Saturday, October 17, 2009

“Sow the wind, Reap the Whirlwind”

Having undermined truth, beginning in the realm of religion and philosophy, Obama's climate experts are surprised and hurt that no one believes them. On a more practical level, liberals haven't convinced their own followers to get out of their SUV's and walk, so why should anyone else be convinced of a crisis in how we use the resources of God's earth?

Friday, October 16, 2009

The experts have undermined their own credibility

...from this thread:

Thanks for bringing up science and communication. There is indeed a problem: in spite of the obvious health impacts of a lousy diet—and I'm not just talking about the obesity epidemic—people continue to believe food ads: “eat what we tell you to”. There is a widespread cynicism, and it is not wholly the public's fault. The public is lied to all the time: Reagan lied about invading Central America in the 80's, Clinton lied about his affair in the 90's, and so on. The whole notion of truth has broken down, and scientists and other academicians have actually led the way. People have noticed that supposedly intelligent people lie all the time, and aren't trustworthy. The lie that science disproves the Bible, for example, or the embarrassing anti-Christian diatribes by Sam Harris, et al, show an utter lack of accountability. The distinction between Hollywood make believe and newscasters has become pretty slim. bbuudd said:“Simply ignoring the plight of the powerless, the poor, and the weak (ignored by the powerful, strong, and wealthy) because it costs too much is not an acceptable argument."
I couldn't agree more. Al Gore ought not to be bashed, indeed, but he needs to be held accountable for his lavish lifestyle by the media, and by Jim Wallis and company. Jim never talks about personal self indulgence; it's as if he's given up on sexual discipline and the discipline of searching for the truth. If we, as a society have stopped believing in the truth, why should anyone search for it? Why should anyone listen to a self proclaimed expert? When there was truth, there were experts. Now, as a logical consequence of the tenets of our state religion of secularism, neither exist.

Neo-pelagianism, our State Religion

A young relative of mine joined the “Youth Climate Action Network” with the best of intentions. The meetings are held in places with excellent access via public transportation. And she wants a ride in an automobile all the time, at a pound of CO2 emitted per mile! What are they teaching her?? She's a good kid; the fault is with a system of adults who say “Let someone else do it, at the government's bidding.” While technological solutions have relevance, allow me to paraphrase Jacques Ellul and point out that it's idolatrous to believe in a merely political or technological solution to a spiritual problem. Yet our state religion teaches faith in human perfectibility, and that those who believe in human sin and a loving, omnipotent and just LORD of Creation are old fashioned, or fundamentalists, or even worse.

Saturday, October 10, 2009

An honest question

We hear a lot these days about laws designed to change OTHER people's behavior. Didn't being a liberal and an environmentalist used to mean "Small is Beautiful" "Living More with Less" and "Tread lightly on the Earth"???
Now Al Gore gets a Nobel for living in a uselessly large and extravagant mansion, and Obama gets a Nobel just for being alive. Am I missing something, or are most of the liberals I know, and know of, hypocrites? Is anyone celebrated for simple living anymore? Naturally, the spoiled rich folks who are TV's talking heads can hardly celebrate folks whose lifestyles put them to shame.
Anyway, enlighten me, correct me, talk to me....

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

More than you asked for, sir.

Qui Verbo Dei contempserunt, eis auferetur etiam verbum hominis.
They that have despised the Word of God, from them shall the word of man also be taken away.

Sunday, October 4, 2009

Progress: the more things change the more they stay the same

“Progress” in 1914 meant we had learned how to kill millions, and could call it “warfare.”
Progress” in 1939 meant we could kill millions of undesirables and call it “evolution of the race.”
in 1974 meant we learned we could kill unwanted millions and call it “medicine”

Thursday, October 1, 2009

Sojourners brought up God's Law again here I go:
I'd like to comment on a Christian and his/her relation to the Law. They are indeed the “Terms” of another covenant, which does not bind us. We are bound under the Covenant of Grace. But the Ten Commandments are still a perfect statement of God's views. God hasn't, won't, and doesn't need to change his mind. A God any less perfect would be unworthy of our worship. Jesus not only reaffirmed God's commands, but made a few of them much more difficult to follow (adultery and murder). Interestingly, it seems Sabbath keeping was made a tad easier by “it was made for humans, you know” which says to me that it's perfectly OK to think about what they mean—not as critics, but as those who seek to understand. Another important thing to think about: does this particular law make any sense as public policy in a secular society? For many of the Ten, the answer is, obviously, "No." But that doesn't mean Christians should be shy about "this is what I believe." In Psalm 19, David said “the law of the LORD is perfect”
I am heartened to see that “LetJusticeRollDown” [another poster at] longs to follow in the footsteps of David, the one “after God's own heart.”
Blessings, for Shalom, the loving reign of God's good laws,