries to distance oneself from feminist critiques and condemnation of traditional religion. However, if one desires to be an honest observer of the human condition, one is forced to admit that only a man sitting back with his feet propped up would construe Thanksgiving Day as a Sabbath free from labor.

On the classic sitcom “Home Improvement” starring Tim Allen, one of the wittiest lines ever uttered on the series was verbalized when his sidekick Al Borlin quipped that dinner does not make itself. The remark was very similar to an observation made by my own mother.

If a man fails to realize that Thanksgiving is not some magical occasion where one of the most delicious dinners of the year just sprouts fully formed on the table in a manner akin to manna from Heaven, it is most likely that a woman in either the form of a wife, mother or even unwed concubine has spent much of the day laboring away in preparation.

Interestingly, those often complaining the loudest about the growing irreverence with which the day is treated are not absent from the kitchen because they are given over to the higher spiritual pursuits such as prayer, Bible study, or theological contemplation. Instead, they are plopped in an easy chair or on the sofa watching the most typical of entertainments. And I am not talking about the Westminster Kennel Club but rather NFL football.

The conspicuously religious claim that they are opposed to retailers being opened on Thanksgiving because their delicate consciences are disturbed by something so crass and base as mere commerce being transacted on such a solemn occasion. Then why do they have their peepers glued to the boob tube?

It is quite instructive that this contempt for free market exchange is limited to when it is engaged in by the laboring and servile classes. For the last time I checked, it is doubtful that the players, assorted team personnel, or the media conglomerates were putting on a complimentary exhibition game.

No doubt, millions upon millions of dollars exchange hands to orchestrate whatever number of games take place on this particular day. I am not really aware of the exact number. I usually watch the dog show while eating canned pasta just so I can say I had spaghetti for Thanksgiving.

So why are those deciding to go shopping on Thanksgiving more worthy of having death and misery inflicted upon them more so than those instead either attending the football game or even watching the event on television? Confronted so boldly about what it is that they are advocating, those previously enunciating a desire to see God's wrath dispensed over something as commonplace as going to the mall might attempt to linguistically backpedal by claiming that, in their call for judgment, they did not mean to wish misery or death upon those participating in a disputed activity or behavior.

I've pretty much been in or around Christian circles my entire life even if I don't feel welcomed within them entirely. The phrase “God's judgment” rarely has connotation other than that of sorrow and lamentation unless in rare instances where one is referencing the rewards that will be bestowed upon the believer for the good deeds they did honoring to Christ.

Furthermore, in the vast majority of instances, it's not like those participating one way or the other were prevented from enjoying the primary festivities of the Thanksgiving celebration or were not duly compensated in some manner.

For example, though likely not a universal beneficence bestowed on all employees, most laboring to make the sales happen were probably paid some kind of overtime. If not, such personnel were probably not compelled to work beyond their normal allotment of hours for that particular week. As such, they were payed with their scheduled adjusted to be off at another time.

Of even less moral concern ought to be the ones deciding to participate in these sales events on the consumer side of the transaction. For example, many of these sales were designated to commence well after the customary dinner hour.

As such, by that point in the evening, most would have already cogitated upon whatever thoughts of gratitude would have otherwise fired within their respective synapses. Most are in a turkey-induced catatonia, bloated and passing intestinal gas as they glare in a stupor into the television.

Interestingly, if we are raising the opposition to the opening of retailers on Thanksgiving to the level of Biblical law worthy of incurring divine retribution for violating, it must be pointed out that the commencement of these sales technically aren't even occurring on Thanksgiving. In the context of Hebrew culture and religious jurisprudence, the rendering of the day is not determined from midnight to midnight as occurs in the contemporary system. The day is instead rendered from sundown to sundown.

If one wants to be a stickler to Biblical detail, it must be noted that many of these Thanksgiving sales often commence well after dark. Therefore, under Sabbath prohibitions, it is no more immoral to shop from the disputed 8 to 11:59 PM than it would be during the 8 to 11:59 AM period Black Friday morning.

Those wanting to impose the Old Testament as binding civil legislation insist such must be done because God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. So if Americans deserve nuclear annihilation, plague, or whatever manifestation of the Apocalypse tickles your particular eschatological fancy for simply going to the store on Thanksgiving, should our nation also be destroyed for altering the method of rendering the days in compliance with the interpretative principle just enunciated?

It can indeed be upsetting to see what one perceives as our culture moving away from Godly foundations. However, enunciating a desire to see lives ruined and destroyed for such is probably a greater violation of explicit Biblical imperatives (such as the careful invocation of judgment) than the modification of a practice that (though commendable and worthy of continuation) is more of an interpretive application of the divine imperatives to begin with.

By Frederick Meekins

Religious Leftists Attempt To Turn Thanksgiving Into Socialistic Guilt Trip

Click On The Headline

Apostate Clerics Bestow Blessing Upon Racailist Mob Violence

Click On The Headline

Islamist Desecrating National Cathedral A Terrorist Sympathizer

Click ON The Headline

Thursday, November 13

How Much History Is One Obligated To Study?

Because God in Christ worked out the plan of salvation in a particular moment of time, I don’t see how it follows that the true Christian is obligated to have a lifelong love of history to the point where you read the discipline regularly.

Isn’t that akin to saying that if you don’t possess a physician’s or nurse’s level of knowledge of anatomy that you don’t appreciate the body as the temple of the Holy Spirit?

Everybody’s got different things they are interested in.

It is commendable to have a knowledge of church history.

But I don't see the point of laying on a guilt trip on those that really aren't into the topic as an avocation or hobby.

Should the bookworms not that great at math beyond balancing a checkbook be condemned for not being skilled in what is often described as the language in which God wrote the universe into existence?

It is commendable to have an understanding and appreciation for church history.

However, if one becomes to absorbed in the discipline, isn't there a danger of keeping stoked to too intense a degree ancient disputes of long ago?

Just how worked up should the believer still be over the Defenestration of Prague?

by Frederick Meekins

Legalistic Fanatics Condemn Kirk Cameron For Defending Santa Claus

Click On The Headline

Wednesday, November 12

Church History Sermon Fails To Consider Profound Lesson

In a sermon on the importance of church history, it was argued that the church rather than the biological family was the primary social and psychological relationship in the life of the believer.

That might provide a degree of comfort if one's biological family is urging one to engage in blatantly anti-Biblical behavior.

However, such a grandiose sentiment itself needs to be circumscribed by carefully delineated boundaries.

You will always have a higher priority to those through whom you came into the world.

There is something downright shameful regarding some of these missionaries that will willingly die on behalf of the Pygmies in the African bush but hardly give a second thought to their aging parents here in America.

In classical Christian thought, this is the idea of subsidiarity, that your most profound obligations are to those closest to you.

Secondly, by insisting that a more profound loyalty is owed to one's church family than one's biological family can expose the gullible to a shocking litany of potential abuse on the part of church leaders.

For Jim Jones will live in infamy for conditioning numerous followers to place obedience to church structure over the well being of spouses and children, with the coercion and manipulation he subjected them to in the isolation of the jungle ending with hundreds dead.

It is a shame that a sermon purporting to admonish the need for the Christian to heed the lessons of history failed to take into account one of the twentieth century's most profound.

By Frederick Meekins

Rowan Williams Would Allow Teachers To Parade Around Classroom In Full Heathen Regalia

Click On The Headline

Mormon Church Admits Founder Was A Sex Pervert

Click On The Headline

Increasing Number Admit To Despising Compulsory Handshaking Rituals

Click On The Headline

National Cathedral Surrendered To Islamists

Yes, these are Islamists.

If just interested in quietly practicing their Islamic faith, they'd simply find somewhere else to prayer.

Will women be allowed to participate?

The National Cathedral has embraced the libertine sexual agenda so wholeheartedly that the bells were rung following a Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage like a war had ended or a new monarch crowned.

How many mosques or Islamic centers are open to distinctively Christian prayers?

Click On The Headline

A Biography Of Martin Luther

Click On The Headline

Tuesday, November 11

Colorado Educators Prefer Students Discuss Legalized Pot Than Theology

Click On The Headline

Ebola: The Blood Serpent & The Horsemen Of The Apocalypse

Check Out News Podcasts at Blog Talk Radio with Hagmann and Hagmann Report on BlogTalkRadio

For Thinking It's So Evil, Preachers Can Certainly Rattle On About Harry Potter's Specifics

In a discussion of the Harry Potter novels that was broadcast interestingly enough as part of the program that just days before heralded Larry The Cable Guy as a philosophical humorist on par with Will Rogers, the host lamented that 50% of all children in America have read at least one of the novels in that particular series and how said it was that many of the children claim to be Christian.

But what if a youngster, particularly as they move into the adolescent and teenage years, is able to discern spiritual truth from deception for themselves?

If that aptitude is irrelevant to the discussion, what about these ministers and teachers that go beyond the message that witchcraft is to be avoided but can themselves go into exacting detail regarding the plot twists of the Harry Potter saga that it is obvious that they have either read the books or seen the movies?

That is akin to simply not warning of the dangers of pornography but being able to critique how convincingly particular actors in that debauched genre are able to pull off roles as pizza delivery lads or coeds needing the dormitory plumbing snaked.

Should they be called upon to repent as well?

What gives this occupational class an exemption to research this material first hand but not the remainder of us?

If we are to be forbidden from investigating these things on our own, how do we know that the line they are pedaling us is really true?

By Frederick Meekins

Monday, November 10

The Dreadful Legacy Of Mark Twain

Click On The Headline

Mark Twain's Battle Against God

Click On The Headline

Researchers Hope To Respark Interest In Da Vinci Code Hooey

Click On The Headline

Scandal Erupts That Consumation Of Duggar Wedding Insufficiently Prayed Over

Click On The Headline

Will The Jesuits Brainwash The Gullible Into Surrendering To Extraterrestrial Invasion?

Click On The Headline

Are Certain Evangelicals As Obsessed Over Sexual Identity As Radical Gay Activists?

Controversy has erupted over a Notre Dame University conference titled “Gay In Christ: Dimensions In Fidelity”.

The purpose of the meeting was to reflect upon and address those that embrace Catholic teaching on marriage and the family but also experience homosexual temptation.

But instead of encouraging those that are struggling to live the right way despite the desires of their flesh, some have instead decided to criticize the goal of reconciling these combating inclinations.

Ryan Dobson, the slovenly tattooed beatnik son of James Dobson of Focus On The Family, is quoted in a ChristianNews.net article as saying, “Sexuality is not an identity; sexuality comes from one's identity. My identity does not come from my intimate relationship with my wife; my identity comes directly from my relationship...with God.”

Those words can be a powerful encouragement for those struggling against this variety of sin --- both homo and heterosexual.

However, haven't those affiliated with Focus On The Family over the years such as James Dobson and Albert Mohler carved out for themselves lucrative niche ministries guilt tripping those not married by the age of 25?

In essence, these ministers and scholars have come dangerously close to reducing individuals to little more than their sexual identities.

In these circles, it is not simply enough to teach that heterosexual marriage is the only relationship in which the manifestation of carnal affections is not a profound sin.

On his broadcasts and audio recordings, Mohler has suggested that churches should actually interrogate and verbally harass young adult singles as to why they have not yet married.

Our identity is indeed grounded in Christ and not over what elicits a stirring in the loins.

As such, perhaps it is about time for churches to leave alone those that have not fallen into open sin in this area of their lives and lend sensitive support rather than condemnation to those that have requested assistance in battling these particularly vexing temptations.

By Frederick Meekins

Audio: Church's Opposition To Holidays Borders On The Cultic

Because God in Christ worked out the plan of salvation in a particular moment of time, I don’t see how it follows that the true Christian is obligated to have a lifelong love of history to the point where you read the discipline regularly. Isn’t that akin to say that if you don’t possess a physician’s or nurse’s level of anatomy that you don’t appreciate the body as the temple of the Holy Spirit? Everybody’s got different things they are interested in.

Wednesday, November 5

Christan Bale Damns Moses As Barbaric

Click On The Headline

Present Shock: When Everything Happens Now

Disciples Of Christ Congregation Spices Up Hymn Sing With Free Booze

Click On The Headline

Has The Pope Abandoned Christianity In Favor Of A Platonic Mormonism?

In addressing the Pontifical Academy Of Sciences, Pope Francis pontificated, “When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so.”

If this wasn't bad enough, Pope Francis further elaborated, “God is not a divine being or a magician, but the Creator who brought everything to life.”

In other words, Pope Francis is not so much a Christian but rather a Platonist.

Christianity holds that God brought forth the world from nothingness.

John 1:3 reads, “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.”

Colossians 1:16-17 stipulates in concurrence, “For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth...And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.”

Platonism, on the other hand, believes in accord with the assumptions hinted at in the Pope's statement that matter exists eternally and independent from God.

God merely reshaped to the best of His ability that which was already there.

Pope Francis is to be commended for his attempt to preserve the metaphysical freedom of human beings in playing a role in determining their eternal destiny.

But in positing the cosmology that he does, what guarantee are we provided that the system won't go spiraling out of control or that the promises made by God are even trustworthy?

For example, if God did not bring matter nor the laws governing physical substance into existence and is Himself subject to these limitations as inviolable standards rather than by His own volition, why ought we to believe that He is able to cause a virgin to conceive a son, and for that son to rise from the dead after dying upon a cross so that we might have the forgiveness of sins and beatific eternal life?

For are not these greater contraventions of how the universe operates than to bring the cosmos into existence within the span of six literal days?

In Luke 5 in the account where Jesus heals the paralytic lowered through the roof, Christ inquires in verse 23, “Whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Rise up and walk?”

Thus, if the laws of nature cannot be suspended as the Divinity sees fit, on what grounds ought we to believe that He really has paid our debts in full?

On old adage asks is the Pope Catholic.

Maybe so, but these days it seems that, in terms of his foundational presuppositons, he might be trending Mormon but hopefully with a much less active sex life. By Frederick Meekins

Tuesday, November 4

Understanding The New Testament

Click On The Headline

Should We Abandon Or Reform American Protestantism?

Click On The Headline

Church's Opposition To Holidays Borders On The Cultic

In the equivalent of the self-denunciation that occurs in a variety of cults and Vietcong prisoner of war camps, the congregation of Grace Fellowship Church in Davenport, Iowa celebrate assorted holidays by not only being harangued by their pastor as to what wretched Christians they are if they are caught participating in these festivities but they are also expected to confess to one another just how much they despise these occasions as evidenced by a number of sermons posted at SermonAudio.com..

In an anti-Halloween sermon, the pastor remarked that any parents that have taught their children about Santa Claus are guilty of having lied. He then remarked how delighted he was of his son for having responded to an inquiry that Santa Claus was a wicked elf from the north. So the moral of that story must be that falsehoods are acceptable then they advance the family theological agendas and pecularitiies.

In a sermon condemning Halloween and nearly all other holidays, the pastor suggested that if you enjoy the accouterments of a particular celebration, you can partake of it at another time of year. As an example, he suggested saving your marshmallow peeps until May or June.

But if you are required to live your life in such a controlled and contrived manner, aren't you still living still beholden to that particular holiday? And more importantly, isn't such an individual still seeking the approval of man rather than God?

In an anti-Halloween sermon, the pastor made the argument that Trick Or Treating was wrong because the custom encourages children to dress up as something they are not and to hoard something that “appeals to the flesh” (that being candy). So in the case of this preacher, it would not be a sin for him to dress as a donkey because he's certainly a dumb you know what.

In a sermon on Halloween, it was claimed that the customs of Halloween are designed to take children away from God at an early age. Couldn't something similar be said about legalistic churches and Christian schools pushing children away from God with too many nitpicky and asinine rules?

The pastor devoted a portion of his assorted tirades exposing that Frosty the Snowman was based on a lie. Who over the age of six believes he is real? Even the History Channel hasn't stooped that low yet. By singing about Frosty, you are no more worshiping Frosty than you would be worshiping Calijah The Wooden Indian or worshiping The Gambler by singing those classic songs.

Particularly unsettling and disturbing were the verbal confessions members of the congregation were expected to engage in order to receive approval and affirmation from the pastors and elders.

One gentleman confided how much he had wanted to celebrate Christmas the previous year but instead submitted himself to the eldership of the church. Buddy, the elders might have say as to whether or not the church building is decorated for Christmas. However, they don't have any say whatsoever as to what you do in your home.

In being prodded further by the leadership as to why he no longer celebrated Christmas, this individual responded because the authority in his life had instructed him as such. At no time did he clarify whether or not by that he meant the Holy Spirit or rather merely those holding position at church. If you are going to relent to pastoral control over your life to such an extent, please for the sake of your family, decide for yourself now if you are going to let the pastor sleep with your wife and molest your kids when he comes asking or drink the sour Kool Aid when he orders it.

Another seeking approval during this protocultic ritual admitted in her confession to tossing out a Fischer Price Nativity set because of the adoration her granddaughter exhibited towards the Baby Jesus figurine. The grandmother reflected, and rightfully so to a certain extent, that often we prefer the adorable Baby Jesus that is not a depiction of the Christ of wrath and judgment.

But shouldn't we be cautious about tossing out the messianic baby with the baptismal water? Isn't there a profound and beautiful truth in God in Christ condescending to our level by becoming one of us?

There are indeed both gentle and wrathful sides to God. And in the spirit of the Book of Ecclesiastes, there is a time and purpose to contemplate each of these under Heaven.

Would it be better to deny this obviously spiritually sensitive and receptive child the tender side of Jesus and instead replace Him only with the hard-edged disciplinarian Jesus that the most thoroughgoing Fundamentalists seem to have a preference for? About the only thing the child is going to retain of this entire encounter is that granny tossed out such a beloved toy or decoration. Her family will no doubt sit around twiddling their thumbs years down the road baffled as to why the child is no longer close to God.

A pastor opposed to the celebration of Christmas remarked that no one that has considered the material he has made available regarding the subject and prayed seriously about the topic has told him that despite these that they will continue celebrating the holiday. The statement was made to promulgate the impression that there is little chance for the true believer to come to any conclusion other than that of this particular pastor.

However, there are at least two other alternatives.

Firstly, the individual believer could have been convicted by the Holy Spirit that there is something more profoundly wrong in that particular congregation than the celebrating of Christmas. Concluding such, they retreat hastily from that particular assembly and flee to another house of worship.

Secondly, they might have considered what the pastor had to say, came to a different conclusion, and felt their was no need to inform the pastor of the decision. Especially in light of those matters where the individual is granted some measure of personalized conviction, it is not really the preacher's business what goes on in your home. If this brand of theology and ecclesiology makes such a fuss over Roman Catholic confession, they can't really then invoke some kind of expectation that you are obligated to blab about everything you do.

In these churches where the congregations don't celebrate Christmas, is it out of a desire to please God or have they been so brainwashed by the pastor that they are afraid of ticking him off?

A pastor can repent of celebrating Christmas as much as he likes. However, it is really not his place to homiletically manipulate and coerce you into doing so.

By Frederick Meekins

Christianity & The New Liberalism

Click On The Headline

Now, on his commercial where he says that he and Gloria Copeland are married forever, does Kenneth Copeland speak rhetorically about this life or has he adopted the Mormon teaching on marriage. Might as well. Sounds like his old pal Pope Francis is adopting a more Mormon understanding of Creation.

(Audio) Has The Pope Abandoned Christianity In Favor Of A Platonic Mormonism?

Wednesday, October 29

Presbyterian Minister Downplays Physiological Aspects Of Mental Illness

In an anti-Halloween sermon that dealt in part with demonic manifestations, Presbyterian Pastor Steven Dilday insisted that the cure to potential possession was the same irrespective of whether the particular case was real or more psychological in nature.

That is because it is ultimately Christ that delivers the victory.

And does that include maladies that were once considered demonic in origin such as epilepsy or schizophrenia?

It might be the role of the minister to provide prayer in the resolution of these afflictions as well.

But if the cause of the illness lies in the realm of the biologically physiological, does not Christ also work through a physician for the alleviation of that variety of suffering?

By Frederick Meekins

Are Christian Broadcasters Losing Resolve To Stand Against Transgenderism?

In coverage of an incident where parents were not informed that a deranged sex fiend identifying itself as a female was allowed to change in the presence of minors actually configured as such genetically, the hosts of Standing Up For The Truth went out of their way to point out that it would be inappropriate to judge the student.

Comments crossing over the line into profanity would not be publicly acceptable.

But isn't there a place for good old fashioned judgment and shame?

This student wasn't caught in his own home crossdressing.

If this behavior is not to be subject to appropriate condemnation, is it really all that wrong to begin with?

How do we know that the lad in question really identifies as a woman or simply had an overwhelming compulsion to view a lush, emerging bosom?

If a boy wiggled his way into the girls changing area for that reason would Christian broadcasters be fumbling all over themselves verbally in regards to a school system that applauded such deviancy?

Yet isn't that lewdness less morally depraved than someone so obsessed with the body of the opposite gender that they are willing to have themselves mutilated in pursuit of such lust?

By Frederick Meekins

The Christian Origins Of Halloween

Click On The Headline

The Lutheran Reformation & Education

Click On The Headline

Hell Underlies Heaven's Initial Appeal

A blog posted at Patheos,com titled “What Christianity Without Hell Looks Like” claims that a more authentic expression of this particular world faith would be possible without the concept of a potentially punitive destination in the Afterlife being held over the heads of humanity.

The author writes, “In short, a Christianity without hell would be a fearless, trusting, loving, divinely inspired source of good in the world.”

Maybe so.

But it must asked, what then is the point?

For if either we all get to Heaven or Heaven is as nonexistent as this mythologized Hell, why bother going out of one's way to consider the claims of the Gospel message or to abide by the basic rigors of Biblical revelation?

As much as these progressives brainwashed to oppose the notion of enlightened are loathe to admit it, there are few motivators greater than an aversion to pain and suffering.

by Frederick Meekins

Monday, October 27

In an anti-Halloween sermon, a pastor showed the congregation a picture of himself in a costume as a child. If Halloween is so wicked, isn’t that the equivalent of a repentant adult film star showing a clip of one of her pornos?

Ministers Condemning Trick-Or-Treat Excuse Their Own Halloween Participation

In a tirade against Halloween, it was assured that, while the autumnal celebration is not referenced directly, the Bible does speak about the works of the devil.

So does that include pastors that can't keep their hands off the teen girls (and shockingly even the teen boys these days) in the congregation?

Since a shockingly high number of these incidents now occur in the ranks of Independent Baptist Churches now that this profound evil has burned its way through the Roman Catholicism, to avoid the appearance of evil and to be separate from these unclean things, does that mean the Christian ought to avoid independent fundamental Baptist churches for the sake of their testimonies as well?

In their annual tirades against Halloween, often aging ministers excuse their past participation in this celebration by insisting that the confectionary collection ritual did not mean back then what it does today.

To justify not only their abstention from the holiday but calling into question the profession of faith of any Christian caught participating as well, often ghastly atrocities that may or may not have actually taken place are elaborated as the sources from which these customs are alleged to have originated.

So unless there has been some kind of chronometric discombobulation where the time stream has become unhinged, even if these ministers are on the declining side of fifty in the their onward perambulation towards the century mark, these pulpiteers are still younger than the evils that they are referencing.

To get around the question that pops into the mind of the discerning of why it was acceptable for the Christian youth of fifty or sixty years ago to Trick Or Treat but a transgression bordering on the unpardonable for the youth of today to participate in the same form of merriment, the geezers at Southwest Radio Ministries concocted a novel but logically questionable justification..
Back when they were wee tots, America was a Judeo-Christian nation.

However, going door to door to collect candy (even if the local preacher doesn't place his hands where he has no business and will land him on an offender registry) will mentally warp the youth of today in these philosophically confused times.

It is still never satisfactorily explained how carving a pumpkin or cavorting about in an amusing but tasteful costume will cause one to apostatize from the faith later down the road.

It seems ministers and clergy that admit to having done one thing still not sounding very repentant about it while demanding another of those under their teaching would be the greater threat of tempting people away from the faith.

It has been suggested that, instead of handing out candy for Halloween, that the Christian should give out Gospel tracts.

But if Halloween in general and Trick Or Treat in particular are so inherently evil, applying this kind of logic to another setting, would placing a gospel tract into an exotic dancer's thong rather than dollar bills justify attendance at a strip club?

By Frederick Meekins

Saturday, October 25

Shouldn't Christians Be More Outraged At Scripture Twisting Than Trick Or Treating?

In an anti-Halloween sermon, a pastor quoted I Thessalonians 5:7, which reads, “For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night.”

In the exegesis that followed, the minister expounded that it was nearly a sin to do anything at night other than sleep as if to do so were some kind of mark of evil.

But what if you are a nocturnal type that is more alert at night?

Or what if, no matter what you do, you tend not to sleep the whole night through?

But is the text really so much about the condemnation of any activity at night other than slumber?

Earlier in the passage, the text emphasizes that the Day of the Lord is at hand.

The verses that follow remind the believer that we do not belong to darkness.

There is not much argument that significant carousing takes place while many of the more industrious and diligent are at home resting up for work the next day.

However, from the passage, one could just as legitimately conclude that both sleep and drunkenness are more metaphors for a lack of discernment and awareness.

The drunken could be viewed as those so overwhelmed by the despair of the world that the turn to overwhelming distraction.

The asleep are those that just don't give a tinker's you know what.

From such a comparison, a case could be made that the drunken might be better off because at least they are troubled by some kind of nagging sense that something is not right in the world.

If a pastor is going to position themselves as being so spiritual as to take a hardline position against Halloween, shouldn't they at least be as cautious as to consider the verse of scripture immediately prior to the one they intend to bash over the heads of those that do not agree with their interpretation of certain secondary matters?

I Thessalonians 5:6 counsels, “Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober.”

This portion of the epistle under consideration is similar in motif to Christ's parable of the virgins in Matthew 25 that let their lamps go out waiting for the groom to arrive at the marriage feast.

If the passage is to be utilized to condemn Halloween on the grounds that it prompts people to participate in nocturnal activities other than slumber, shouldn't the next sermon in the series aim its condemnation at the mattress or pillow industry for abetting recuperative unconsciousness?

For in the passage, sleep is not portrayed all that positively either.

By Frederick Meekins

Sunday, October 19

Pastor Baffled Why Christians Reluctant To Embrace Death At The Hands Of ISIS Or Ebola

A pastor mused during a sermon that he wondered why so many Christians were reluctant to die.

It was then remarked you can either die at the hands of ISIS or from Ebola, so you might as well have a positive attitude about it.

Do those making such statements in a religious frenzy actually stop to consider how it is to perish as a result of such necrotic modalities?

Regarding the concern Christians often express regarding death.

Why are we at fault regarding the survival instinct God has imbued into nearly every form of life?

Furthermore, if Scripture says that those that hate God love death, wouldn't it therefore follow that as the most correct religion that Christians would be the most averse to this disputed metabolic state?

By Frederick Meekins

Friday, October 17

Could The President's UN Remarks Undermine Religious Liberty

In an address before the United Nations, President Obama proclaimed to the planetary assembly, “No children --- anywhere --- should be educated to hate people.”

The President went on to clarify, “There should be no tolerance of so-called clerics who call upon people to harm innocents.”

The President suggested that this could be accomplished in part by composing a “new compact...to eradicate the corruption of young minds by violent ideology” and by “contesting the space that terrorists occupy --- including the Internet and social media.”

Such proposed policies sounds like a prudent course of action to take against those out to destroy the American way of life.

But in deciphering the double talk that spews from the mouths of political elites like phlegm during flu season, the discerning grow concerned as to whether or not such rhetorical pronouncements will only be used against the jhadist menace.

Given the President's fundamental ideological orientation as a socialistic secularist, what safeguards are to be put in place that these strategies won't be used against Americans of a conservative Evangelical or Roman Catholic persuasion?

For example, when the average American hears Obama insist that no child anywhere should be taught to hate other people, images of toddlers and preschoolers being indoctrinated by a giant plushy mouse as to the glories of not only killing Christians and Jews but of their own suicide martyrdoms.

However, in the eyes of the crowd that Obama runs with, propagating hate can consist of little more than publicly reading those passages of Scripture critical of homosexuality or peacefully insisting that professing belief in Christ is the only path to eternal salvation.

In fact, columnist Mark Steyn was dragged before a Canadian human rights tribunal for remarks not too much more rhetorically forceful than those made by Obama on the floor of the United Nations by simply exposing what jihadists had themselves articulated.

Obama suggested that different faiths should come together to speak out against this violent worldview.

It depends upon what the President means by that.

Fine and dandy if he means a respect for human decency being enunciated individually from behind each pulpit in a wide variety of houses of worship.

However, if the President is suggesting that widely diverging faiths are obligated to open their pulpits to one another free of doctrinal criticism as to where these guests measure up and fall theologically short, the government will have taken a step one too many to the point where its agencies will likely become the next great threat to our own liberties and well being once the identifiable terrorist menace has been identified and appropriately dispatched.

By Frederick Meekins

Thursday, October 16

Naive Lutheran Would Welcome Homiletical Interrogation

Speaking in regards to the subpoena of the sermons of a number of Houston pastors opposing a “gender equality” statute, Dr. Scott Murray of that city's Luther Memorial Church remarked on an episode of Isssues Etc. that he would welcome such an opportunity to have his homilitetical output scrutinized by the state.

He ruminated that it might be the only time that these magistrates might be exposed to a nonlegalistic version of Christianity.

But is it really the proper function of civil authorities to deploy its policing powers to penalize doctrinal expression that has not veered beyond the boundaries of verbalization into the territory of physical or financial abuse?

Wednesday, October 15

Pastor's Advice Could Result In Prolonged Abuse

In a sermon comparing those that express anything but positive comments to the Ebola virus, a pastor suggested that we ought to concentrate solely on the good in our marriages, families, and churches.

But in the world in which we live, shouldn't that instruction be conditioned to apply only to minor everyday slights?

For example, should a wife say, “My husband only backhands me once in a while, but he certainly buys me pretty things.”

Should the husband say, “I might have caught her in the backyard next door squirming around in the neighbor's lap, but I should just be satisfied because she's the only woman that would consider marrying me.”

And what about church?

Should it be said, “Well, pastor might skim off the collection plate when he thinks no one is looking and, sure, he cops a feel of the teen girls occasionally, but boy can he preach a sermon condemning nearly every last aspect of the contemporary world and how we ought to avoid contact with any church that doesn't embrace our doctrinal peculiarities in their unaltered totality.”

by Frederick Meekins

Devout Catholics Stand Erect Against Homosexual Penetration

Click On The Headline

Tuesday, October 14

Reflections Upon Ebola

Thomas Friedan of the Centers For Disease Control remarked regarding the Texas nurse that contracted Ebola in the course of treating a patient with the plague that protocols were obviously violated.

In other words, it is her own expletive fault.

So does the government's medical establishment enunciate the same flippant dismissiveness regarding those that contract sexually transmitted diseases?

Eventually, Friedan did apologize for his remarks.

But if a public health functionary would still need to be punished for verbalizing such sentiments in reference to certain celebrated lifestyles, then why not in this particular instance where a dedicated individual was attempting to assist the suffering and afflicted rather than satisfying some carnal desire?

It was pointed out on Hannity that 900,000 Africans could perish in the Ebola epidemic.

This will undoubtedly rank among the great disasters of the 21st century.

The bubonic plague was one of the events demarcating the close of the Middle Ages and the commencement of the Modern Era?

Likewise, are we witnessing the close of this epoch even apart from any eschatological considerations. How much of the present order will be left standing this time next year?

by Frederick Meekins

Friday, October 10

Wednesday, October 8

Religious Leftists Agitate Politically

According to the 10/15/2014 issue of the Christian Century, a coalition of religious leftists is launching a campaign to encourage voter registration in low income and immigrant communities.

In other words, populations likely to elect candidates more likely to promise the largest handout payments.

This mobilization effort plans to organize under the banner of Let My People Vote.

Mind you, these are likely the very same agitators insisting that the pro-life, pro-family, and pro-American policy preferences of Religious Right organizations such as Moral Majority and the Christian Coalition cheapen the cause of the Gospel.

The Roman Catholic Church will probably lavish praise and honor for heroism all over the missionary priest that died from Ebola. So is the institution going to do anything for the nursing assistant that contracted Ebola from the priest?

Broadcaster Hints Ebola Plague Could Be Retribution For Violating Mosaic Dietary Guidelines

On the 8/5/2014 broadcast of Viewpoint, Chuck Crismier examined the threat posed by the Ebola virus.

In his analysis, he pointed out that the virus can be spread through the fruit bat, which a number of Africans consume as part of their native cuisine.

Crismier interjected that such a practice is not Biblical.

If the apologist is insisting that Old Testament dietary regulations are binding upon New Testament non-Jewish believers, he is not correct.

In Matthew 15:11, Christ Himself counsels that an individual is not defiled by what goes into one's mouth but rather by what comes out of the elocutionary orifice.

This New Testament alteration of the Old Testament law seems to be sustained by a number of other passages.

In I Timothy 4:4, the Apostle Paul asserts that ALL foods (not just the list of Mosaic kosher foods) can be enjoyed with thanksgiving.

To clarify that God was the God of both the Jews and the Gentiles, in Acts 10 Peter was instructed to eat from a selection of foods that up until that point that he had been conditioned to avoid as unclean.

God would not have compelled Peter to do something that was still a violation of God's law.

It's not like Peter was told to marry a man or to offer worship up towards a false god.

It is a correct observation that very few Americans would want to eat a bat.

However, is Chuck Crismier going to insist that he has never eaten or since repented of partaking of crab, shrimp, or lobster which are also forbidden under Old Testament dietary guidelines since these creatures are essentially underwater coach roaches?

Likewise, if Chuck Crismier believes this strongly about strict adherence to the Mosaic law in its entirety, does he intend to broadcast an episode of his Viewpoint news and cultural analysis program condemning the Duck Dynasty clan for the consumption of yet another food clearly forbidden in the pages of Old Testament revelation?

And what about the fast food industry such as Burger King and McDonald's?

A common complaint among certain factions of the more doctrinally enthusiastic is that contemporary Evangelicals are insufficiently Hebraic in their approach to the interpretation and application of Scripture.

So if Africans are to be condemned for consuming bats which might be one of the very few food items available to such impoverished populations, does one have to be consistent and declare an all out crusade against the All American cheeseburger?

By Frederick Meekins

Pope Threatens Income Redistribution In The Name Of Humane Immigration Policy

Click On The Headline

Sunday, October 5

Is The Southern Baptist Missions President More Interested In Your Stuff Than Your Soul?

There is no pleasing some theologians unless you word to the most exacting detail everything the way that they would.

A Facebook meme attributed to Southern Baptist International Missions Board president David Platt is quoted as saying the following: “Accept him? Do we really think Jesus needs our acceptance? Don't we need Him? Jesus is no longer one to be accepted or invited in but one who is infinitely worthy of our immediate and total surrender.”

Is there really a reason to get one's backside up on one's shoulders over a pastor or evangelist that phrases the soteriological appeal in terms of accepting Christ as Lord and Savior?

Granted, as part of the infinite triune Godhead, Jesus can hobble along quite fine without us no matter how much Pastor Platt believes world missions might collapse without his particular brand of religious over-enthusiasm.

What it simply means when someone accepts Jesus as Lord and Savior is that the person assents to the truth and validity of the claims and conditions made in the Gospels.

What is interesting is Rev. Platt's phraseology of immediate and total surrender.

Traditionally, that is what occurs when the sincere individual comes to a saving knowledge of Christ, meaning one makes a concerted effort with the help of the Holy Spirit to resist those more sinful desires.

However, what Platt may mean by that, given the perspective taken in a number of his books such as “Radical” and his sermons available on sites such as Youtube, is a bit different.

To Platt, it is not so much that your life and possessions are Christ's to determine directly how these are to be used to His glory but rather that is to be determined by your betters up the ecclesiastical food chain.

According to sermons from the likes of Rev. Platt, in taking up your cross, it is not sufficient to endure a particular struggle or trial that has come into your life but rather that you are to think of yourself as on the way to execution in terms that you are supposed to be wracked with profound guilt for a standard of living above that of the subsistence level.

However, religious superstars such as David Platt are to enjoy a semi-luxurious lifestyle flying across the country and around the globe having accolades and wads of cash tossed in their direction over how wonderful they are for being outraged that you have what you have.

Christ Himself says in Revelation 3:20, “Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.”

The text does not say that Jesus will beat down the door.

Customarily, when someone knocks at the door, it is your right to either open the door to invite them into your dwelling or to decline their request along with whatever it is they might be happening to bring you.

But then again, we are in the age where apparently the theological celebrities know more than Christ ever did.

By Frederick Meekins

Thursday, October 2

Pastor Apparently Selective In What Pagan Practices He Condemns

In a sermon titled “The Satanic Deception Of Halloween” posted at SerrmonAudio.com, Pastor James Cooley details the history of how black cats came to be connected with this autumnal celebration as the spirit familiars of witches and as a result of an alleged Druidic belief that cats were the reincarnated souls of evil people.

To this, the podcaster interviewing Pastor Cooley remarked that he knew there was a reason why he did not like cats.

Pastor Cooley concurred with an “Amen.”

But who is it that created cats?

Surely it was not Satan.

Was it not the God that we are supposed to be so dedicated to that we can't even participate in a festival that does not possess any meaning for most other than dressing up in a silly costume to collect candy from door to door?

Cats are not inherently evil.

That is merely the connotation they have been imbued with from a cultural and literary standpoint derived from subjective existential or psychological sources.

In other words, from nothing more than what someone happened to think or feel regarding them.

Should something be abandoned because a number construe a conceptual or ontological category to be evil rather than it actually being so?

So does this include Fundamentalist Baptist Churches?

For years, that form of ecclesiology's most ardent adherents rightly condemned the pedophile scandals that wracked the Roman Catholic Church.

However, it turns out that nearly the same perversion had gripped a number of hardline Independent Fundamentalist ministries.

Therefore, isn't it logical to contend that there have been more innocent people hurt in a spirit of appalling wanton sin perpetrated by those that should have known better than were ever hurt by cats exhibiting a similar degree of deliberate malice?

So does that mean we should refrain from attendance at these particular houses of worship to avoid offending the weaker brother?

Often, the conspicuously pious will homiletically insist that Halloween ought to be avoided altogether not so much to refrain from actual wrongdoing but to avoid the appearance of such and out of the necessity to separate from unclean things as counseled by Scripture.

As such, shouldn't we also consider the source of this sentiment against cats if the propriety or impropriety of a thing is to be determined not so much by how it is practiced today but rather by ideas affiliated with it at the time a custom came into existence?

By the pastor's own admission, this particular prejudice is supposedly Druid in origin.

Thus, if we are to severe all connections with Halloween for being pagan in origin, why not this unfounded contempt for felines as well?

By Frederick Meekins

Albert Mohler Praises Islamist Call To Reduce Women To The Status Of Breeding Cows

Click On The Headline

Abortion Tourism A Growing Tennessee Industry

Click On The Headline