Gairney Bridge

Back when I taught high school, every year we had to sit through a “pressure speech” (I might be exaggerating slightly) on how everyone on the faculty were expected to give to the United Way. When I say everyone, I mean everyone: 100% for the entire school system was the expectation. Of course, they never got that (at least while I was working there), since I never gave. And, to the credit of the school, they never questioned me or individually pressured me, and I was glad to explain my convictions to anyone who asked.

I was glad to see someone express my convictions over this matter in the blogosphere. This post, at the Baylyblog, explains why Christians should be avoiding giving to the United Way. Here’s a quote, and you are encouraged to read the whole article (the statistics/numbers cited are staggering):

Across the country, Christians should be refusing to participate in United Way campaigns that fund Planned Parenthood. It’s not enough that some United Way chapters allow donors to specify certain charities or exclude others. We should have nothing to do with an organization that provides a single dollar of support for those making a living off the slaughter of unborn babies safely nestled in their mother’s womb. Planned Parenthood is wicked, ruthless, heartless, cruel, deceptive, bloodthirsty, and depraved. Planned Parenthood is also obscenely rich.

Keep reading the article. My question has to do with the United Way’s connection with PP. Why has this been allowed to persist? Why don’t donors (and the UW does give to some worthy causes, granted) stand up and refuse to donate as long as the UW continues to support a tax- and charity- funded abortion mill? Why doesn’t every donor stand up and demand that the UW cease and desist giving to this monster? Do this first, and then we can start working on the insane reason why our tax dollars are used to fund PP.

I can dream big, can’t I?

I’ve been thinking about looking for a video of this song to post for a while now. I first ran across a performance of this several years ago while flipping channels (it was on a local Christian channel in Greenville, SC). This captures so much of what is wrong with southern gospel music (the hokey music, the silly lyrics, the tendency to embrace of cultural legalism) while still managing to somehow point to Jesus Christ in some way. Of course, I’m just picky sometimes, so feel free to offer other opinions.

So, without further ado, here’s “The Night Ol’ Jack Daniels Met John 3:16″ (I’m not kidding):

This sermon was preached at Midlane Park ARP Church on June 29, 2008.

By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, And by the breath of His mouth all their host. He gathers the waters of the sea together as a heap; He lays up the deeps in storehouses. Let all the earth fear the LORD; Let all the inhabitants of the world stand in awe of Him. For He spoke, and it was done; He commanded, and it stood fast. The LORD nullifies the counsel of the nations; He frustrates the plans of the peoples. The counsel of the LORD stands forever, The plans of His heart from generation to generation. Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD, The people whom He has chosen for His own inheritance. ~ Psalm 33:6-12

Well, today is the 7th anniversary for me and the missus. Seven years, but no itch! Ha! I am reminded that Jacob was willing to put in seven years labor (and then another seven!) so that he could have the hand of his beloved Rachael in marriage.

So, in honor of my beloved of seven years, I want to quote the following verses, from Song of Solomon 2:10-13, which were sung at our wedding seven years ago today (from the Michael Card song “Arise, My Love”).

Arise, my darling, my beautiful one, and come along. For behold, the winter is past, the rain is over and gone. The flowers have already appeared in the land; the time has arrived for pruning the vines, and the voice of the turtledove has been heard in our land. The fig tree has ripened its figs, and the vines in blossom have given forth their fragrance. Arise, my darling, my beautiful one, and come along!

Here are the lyrics to the Michael Card song:

Arise, my love, my lovely one come,
Winter is past and the rains are gone.
The flowers appear, it’s the season of song,
My beautiful one, arise and come with me.

Who is it that appears like the dawn?
As fair as the moon, as bright as the sun?
Show me your face, let me hear your voice.
My beautiful one, arise and come with me.

Set me like a seal on your heart,
For love is unyielding as the grave.
The flash of it is a jealous fire,
No flood can quench,
For love is as strong as death.

Arise my love and come with me
Before the dawn breaks and the shadows flee.
You ravished my heart with just one glance
My beautiful one, arise and come with me.

Do not arouse or awaken love
Until it so desires.

Arise, my love, my lovely one come,
The Winter is past and the rains are gone.
The flowers appear, it’s season of song,
My beautiful one, arise and come with me.

I am my love’s, my beloved is mine.
Arise and come with me.

My beloved Anna, I love you!

I had breakfast this morning with two fellow bloggers (one who lives in Louisville, one who happened to be passing through on the way to Cincinnati). The conversation was good and it was great to finally be able to put faces to names. If memory serves, this makes the fifth and sixth bloggers I’m actually met in person (that I didn’t know beforehand). I say, the more the merrier!

I meant to bring a camera for a picture, but I forgot. You can read Ben’s blog here and Chris’ here. Both are good guys and I am better for having met them.

Breakfast (at Chris’ suggestion) was at the Shady Lane Cafe. Click on the link if you’re interested. The omelet was very good, btw.

Who said the following?

For where the Church is, there is the Spirit of God; and where the Spirit of God is, there is the Church, and every kind of grace; but the Spirit is truth. Those, therefore, who do not partake of Him, are neither nourished into life from the mother’s breasts, nor do they enjoy that most limpid fountain which issues from the body of Christ; but they dig for themselves broken cisterns out of earthly trenches, and drink putrid water out of the mire, fleeing from the faith of the Church, lest they be convicted; and rejecting the Spirit, that they may not be instructed.

Here’s a hint: it wasn’t someone at the PCUSA GA this year.

Here’s another quote from the same guy:

Such, then, is their system, which neither the prophets announced, nor the Lord taught, nor the apostles delivered, but of which they boast that beyond all others they have a perfect knowledge. They gather their views from other sources than the Scriptures; and, to use a common proverb, they strive to weave ropes of sand, while they endeavor to adapt with an air of probability to their own peculiar assertions the parables of the Lord, the sayings of the prophets, and the words of the apostles, in order that their scheme may not be seem altogether without support.

He almost sounds like he’s talking about the Jesus Seminar there, but he’s not (wrong century, but closer than you might think!).

Any guesses? No fair Googling!

This sermon (preached on June 22, 2008) concludes the series (begun last October) of sermons going through the entire book of Galatians. For those interested, I’ll be starting a short summer series soon on the topic of assurance of salvation. I’ll be using different texts from 1 John; I preached through the entire book several years ago when I pastored Ebenezer ARP Church; John repeats certain themes throughout his first epistle, so the letter actually lends itself to look at specific things topically, at least with regard to this subject matter. After that, I plan to preach through the first part of 1 Samuel.

I consider this to be a very powerful passage of Scripture. It helps summarize Paul’s emphases to the Galatians, and it is an important reminder to pastors about the important things (boasting only in the cross of the Lord and bearing His marks — not manmade ones). It would do all of us well to commit verse 14 to memory: “But may it never be that I would boast, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.”

See with what large letters I am writing to you with my own hand. Those who desire to make a good showing in the flesh try to compel you to be circumcised, simply so that they will not be persecuted for the cross of Christ. For those who are circumcised do not even keep the Law themselves, but they desire to have you circumcised so that they may boast in your flesh. But may it never be that I would boast, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. For neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation. And those who will walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God. From now on let no one cause trouble for me, for I bear on my body the brand-marks of Jesus. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brethren. Amen. ~ Galatians 6:11-18

I commented on the Romish superstitions surrounding relics here. Of course, Rome Catholics aren’t the only ones who valuable the remains of the dead. I recently picked up a copy of Coffee News — one of those free weekly papers that one finds in restaurants and coffee shops (I like reading the trivia) — and saw this interesting “story”:

 Valuable hair: A bookstore owner from Houston, Texas, has paid $100,000 for a lock of hair cut from the head of Ernesto (Che) Guevara. Bill Butler, a collector of 1960s memorabilia, called Guevara, a Marxist, “one of the greatest revolutionaries of the 20th century.” The three inch snippet of hair was obtained prior to Guevara’s burial in 1967. Butler said he would be displaying it in his bookstore, Butler and Sons Books, in Rosenberg, near Houston. He added the Marxist’s writings are still worth reading today. The hair was sold by a former CIA operative and Cuban exile involved in Guevara’s capture.

His writings are still worth reading? Well, sure, but so is Mein Kampf — so that we can recognize monsters before they become leaders of totalitarian states. Here’s an appraisal of the legacy of Guevera, and one that comes from a source that can’t be pigeon-holed as right wing:

The cult of Ernesto Che Guevara is an episode in the moral callousness of our time. Che was a totalitarian. He achieved nothing but disaster. Many of the early leaders of the Cuban Revolution favored a democratic or democratic-socialist direction for the new Cuba. But Che was a mainstay of the hardline pro-Soviet faction, and his faction won. Che presided over the Cuban Revolution’s first firing squads. He founded Cuba’s “labor camp” system—the system that was eventually employed to incarcerate gays, dissidents, and AIDS victims. To get himself killed, and to get a lot of other people killed, was central to Che’s imagination. In the famous essay in which he issued his ringing call for “two, three, many Vietnams,” he also spoke about martyrdom and managed to compose a number of chilling phrases: “Hatred as an element of struggle; unbending hatred for the enemy, which pushes a human being beyond his natural limitations, making him into an effective, violent, selective, and cold-blooded killing machine. This is what our soldiers must become …”— and so on. He was killed in Bolivia in 1967, leading a guerrilla movement that had failed to enlist a single Bolivian peasant. And yet he succeeded in inspiring tens of thousands of middle class Latin-Americans to exit the universities and organize guerrilla insurgencies of their own. And these insurgencies likewise accomplished nothing, except to bring about the death of hundreds of thousands, and to set back the cause of Latin-American democracy—a tragedy on the hugest scale.

Nice guy. Even nicer pic.

That’s a lot of hair. No wonder there was no problem clipping a lock of it. Probably a lot more to be had, and no one would have been the wiser.

The bookstore must be doing pretty well if the owner can drop 100K on a lock of famous hair. I doubt he’d be able to afford it, though, if Che had had his way. Quite ironic, actually.

A second issue of ARPTalk has been posted on the web. For those interested, this edition will discuss several of the issues at the 2008 ARP General Synod. Click here to link directly to the page for the second issue.

Here’s an interesting post from La Shawn Barber’s website; she does a pretty good job at explaining the uses and differences in the OT law, including pointing toward Jesus Christ. I hope that many politicians (and voters), regardless of party affiliations, would read it.

IMHO, this is not an unusual thing for someone who lays claim to “American Christianity” to make such a statement as did the senator from Illinois. This is what people do, Christian and non-Christian alike; they set themselves up as experts on the Scripture, read it a-contextually, read their own personal wishes and desires into it, ignore the parts they don’t like, etc.  If anything, this should emphasize the importance of God’s people attending a church where the minister has been adequately trained and the word of God is faithfully taught (Ms. Barber, if memory serves, attends a PCA church, plus she likes James White). But, just to show I’m not picking on anyone in particular, I found the following observation (concerning the third 2004 Presidential debate between George W. Bush and John Kerry) to be interesting. When asked what part faith played in his policy decisions, the President responded:

First, my faith plays a lot — a big part of my life. … My faith is a very — it’s very personal. … Someone asked me one time, ‘Well, how do you know?’ I said, ‘I just feel it.’

The article continues by stating:

By contrast, Senator Kerry answered the same question by referring to Christ’s summary of the law that he was taught in church and parochial school. … Following the debate, the media were almost unanimous in praising President Bush’s response to the question and in ridiculing Senator Kerry’s response. The president, they said, was sincere and passionate about his faith while the senator was merely answering the question by rote. … A close look at the contrast between the two answers shows President Bush’s religion to be almost entirely personal, having to do with a private relationship with God that goes beyond public scrutiny. He prays a lot, and his religion is authenticated by his feelings. Although the president’s answer is, no doubt, sincere, it has very little connection to what has historically been considered Christianity.

The article I’m citing appeared in Modern Reformation magazine. Read the rest of the article here.