Alpha & Omega Ministries Apologetics Blog

Archives
Download Greek & Hebrew Fonts Here

The Stench of a Rotten Corpse

08/07/2006 - James White

Dutch society died in the realm of morality quite some time ago. The bloated corpse, however, hangs around. Hat tip Shamgar and crewbear. Oh, by the way, do their arguments sound hauntingly familiar? Like the arguments used by the homosexuals only a few years ago? Hmmmm.

22:40:16 - Category: Christian Worldview - Link to this article -

I've Been Saying This for Years Now...

05/02/2007 - James White

   Homosexuals are suppressing the truth of God in their lives. It is a difficult thing to wrestle constantly with your conscience, to put out so much effort into convincing yourself that your sin is good, to call light darkness and darkness light. It is toilsome. Because of their state, homosexuals are particularly angered by anyone who would say "homosexuality is unnatural; it is directly opposed to God's creative order, it is sinful, life-destroying, and God demands you repent from it." And so, they are willing to lend their considerable financial (and hence politically powerful) support to any politician who will help them to suppress such speech, or to put it bluntly, to give them super-rights. They wish to be able to say, and do, anything at all: but, at the same time, they are willing to see the rights of others, especially their free-speech rights, denied.
   Now that the party that is most in support of homosexuality and its agenda is in (slight) control of the legislative branch of the US government, the laws that are being used to suppress the open and honest preaching of the Christian faith in Europe, Canada, and Australia, are being promoted here. Under the guise of "hate crimes legislation," HR-1592 is making its way through Congress, the next major step in criminalizing Christianity in the West. Robert Gagnon has the story here.
   Our society's hatred of God's law is so deep, so pervasive, that I honestly see this not as something that will bring God's wrath--we are well beyond that point--but as evidence of God's wrath. If my generation passes away without facing the very same seizure of our property, denial of free speech rights, and even imprisonment, faced by our brothers and sisters at the hands of Muslims, Hindus, and Communists around the world, surely the next generation will face such hardships. May God grant us strength and insight to use our current freedoms to form for the next generations a solid foundation upon which they can stand against the fierce storm of the world's hatred.

12:08:06 - Category: General Apologetics - Link to this article -

Signs of Judgment

09/16/2006 - James White

   Gay police in the UK demonstrate hatred for the Holy Scriptures. (Can you imagine how many people would die in riots and murders across the world if such a picture appeared with the Qur'an instead of the Bible?)
   Firemen Punished for Refusing to Distribute Leaflets at Gay Pride March. Anyone who has seen video of these debauched events knows why these men did not wish to participate. This is nothing less than persecution of Christians and state-sponsored persecution of people who are moral enough to find prancing homosexuals repulsive. This is what the homosexual lobby wants, folks. They not only desire the end of free speech, they want their views forced upon everyone else. They will accept nothing less. (Hat tip to legolas from the UK).
   Pope Stops Short of Apology. As well he should. When we cannot speak the truth, when we cannot even admit history itself, the battle is over.

Meanwhile, Muslims burned the Pope in effigy, and firebombed churches, all in glorious testimony to how peaceful they are! We need to realize that for Islam, the Pope is the head of Christianity. Very few understand the Reformation, and hence they see anything the Pope says as representing all of Christianity. So, if they can silence the Pope, in their minds, they have silenced Christianity. Their demands in this case, of course, are utterly irrational. They are demanding the same level of control of speech as the homosexuals in the links above: total suppression of any and all criticism of their position is all they will accept. You cannot discuss Mohammad outside of abject acceptance of his claimed prophethood. And if you say jihad is evil, well, that's evil, too! There is nothing logical or rational about this worldview, and "moderate" Muslims who actually attempt to defend Islam rationally well know they must be silent when Islam takes the majority and shariah is established.
Let me be very clear here. The Pope said nothing wrong, and if he dares apologize for claiming the right to address history and the issues that relate to Islam's past, every single Muslim toting an AK-47 in Iraq or throwing firebombs at churches elsewhere will see that as an utter capitulation on the part of all of Christianity, whether they have a clue what the Pope was originally talking about or not.

15:31:33 - Category: Christian Worldview - Link to this article -

Don't Talk About Us!

08/27/2008 - James White

Back on June 30th I posted a short note regarding the abuse inherent in depriving a little child of a father and a mother that comes from "same sex unions." I made reference to a picture, posted on the Internet, in a major news source (MSNBC) as a glowing example of just how self-centered "same sex unions" have to be by nature. Here is the article I posted.

I was contacted by "jennifer kozumplik/nicole webber" (name provided on the contact page) and told to remove the image, found in the above linked article. I have done so pending my getting legal advice on the matter. You will find the image on the following websites, and something tells me "jennifer kozumplik/nicole webber" haven't contacted USA Today, MSNBC, etc., demanding that the picture be removed. As I have said many times, and as more and more people are discovering, homosexuals do not ask for equal rights: they want super-rights, including the ability to shut down all expression of belief that reminds them of the moral evil by which they have chosen to identify themselves. This is a glaring example. Note the use of this picture by such national online sources as MSNBC and USA Today. Google will provide you with lots of examples, such as this one.

The two individuals have likewise posted similar pictures on Facebook; even those without a Facebook account (such as yours truly) can see them.

Even Flickr has them as well.

I wonder if they wrote to The Ledger as well? That one even provides the very same image they have demanded I remove in a zoomable form.

Clearly, these two individuals are not camera shy, and they surely did not grant "rights" to all of these sources to post their pictures. No, the reason for this is clear: homosexuals use the cover of "tolerance" as a demand for "silence" on the part of those of us who still identify moral evil as moral evil. These individuals are glorying in their rebellion against God's moral law, and they are damaging not only themselves in their rebellion, but others too young to even understand what is being done to them. But they are intent upon making sure that no one reminds them of these facts that they know all too well.

I have been asking those "in the know," and since the picture is an AP picture, all one needs is an account with AP to post it. These individuals do not have the right to selectively determine which sites post the pictures and which do not---they lost that right when they allowed the pictures to be taken in the first place. But their demands cannot change the reality of their actions, and the actions of all of those rushing off to California so that they can pretend that marriage is a term humans get to define (instead of an institution God Himself ordained) before common sense returns to that state (Lord willing) in November. My original post only used their picture as an illustration of a general moral evil that is being promoted in our day. They are not alone in putting their own sexual desires before the good even of themselves, let alone of a little child. It is the very essence of homosexuality, and the very essence of man-centered Western culture.

13:07:00 - Category: Christian Worldview - Link to this article -

Odds and Ends

09/06/2006 - James White

First, an "I told you so" that is not much of one. I have said many times that homosexual activists cannot allow freedom of speech or expression. Their ultimate goal is to silence anyone who would even whisper God's standards. They do not want equal rights, they want super-rights, all based upon sexual behavior. And as long as they have deep pockets and politicians can "use" them and be used by them, they will continue racking up success in their campaign. So I have repeatedly said the days are coming, and indeed, are here, where open and honest discussion of what the Bible itself says about homosexuality will be limited and in fact will put one in danger of the authorities. Here is a story illustrating this very thing from the UK. Note that this special "police unit" exists not to protect British citizens from criminals, but instead is there to support homosexuals! And note especially the admission that the arrest was based simply upon the leaflets containing relevant biblical citations! You have to wonder where all the proponents of "free speech" are hiding these days. Hat tip to PC.
Next, I have been informed by eyewitnesses that Jerry Falwell, in announcing the upcoming debate at the Thomas Road Baptist Church, referred to myself and Tom Ascol as "hyper Calvinists." This is most disappointing. For one thing, I'm sure the real hypers are truly upset that we are taking over their turf and illegitimately at that! They sure know we are anything but hyper-Calvinists. But I had hoped for better from Dr. Falwell, who should know that there are historical definitions of these terms and that it is inaccurate to use the phrase of myself or Dr. Ascol. I will have to write and correct his misapprehension. We wouldn't want too many flaming straw men in that fine new sanctuary! The fire marshal would not like it!

11:41:23 - Category: Misc - Link to this article -

More on Homosexual Uber-Rights

11/19/2009 - James White

I have been saying for years, homosexuals do not want equal rights. They want uber-rights. They want to silence anyone who would identify their sexual perversion as sin. Why? Romans 1 tells you. Suppressing the truth is tiring, and for the homosexual, it is a full-time job. They cannot silence their conscience, but they can try to silence anyone who would remind them of it. And so, they seek to force us, by rule of law, to honor, or admire, in the words of President Obama, their sin. Note this article from the UK:

Homosexual activists are lobbying to change the law hoping that, in the future, churches may be forced to host gay civil partnership services.

At present the gay lobby group Stonewall is seeking an amendment to the Equality Bill which will allow churches to host the services if they wish.

But Ben Summerskill, head of Stonewall, said: “Right now, faiths shouldn’t be forced to hold civil partnerships, although in ten or 20 years, that may change.”

Mr Summerskill said his organisation was working with the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement (LGCM) and the Metropolitan Community Church.

Rev Sharon Ferguson of the LGCM told Pink News, a gay news website, she wanted “equality” for civil partnerships and marriage.

This is why there is no protection at all in the addition of "free speech" protections in hate crimes laws, etc. We need to realize they are taking things one step at a time: get the law in place, then whittle away at the protections until you accomplish your goal. Do it slowly enough not to raise too loud an alarm, but never, ever give up. And given that these people define themselves by their deviancy, they will dedicate themselves each and every day to their task.

11:38:56 - Category: Christian Worldview - Link to this article -

The State vs. Christians: Canada Joins those Nations that Prohibit Free Speech and Gospel Preaching

06/09/2008 - James White

The speed at which the governments of the secular West are turning on the Christians living within their borders is a sure sign of the judgment of God coming upon this culture. It truly has come to the point where I question the wisdom of my ever going north of the border again, given that it is without a question true that I could be charged with a "hate crime" in Canada this very day. My debates with Lynn and Spong, my book on the topic, my preaching, would all now expose me---and more importantly, all believing Christians in Canada today---to the rebuke of the "law" in Canada. Free speech? Forget it! Homosexuals now have super-rights! You can't even express opposition to their sexual deviancy!
I am referring to the decision handed down by the Alberta Human Rights Commission Friday against pastor Stephen Boissoin and The Concerned Christian Coalition Inc. I will not repeat an overview of the case, as it is found here and here, only to note that this has to do with the outrageous action of Boissoin in sending a letter to the newspaper that was published voicing opposition to homosexuality and its impact on society. Here is a sample of the terrible things Boissoin said:

Children as young as five and six years of age are being subjected to psychologically and physiologically damaging pro-homosexual literature and guidance in the public school system; all under the fraudulent guise of equal rights.

This basic expression of a logical, rational, perfectly consistent and Christian viewpoint is now officially illegal in Canada. Dr. Darren Lund, a homosexual activist, filed a complaint, and now gets $5,000 for the "suffering" he has experienced by the bare expression of Boissoin's words! Sound completely impossible? It isn't. Free speech is gone in Canada, and the secularists have taken over the key positions in government so that from those positions they can do exactly what they are now doing: silence Christians and the proclamation of the Gospel.
I downloaded the pdf of the "decision" of these anti-Christian secularists. Note the following:

14. The Panel finds, and the Panel orders as follows:

a. That Mr. Boissoin and The Concerned Christian Coalition Inc. shall cease publishing in newspapers, by email, on the radio, in public speeches, or on the internet, in future, disparaging remarks about gays and homosexuals. Further, they shall not and are prohibited from making disparaging remarks in the future about Dr. Lund or Dr. Lund's witnesses relating to their involvement in this complaint. Further, all disparaging remarks versus homosexuals are directed to be removed from current web sites and publications of Mr. Boissoin and The Concerned Christian Coalition Inc.

Now keep in mind, the entirety of the Christian proclamation is "offensive" to many, hence, "disparaging remarks" can be, well, anything. So, this is a legal demand that Pastor Boissoin cease saying anything in any forum whatsoever about homosexuality. Period. Shut up. And since I am sure the preaching of the Bible constitutes "in public speeches" in Canada, this is an open unadulterated attack upon Christianity by a legal governmental agency. To call it anything else is to have one's head way, way too far down in the sand.
The entire document is simply frightening in its mindless secularism. Boissoin is told he must apologize publicly for holding the historical Christian position! What an audacious demand! Can you imagine! Orwell was off by only 24 years, to be sure. But what is truly sickening is the fact that the decision is plainly intended to function as a chilling influence upon all other Christians. By prosecuting this one pastor the intended effect is to silence all Christians in general. I quote:

8. The Panel agrees also with Dr. Lund's submission that hate propaganda remedies should have a symbolic and educational value as stated in the Citron case:

Any remedy awarded by this, or any Tribunal, will inevitably serve a number of purposes: prevention and elimination of discriminatory practices is only one of the outcomes flowing from an Order issued as a consequence of these proceedings. There is also a significant symbolic value in the public denunciation of the actions that are the subject of this complaint. Similarly, there is the potential educative and ultimately larger preventative benefit that can be achieved by open discussion of the principles enunciated in this or any Tribunal decision."

   Do you see that? "We will come after you and we will prosecute you if you dare give voice to Christian beliefs on homosexuality in Canada." I cannot possibly see how the Bible itself can long remain on the shelf in Canada in light of such judicial activism and anti-Christian bigotry. The irony is, this kind of decision is purposefully designed to inculcate--hatred of the Christian faith. And never forget it.
   Boissoin endured six years of persecution at the hands of the High Priests of Secularism in Canada. You cannot debate these people: they know they cannot win in that venue. They seek to silence the other side by force of "law." The militant jihadi does the same thing. Both have the same goal in mind: silencing those who would dare to point out that their arguments are without merit. Their methods are quite different, but their ends are the same: the suppression of truth.
   Should you watch these things and experience temptation to fear and distrust, remember: many have been the nations and cultures that have passed from the scene over the centuries due to their hatred of God's law. Justice will be done in the end, thankfully. Unrighteous judges should read the many warnings directed to them in Scripture. Meanwhile, Christians must pray for strength to stand firm in the face of those who would instruct them to be silent about the Gospel. "Whether it is right in the sight of God to give heed to you rather than to God, you be the judge; for we cannot stop speaking about what we have seen and heard" (Acts 4:19-20).

18:54:21 - Category: Christian Worldview - Link to this article -

More On the Death of Free Speech

04/22/2009 - James White

Last year I posted a blog article on the faux-marriage of Jennifer Kozumpli and Nicole Webber. These lesbians were pictured (one dressed as a man) holding an 18-month old girl, Sophie, which the caption identified as "their...daughter." I commented on how abusive it is to subject a child to such conditions, and how this again shows us how far our culture has descended into utter reprobation in its views.

You may recall that a while later I received a note demanding we take down the picture. I blogged the following at that time, and I note that the links are still active and accurate:

The two individuals have likewise posted similar pictures on Facebook; even those without a Facebook account (such as yours truly) can see them.

Even Flickr has them as well.

I wonder if they wrote to The Ledger as well? That one even provides the very same image they have demanded I remove in a zoomable form.

So today I was informed that a laywer from AP had sent us a cease and desist order. So I've once again removed the picture, though, you can see it, repeatedly, if you so desire, even with zoom capabilities, at all the links posted above. For, as we all know, the only reason the AP came after us is that a complaint was filed with them.

Compare this zealous activity with that of YouTube/Google. I noted last week that someone had posted a disgusting, vile, clearly illegal and slanderous video in which they used my own video, but cobbled together words and phrases from other videos, so as to accuse me of gross immorality. I informed YouTube/Google of the video. Last I checked, it is still posted. When I complained, I was told it wasn't a copyright issue! So I asked to be directed toward the forms I needed to fill out on other grounds, and I did not even get a reply to the request.

Once again we see the elevation of a sexually-defined minority to the position of a protected group of elites based upon the society's fear of "offense" of these elites, while, concurrently, there is an ever lessening concern for a much larger minority group's rights, all due to the "political correctness" of the day. Somehow, long, long ago, these words were written:

"If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you..." (John 15:18)

15:31:45 - Category: Christian Worldview - Link to this article -

Massachusetts Changes Name to Gomorrah

11/18/2003 - James White

Not that anyone is overly surprised. The decades of corruption of the judiciary (a fact openly acknowledged, at least by their actions, by one major political party) has led inevitably to the actions of the Massachusetts Supreme Court today. To quote Reuters:

In a 4-3 ruling that could make Massachusetts the first state to legalize gay marriage, the Supreme Judicial Court said the state may not deny the rights conferred by civil marriage to two individuals of the same sex who wish to marry.

Consider the contrast: Roy Moore is fired, the Ten Commandments are hidden in a closet, and Massachusetts grants the sacred status of marriage to homosexuals. Then again, is it really a contrast? Isn't Massachusetts just acting in harmony with those who could not bear to be reminded of God's law in Alabama? The same mindset that allows entire judicial panels to ignore the role of God in US history in Alabama leads them to redefine the entire structure of the society, and the nature of marriage in the process, in Massachusetts.

It truly makes one think through one's views on such issues as God's law and the basis of final judgment. I was watching one political leader over the weekend lying through his teeth, hiding the fact that he and his cohorts have decided that no man or woman who would ever, ever consider the facts about the murder of unborn children will ever sit upon a judicial bench again, and I thought to myself, "If such a man will not be judged for his actions in maintaining the Holocaust of the Unborn in this nation and around the world, then there is no justice at all."

How do we pray for nations like Australia, England, Canada, and now the United States---all of whom have heard God's truth with great clarity, and yet are intent, in the actions of their governments (and especially now in the actions of the New Priesthood of Rebellion, aka, the judiciary), upon throwing off all forms of restraint (while suppressing the proclamation of the gospel)? History says God normally deals with such nations with judgment that either brings repentance through difficulty and disaster, or through destruction itself. We cannot see the future, but we know this: we are to remain faithful no matter what the situation, no matter what the cost.

19:00:00 - Category: Christian Worldview - Link to this article -

A Picture of Child Abuse

06/30/2008 - James White

I was directed to this article about "Gay Marriages" (marriage, being defined by God, cannot be redefined by man, hence, these are not marriages at all, but celebrations of rebellion) and as I scanned down the page I encountered the picture found here. The AP picture by Tony Avelar carries the following caption:

Jennifer Kozumplik, left, and her partner of 17 years Nicole Webber, right, from Sacramento, Calif., hold their 18 month-old daughter Sophie as they pose for a photo after receiving their marriage license on the first day of same sex marriages at City Hall in San Francisco.

   As I stared at the picture I could not help but see only one thing: the selfish, self-centered abuse of a beautiful little child by two people committed to the fulfillment of their own desires. I once again immediately thought of the comments of Rosie O'Donnell. She was asked about her "son," and she said he has asked about where his daddy is. O'Donnell's response is the very essence of self-centeredness: "I tell him Mommy only likes other Mommies."
   It is a measure of the decay of Western culture that self-deception is the activity of the day. We constantly cry, "for the children, for the children!" while abusing them to no end in the service of ourselves. It is purposefully abusive of a child to consciously deny to them a mother and a father. It is even worse to warp them, from the start, by providing two mothers or two fathers, neither of which is actually a mother or a father, since, by definition, those terms are defined by the other. None of these abused children actually have a true father or a true mother. A father is a man who heads the household and loves his wife as himself; a mother is a female who bears the children and nurtures them, honoring and loving her husband. These role models are never perfect even in the best situations, but the fact that there is failure in true marriage is no excuse for the creation of faux-marriages.
   A further measure of the decay of our culture is the fact that men like myself will not long be allowed to deny the validity of these unions born of rebellion against God. Oh, I know, for the moment we are assured that we will not be forced to acknowledge these abominations before God, but let's be serious. Look north. Look at Canada. Look to Europe. Homosexual activists, and the foolish politicians who pander to them, are not content with "equality." They want uber-rights. They want to silence any reminder of their sin and rebellion. They will not stop until we are silenced or, in God's grace, repentance comes to a nation, bringing His law back into the consciousness of the populace, resulting in homosexuality once again being seen for what it is: a shameful distortion and perversion of human sexuality. Of course, God may not grant repentance to that nation: He may well replace that nation with one that will hear His law. But in any case, anyone who trusts in the promises of the politicians that the "religious" will not be forced to acknowledge these "unions" should consider buying stock in companies catering to the Y2K problem.
   But while I still have the freedom to say it, I will, and clearly: it is nothing short of child abuse to subject a little one to constant exposure to homosexuality and its perversion of human relationships. Homosexuals cannot reproduce naturally, of course, so they must do so through the perversion of the minds and morals of others. And they have found willing allies in politicians of all kinds who are willing to trade their souls for cash and votes. May God have mercy and bring true repentance!

18:48:08 - Category: Christian Worldview - Link to this article -

The Terrorist Tactics of the Homosexual Jihad

07/19/2006 - James White

Anyone who invests almost any time at all in following groups like SoulForce knows that the homosexual movement uses some of the most egregious forms of intimidation and fallacious argumentation to be seen in the American scene today. I was looking at one of their publications just now, and saw this paragraph:

Let me make something absolutely clear: I do not consider Dr. Dobson my enemy. Misunderstanding is the enemy. We are both children of the same loving Creator, and I genuinely appreciate the many ways he has helped heterosexual families around the globe. I enjoy listening to his radio program, and I believe he has a sincere heart with an unmatched passion for nurturing and protecting families. But gays and lesbians form loving families too, and his spiritual violence against us must stop. [source]

If you dare bring biblical truth to bear upon the topic of sexual sin, you are engaging in "spiritual violence." Just like the inane term "homophobia," such rhetoric is meant to intimidate while raising emotional barriers to rational thought. It is highly prejudicial language without the slightest bit of rational foundation. How is it "spiritual violence" to say, "God's Word defines what a loving relationship is; when we knowingly, purposefully violate His revealed will for us as our Creator, we cannot call the resultant relationship we create 'loving' because it is based upon rebellion against God and hence can only be self-centered instead of God-centered. Such relationships can only be destructive, not nurturing"? If this is a true statement, then is it not the case that the other side is engaging in violence against the truth to suppress my right to speak this truth? And make no mistake: they want to take away my right to say that.
God, as our Creator, determines what is loving and what is not. Jesus left little doubt:

3 Some Pharisees came to Jesus, testing Him and asking, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any reason at all?" 4 And He answered and said, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, 5 and said, 'FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH '? 6 "So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate."

   God made men male and female. God defines sexuality. The family is made up of "father and mother," not "father and father" or "mother and mother." The man leaves this family unit, is joined to his wife, not his "significant other," not his "long-term partner," and the two become one flesh. This is the union God blesses, this is the only way two people become "one flesh." God does not join anyone else together in any other fashion. There is no question about Jesus' intention; no question about the context; no question about the consistency of this teaching with the Scripture that came before, and what comes after. There is no question about how Christians have viewed this subject historically, either.
   Only modern revisionists have problems seeing these texts, or, more to the point, being obedient to them. And their arguments are normally so pathetic that the only way to make them believable is to place them within the emotional context created by cries of "violence!" and "homophobia!" Someone who can be stirred by such irrational clamour is not likely to look too closely at the reasoning behind the gay advocate's claims. That is why the one tiny section in the above cited source relating to the Bible is utterly vacuous and without substance: you don't have to come up with much once you've turned off the rational faculties with repeated references to how homosexual "couples" are loving and anyone who says otherwise is hateful. Of course, the fact that the vast majority of homosexuals have never, ever, ever been monogamous is missed by this kind of rhetoric, but that is another subject.
   As I look forward to the upcoming debate with John Shelby Spong I am once again convinced that this debate will be representative of the struggle we will all be facing in our culture with greater regularity in the future. Indeed, even today, unless one has already adopted the "silent Christian" posture, you cannot help but have to address God's right to determine what is proper human behavior.

22:30:36 - Category: Christian Worldview - Link to this article -

"But I chose you out of the world, and because of this, the world hates you" Our Lord, John 15:19

10/22/2007 - James White

   God's judgment upon decadent God-hating secularism seems to be speeding up. The collapse of Western culture into open, unapologetic persecution of Christians based upon Darwinistic dogmatic fundamentalism is evidenced every day in the media. Unreasoning secularists refuse to even consider engaging in an intellectual defense of their worldview. Instead, with force of human law, they seek to silence all opposition. While we normally see these things happening in Europe first, we can look to the East and Left Coasts in the US for examples as well. Repeated stories about the exaltation of homosexuality to a position of protected, preferred status, with the attendant insistence that the state has the right to force all children into its mind-numbed mold of political correctness is already forcing many Christians to consider fleeing from those nations and states that enforce such evil ideologies. The open denunciation of the simple factual evidence that life is complex and the result of design, and the prohibition of even mentioning this obvious fact within the context of "public education" (far better to identify it accurately: public, government sponsored indoctrination), is another clear example of God lifting His hand of restraint and allowing the evil of men's hearts to run wild.
   I have noted that the secularists will probably not last long in Europe anyway. I am hearing stories of how sharia law is being put into practice in Norway, so it is just a matter of time before the secularists are swept away anyhow. Humanistic religion is a brittle thing, and quite incapable of moving men's souls (how could it, since, in its Darwinistic dogma, there is no soul to move?), and hence incapable of putting up an extended fight against Islam. Just as the apostate armies of Israel long ago were no match for the Assyrians, so the apostate secularists will have little chance withstanding the jihadis.
   I'm sure most have already read about the bills Schwarzenegger signed in California that seek to give uber-rights to homosexuals and sundry others who define themselves by how they have sex or how they dress, etc. I suppose that makes sense: in a secular worldview, there is nothing spiritual about man to raise him above being defined by such things as what kind of under clothes you like to wear. I mean, we define dogs by "long hair" or "short hair," so man, the evil animal, might as well be defined by such mundane things as well, right? No wonder we no longer see Bachs and Beethovens. Anyway, I noted a while back the move in the UK to make preaching the gospel or just reading the Bible itself in public a hate crime. Here's an article that should likewise make you realize that in a very short time we will all be faced with the choice of suffering persecution and loss of worldly goods at the hands of those who irrationally hate God and refuse to defend their views in argument, and being silent. Note how the secularists hate the idea of truth. Well, except for "their" truth, which is unquestionable. The only truth they will allow is that "there is no truth in religion, only in science." They have no idea they are just as much a caricature as the most wild-eyed Inquisitor in Spain in the 15th century.
   I pray God will cause me to love His truth, His church, His people, His gospel, more and more, so that my attachments to this world will grow ever weaker and weaker. The only Christians who will remain strong in the coming years will be those who realize the strong antithesis of these simple words: "Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him" (1 John 2:15). The only "leverage" the world has against us is that which we willingly give: our ungodly attachments to this world system. The more we are crucified to the world, the more we live in light of our death in Christ and our life in Him, the less power they will have. This is the secret of the persecuted church, and it is a lesson our brothers and sisters in other lands know well. It is one we must learn, and quickly.

10:05:11 - Category: Persecution - Link to this article -

More Hatred of Christianity

10/10/2007 - James White

   I have added a new category here on the blog: persecution. We all know that our brothers and sisters are persecuted around the world by repressive regimes, whether they be atheistic/communistic (North Korea, for example), or religious (Islamic, Hindu). But it is no longer any secret at all that secularists want to silence Christians, whether they be of the dogmatic Darwinist sort (Dawkins) or others, such as the homosexual lobby.
   We saw just recently that the Council of Europe (part of the EU) put forward document 11375 (17/9/2007 -- in European date order, which makes more sense, in this case, than the standard US format) titled "The dangers of creationism in education." The document can be found here. There is no room for debate, no room for discussion or dispute, as the document begins with its summary, "Creationism in any of its forms, such as 'intelligent design', is not based on facts, does not use any scientific reasoning and its contents are definitely inappropriate for science classes." Well there you go! That settles it! Just as Rome attempted to silence criticism of its own misunderstandings centuries ago in Europe, no one seems to have learned a thing during the intervening centuries. While once it was religious bigotry that stifled the very ability of man to speak and debate and argue and disagree, now the secularist bigots have taken control, and they are just as intent upon stifling free speech and the expression of opposing viewpoints as ever their religious ancestors did. Dogmatically committed to Darwinism with a fervor of faith beyond almost anything known today in European "Christianity," the Secular Kingdom of Europe has firmly established its credentials as hating God's law, hating God's Word, and hating God's truth. You will love homosexuality, abortion, and everything else that eats at the soul of man, or you will be an outcast, and feel the brunt of the heel of the kingdom's boot. Of course, secularist Europe cannot withstand the onslaught of Islam, for the secularist is concerned only about himself or herself, and hence simply does not reproduce. So this monument to man's hatred of God will be washed away in short order by the natural reproduction rates of the immigrant Islamic populations, and the work of persecuting Christians, begun by the secularist regimes, will fall to those with far more experience in that field.
   There are so many contradictions and absurdities in the Council of Europe document that it takes one's breath away. It is a monument to dogmatic secularistic fundamentalism. It does not even show a passing familiarity with the key issues in the debate, but, how could it? Darwinists do not want their theory debated. They want it obeyed. Period.
   So today I was pointed to another indication of the incessant bent of the Western Rebel toward hatred of God. Here is another move to shut the mouths of those who would speak God's Word in the UK. I have documented numerous times on this blog the push to establish "gay super rights." Homosexuals, constantly suppressing the voice of conscience, want no one adding to that monumental effort by speaking the truth they are working so hard to suppress. So they seek to silence those who would say homosexuality is a life-destroying, culture damaging addiction by force of law. "Hate crimes" legislation is nothing more than a means of giving the government the right to peer into the hearts and minds on the basis of its own prejudice. It is a mechanism to suppress expression of "politically incorrect" views. We watched the old Soviet Union use these kinds of laws for decades as a basis for its brutal suppression of free thought, and now the West is mimicking its vanquished foe. While it will take longer for these laws to come to full effect in the US, the process has already begun. Free speech is now only for those who wish to promote godlessness thereby.
   In a wonderful display of irony, I paged down to find one Dan from Sheffield making a comment on the news story. He concluded his comments with, "laws against incitement to hatred allready exist for other things, this just extends that legal standard, and shoudl extend equally , to everyone, whatever sky pixie they happen to belive in." Why shouldn't Dan's description of my God as a "sky pixie" fall under the very same prohibitions of "hate speech"? No one can answer that question, since logic and reason are not relevant to those who promote this kind of mindless "political correctness."
   The days of our freedom to speak are numbered in the West, my friends. We must take advantage of them while we can! It will not be long before "counting the cost" will finally have meaning for those of us who have been blessed with unlimited freedom for a very long time.

00:01:00 - Category: Persecution - Link to this article -

The Religion of Perpetual Outrage

06/21/2007 - James White

I am writing a review of LDS author Daniel C. Peterson's work, Muhammad: Prophet of God put out by Eerdmans (yes, Eerdmans, the formerly evangelical publisher). One of the topics addressed by the book relates to the power of the spoken word in Arabian thought. Poets were particularly potent enemies. Muhammad faced the wrath of a number of them (and they learned to fear him as well). Someone who could turn a phrase or a verse could bring great shame upon the objects of his literary wrath. A tribe with a great poet was blessed, the opponents of that tribe shamed.

The mind-set that invests tremendous weight in being "shamed" by satirical language is difficult for many in the West to understand. But, it still exists, especially in Muslim contexts. Take the current furor over the knighthood of Salman Rushdie. In comparison with many other works that have been written over the decade's, Rushdie's novel is mild, a work of fiction satirizing many aspects of religion, and not just Islamic religion. I doubt Khomeini even read it. Its title was all that was needed. Muslims can talk about the "Satanic verses," but others may not. That Rushdie dared to engage in satire of Muhammad and Islam is all that matters. For large numbers of Muslims, Rushdie is worthy of death. Just look into their eyes. This is not the result of rational thought, it is visceral, and it is encouraged by the culture and the history spawned by Islam.
The Satanic verses themselves are found in Islamic writings. I have on my desk the English translation of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah, titled The Life of Muhammad. There on pages 165-166 you have the entire story laid out. Muhammad and his movement were facing difficult times in Mecca, and the Quraysh were opposing his claim to prophethood. He longed for acceptance, and so, Surah 53 was "revealed" to him. But as it was originally given, it read as follows:

19 Have ye seen Lat an Uzza 20 And another the third (goddess) Manat? Have you thought of al-Lat and al-Uzza and Manat, the third ... these are the exalted Gharaniq (a high flying bird) whose intercession is approved.

Lat, Uzza, and Manat, are female pagan deities, worshipped and prized in Mecca. When Muhammad gave forth these words, there was a temporary peace between himself and the Quraysh. They went out, saying, "Muhammad has spoken of our gods in splendid fashion" (p. 166).
However, given that this contradicted everything he had said about monotheism, later generations explain that this was a trick of Satan, and God "annulled" the Satanic verses, replacing them with what is found in the Qur'an today:

21 What! for you the male sex and for Him the female? 22 Behold such would be indeed a division most unfair! 23 These are nothing but names which ye have devised ye and your fathers for which Allah has sent down no authority (whatever). They follow nothing but conjecture and what their own souls desire! Even though there has already come to them Guidance from their Lord!

Not only this, but another Surah (22) was revealed, which includes these words:

52 Never did We send an apostle or a prophet before thee but when he framed a desire Satan threw some (vanity) into his desire: but Allah will cancel anything (vain) that Satan throws in and Allah will confirm (and establish) His Signs: for Allah is full of knowledge and wisdom: 53 That He may make the suggestions thrown in by Satan but a trial for those in whose hearts is a disease and who are hardened of heart: verily the wrongdoers are in a schism far (from the Truth):

This leads into a discussion of the entire concept of "abrogation" and the like, and surely, for many, leads to many questions regarding the reliability of Muhammad's "revelations." But my point here is that this is discussed in Islamic sources, but no one issued a fatwa in response. But it is the element of non-Islamic satire, where in essence the tribal elements of early Islamic history have now been transferred wholesale into the Muslim vs. non-Muslim context. Rushdie made reference to this incident in the context of satire, and just as this led to great anger and outrage between tribes in the deep deserts of Arabia 1400 years ago, so too today the outrage is easily seen.

Of course, Islam has no problem encouraging the demonization of others, the mockery of Christianity, for example (their imams speak often of the "cross worshippers" for example), but that's fine, because the idea of having a single set of standards that binds all is foreign to their thinking. That is why it is quite appropriate to speak of the "Religion of Perpetual Outrage." No matter what you say, or how you say it, a reason for offense can be found.
I have noticed another development that I will note briefly in passing. Recognizing how potent is the term "phobe" in shallow Western thinking, Muslims are co-opting the term from the homosexuals and have now begun pressing the phrase "Islamophobe" with dreadful regularity. You can always tell when one side has no meaningful arguments to present in its defense when it adopts the "me-phobe" terminology. "Homophobe" is just as meaningless and absurd a term as "Islamophobe," and I, for one, lose all respect for anyone who utilizes the language. The only meaningful context in which such terminology could be used would be one of abject ignorance combined with abject bigotry--like calling Rosie O'Donnell a Christian-o-phobe. That would be appropriate. But when men and women who are knowledgeable speak the truth about Muhammad and Islam, attacking them as "Islamophobes" is just as empty, just as absurd, and just as much an abandonment of rationality, as the regular use of "homophobe" is by the apologists for homosexuality.

00:01:00 - Category: Islam - Link to this article -

Romans 1:26-27 and Homosexuality

05/17/2005 - James White

[26] For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,
[27] and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

   These verses form a single sentence, connected directly to the preceding words by for this reason. Paul does not depart from his theme at this point. These verses are not some separated, a-contextual leap into another subject. The theme continues without a break. But here Paul teaches that because of the idolatry of mankind God gives men over to degrading passions (NASB), shameful lusts (NIV), vile passions (NKJV). However the phrase is translated, it is obviously referring to desires and passions that are dishonorable and indicative of Gods judgmentupon those who indulge in selfish, lustful behavior.
   Paul then gives a particularly fitting example of these degrading passions, one that illustrates twistednessat the very core of human identity. He first mentions lesbianism, describing, clearly, adult, mutual lesbian activity. This is seen in the description given in both verses 26 and 27, for verse 27 begins with and in the same way,indicating that the description of male homosexual activity in that verse is parallel to the lesbian activity in verse 26. Hence, the description of lesbianism as against naturein verse 26 would apply to male homosexuality as well, and the description of mutuality and indecent acts in verse 27 would apply to lesbian activity as well.
   There is a note of sadness in Pauls words, "for even their women...." The female, as a result of the twistedness of sin, exchanges the natural sexual function (the most basic meaning of the words Paul uses) for that which is against nature. This is a voluntary act. These women exchangethe natural function for that which is against nature. There is choice involved here, a choice that expresses the twistedness of the rebellion against the Creator that Paul is illustrating. The natural sexual functionis still known to these women, but they choose to exchange it. Paul uses the very same term he had used in the preceding verse, "exchanging the truth of God for the lie," so obviously this exchange carries the same negative character: the exchange of Gods truth for a lie is the same as exchanging the natural sexual use for the unnatural. The choice is purposeful in the first, and it is in the second as well. ...
[Click Here to Continue Reading]

02:00:00 - Category: Christian Worldview - Link to this article -

The Monthly Explosion of Anti-Christian Bigotry: This Time with Profanity for Impact!

10/26/2007 - James White

WARNING: This blog post contains profanities and vulgarities. I am warning you up front. No, I have not joined the emergent movement. I am quoting a professor directly, from a digital audio recording this time, and it is important to know what is being said in classrooms today by those who detest Christianity and who behave in simply outrageous fashion.

   Back on September 20th of this year Dr. Lee Carter of Arizona State University and Glendale Community College accused me of lying to my daughter about the authorship of the gospels in his philosophy class. I wrote an open letter to him about the situation here, and a follow up here. He chose not to respond to these letters. It is clear that Dr. Carter does not believe that anyone who believes as I is a rational person worthy of discourse or even the courtesy of response, let alone common respect.
   Yesterday my daughter texted me a quote from Carter's class that left me staring at my Blackberry in disbelief. I texted back, "Too bad that's not on mp3." She replied, "It is." I listened to the entirety of the class this morning while riding, as I did not want anyone to be able to accuse me of isolating things from context. Dr. Carter was going over "Sufi stories," parable-like stories common in Sufism. He errantly indicated that Jesus told parables to help his listeners understand his message (according to the text, the exact opposite is the case), but in any case, he was going over these stories for some reason or another. As normal, Dr. Carter could not avoid going off on various trails, promoting socialism, decrying capitalism, blasting the United States, etc. At one point he paralleled Ronald Reagan to Hitler and somehow made a connection to the killing of Jews. Later he preached loudly about how people do not think rationally, and as evidence he pointed to the election of...George Bush. Evidently, to be rational is to be a leftist socialist. Every time I listen to this man I am left aghast. But never so much as today.
   He came to a Sufi story that had something to do with power temptations. At one point (47 minutes into the lecture) he opines, regarding followers of Jesus when he returns, "We don't give a crap about your ideas, don't give us this idea stuff, we can't understand that shit anyway! It's the power we want, man, and you've got miracles...good enough for me!" Then he speaks about how people would not recognize Jesus were he to come back. "They wouldn't know who the hell he was." He speaks of how you might marry someone when you are young and then one day wake up and say, "Son of a bitch! Who is that person I married?" "You were looking through a lot of illusions." In this context then he made the following statement that became the main element of the text my daughter sent to me after class:

And in fact, if Jesus did come back, the most likely people to put him back on the cross would be Christians, and the most likely people to nail him to the cross would be fundamentalist Christians. They would be the ones who would be nailing that son of a bitch back to the cross, because he'd be the one who'd be refuting what they believe, and they wouldn't want that. Fair enough? So the most likely guys to be hammering in the nails, they are the guys who elected George Bush, and believe in the literal truth of the Bible, and don't believe in evolution, because they don't want to use reason, and they don't want to think, they'd rather stick to their illusions that hopefully may convince them that they don't have to be afraid at night when they are all alone, and the devil may whisper in their ears.

   This quotation comes 49:40 into the lecture.
   Later in the lecture Carter referred to someone who was a "shithead" and asked who that might be like, but stopped himself before stating the obvious: he was referring to the President.
   I am not writing this post about how grossly unprofessional and offensive a man Dr. Lee Carter is. That really is not even a question, as I cannot possibly imagine any professional acting the way he does during his lectures.
   I am not writing this post about the fact that Dr. Carter gives new meaning to the very properly styled psychological problem "Bush Derangement Syndrome." I do find his connection of Bush and conservative Christianity shallow, fallacious, and just plain silly, but again, that's not why I'm writing.
   I am not writing this post about Carter's obvious, deep, imbalanced hatred of Christianity. He is surely not alone in that malady in the academy either.
   I am not writing this post as a complaint that my daughter's ears have been sullied by Carter's salty language. My daughter works out in the world. She takes drive-thru orders at Starbucks. You would be absolutely amazed at how people talk to her.
   I am not writing this post about the language, per se, either. I think it is grossly unprofessional and indicative of a teacher completely out of control, but sadly, things have changed a lot since I was in school, and though I would be summarily dismissed were I to ever use such language, evidently, this is par for the course for Carter. Customer beware. Of course, I have always said, and will always say, "Profanity is for those who lack the intelligence to express themselves in any other manner."
   I am writing this post about the prejudiced, bigoted mistreatment and, yes, I will use the term, persecution, of Christians in a public institution in the United States. It is painfully obvious to everyone that this kind of outrageous rhetoric would never, ever be allowed were the object to be Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, homosexuals, or any particular ethnic group. Carter would have been dismissed long ago but for the fact that his vitriol, his prejudice, his bigotry, is aimed at the sole "allowable" object of such things in decaying Western culture today: conservative, truth-believing, life-changing Christianity. No, Carter knows little about Christianity. He creates a straw man caricature of it in ever single lecture I've heard. But the above outrageous, offensive, ridiculous statement, combined with his willingness to accuse Christian parents of lying to their children about the authorship of the gospels without the slightest evidence and in fact against the facts themselves, demonstrates once again the truth of words written long ago, "If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you" (John 15:19).
   The world wants Christians to believe that if you will just avoid being "radical" (i.e., if you will live like the world rather than being transformed into the image of Christ) then some sort of peace can exist. But the fact is, it is the world that is radical. Think of it: pots in rebellion against the Potter. Creatures denying their Creator. Those who know God exists, recognize Him when looking outward upon the creation, or looking inward as well, and yet unwilling to confess Him, worship Him, or obey Him. That is radical. That is suppression of the truth. And when the world encounters those of us who have given up our rebellion and bow the knee to the Creator they are so intent upon denying, their anger toward us for reminding them of what they are so desperate to forget knows no bounds.

   Just a note for those who will respond to this with, "Just have your daughter go elsewhere!" This is the only class where this kind of thing is taking place. As she has pointed out, she has learned more about philosophy in her modern fiction class than in her philosophy class, and is involved with honors classes, and so she is not complaining. If anything, just as I grew from being the only special creationist in the biology department in college (and that in a Christian school!) and from taking an ethics class in seminary from a pro-abortionist (at least back then he let me debate him in front of the other students---and guess who won?), so too Summer has seen the inherent contradictions in the anti-Christian worldview of Dr. Carter, and has grown as a result. In fact, it has made her appreciate the professionalism of her other professors.

16:02:32 - Category: Christian Worldview - Link to this article -