Becoming a Hate Group

Becoming a Hate Group. (This is spiritual, and may cause hives in the susceptible.)

by

Weatherly Hardy


Once again, Alabama is the center of attention, this time because of the homosexual marriage thing. Social media is full of people being loving and accepting of others' opinions on the thing ... as long as they hold the same opinion. Most of the "pro" side are lambasting "Christians" who don't think for themselves. Your problem is not that people are not thinking for themselves. It is because they just aren't agreeing with you. One person was going on about how he could NOT understand why people were so concerned with HIS relationship with HIS partner.

It's not about YOU.

This is, rightly or wrongly, about LAW. Not you, or your feewings. It's how our legal system works, especially in areas where controversy exists. It takes awhile. Life is not CSI, where problems are solved in under-an-hour.

Allow me to say that, as a rule, secular thinking and Christian thinking are not congruent. Secular thought tends to rely upon compromise and consensus, often through social sanctions being brought against opinion outliers. "Think for yourself" ultimately boils down to "Think like the herd". Whatever is cool, tony, IN, or Real George becomes common wisdom. All done in the name of independent thinking.

Christian thinking is not mere groupthink, and it is patently not meant to mean "think for yourself" (Where that means "pull a socially acceptable opinion from your backside".). Our opinions are to be based upon the revelation of God's word. It is belief and opinion based upon an external source, the word of God, the Bible. While there can be astonishing differences of opinion displayed as to what that book actually means, there is often a clear consensus on what is Good or Bad. The problems arise when admixture with secular opinion occurs, and the salt loses its distinctive flavor, as well as its power to change lives and cultures. The desire by Christians to be accepted by the world also plays a part. The current issue, and the rancor it engenders, is in large part due to believers playing politics rather than hewing to what the scriptures ACTUALLY teach, especially as concerns our proclamation to the world.

The World sees Christians as mouth-breathing throwbacks who want to saddle women with unwanted babies, who want homosexuals to be perpetually unhappy, with a heaping dollop of hell-fire when it's all over. They see us that way because we have NOT played by the rules. We have majored in things that the Bible does not. We have marched, and picketed, and tried to vote the Kingdom of God in, and here is what we have. Jesus did not picket against Jewish quislings collecting taxes for Rome. Paul did not promise Tropical Destinations to the idol-worshippers in Athens, Greece, neither did he organise Straight Pride parades in Corinth, complete with grey-scale rainbows. What did evil, hate-filled Paul do?

"For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified."

The proclamation of the Good News occupied Paul's dealings with people. All the stuff that people get bent out of shape about in Paul's writings are things he wrote TO CHRISTIANS, PEOPLE ALREADY IN THE CHURCH! They had signed up for the club, and needed to have the by-laws explained. The church has no business proclaiming or marching over anything beyond the proclaiming of the gospel. A clever fellow wrote:

   
     A local church (Athens, AL) in 2007 made the national news by initiating a Temperance Drive in an attempt to get the sale of alcohol repealed. Try as I might, I cannot see a single instance in the New Testament where Jesus, Paul, Peter, James or John initiated a march, drive, petition, or mass pout to stop people from doing something that offended. Take slavery, f'rinstance. Paul did not start a campaign to stop the Offending Practice. Brights and other annoying persons find this terrible, for clearly it meant that Paul Did Not Care, that God Did Not Care, and thus ANY modern atheist is morally superior to either if he opposes slavery (Perhaps they should stage Abolitionist Marches in Sudan.). The fact is, Paul recognised that the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation (rescue, deliverance from bondage), and was thus sufficient to quell the deed, which indeed it began to do, as believing slave owners learned the difficulty of calling Property whom he also called Brother. Long and short: you teach the Word. Do something silly like, oh...do it like Jesus said. Make disciples of the nations. That means show them, teach them HOW to live the Kingdom life. This takes years, like it took years for Jesus to teach His disciples. Saying a prayer and sitting in a pew doesn't cut it. Baptise them by the authority of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit. You are promised to receive the Holy Spirit, God Himself residing in your person. This is for starters.


Back to the point. If everyone does JUST what the Word says, it will result in unity. If, however, I insist on MY neat name, MY cool new way to do the gospel, thinking MY way is THE way, then I make myself distinct from my brothers and sisters. I become the enemy of unity. I become factious, jealous of other "ministries", become angry when you don't agree with MY way.

The world will not hear us unless we are unified. They will not believe our message unless we love. They will not believe in forgiveness in Christ if the church puts on its judge's robe. Wait...it HAS no such robe, 'cos it's NOT OUR JOB.

Yes. I yelled.

Oh, wait. That was me!

Paul and the other apostles were in the discipleship business, where members of the church are concerned. We are NOT called to point the bony finger of indignation at the Sinners du Jour. God so LOVED the world...the stinky, disagreeable, rebellious world...and gave Jesus. That is to be OUR proclamation.

We should ONLY go as far in our proclaiming as Jesus and later, his apostles did. They did not preach issues. They preached Jesus, and Him, crucified.


Mr. Hardys' blog, Aardvarks Plumbline here.

Mr. Hardys' company, Aardvark Tees, Shirts made of WIN! here.


Go to Jays' Tee Vee blog main page here.

Son Of God: I'm Not Excited

Diogo Morgado in the title role. He must be the
real thing. He speaks with an English accent!

Son Of God: I'm Not Excited


A new Jesus movie is hitting the theaters and I'm not enthused. I mean, we've seen it before, right?

Let's see, oh yeah, a robed pretty boy in hairdo and beard shows up, spouts platitudes, performs miracles, ticks off the local civic/religious authorities and gets killed for his trouble. Oh yeah, he then returns from the dead ... Why? ... Because he's GOD!

Huh?

That's all I EVER got out of these flicks. People leave the theater just as much in the dark as when they went in.

NOTHING about as to what and why he went through what he did. Just a nice story about "a good man who died".

Maybe what I'm looking for is a cinematic Chick tract with a newsmans' five Ws' treatment and a so many step plan of salvation. You know ... WHY Jesus did what he did ... Where one stands with God (You're toast!) ... and how acknowledgement of the payment only HE could make can change that standing.

Only one "Jesus movie" ever made an impression on me.

The Passion of the Christ - Mel Gibsons' film about the events in the bogus arrest/prosecution of Jesus and the very REALISTIC portrayal of His crucifixion. This film is NOT pretty to say the least and I would not allow children to see it. My only problem is that it's lacking in the details of what the salvation He provides is.

Below are the details as to the what and why of salvation. Be sure to read the whole chapters they appear in for further clarification.


1. Romans 3:10 - As it is written, There is no one righteous, no, not one.

Psalm 14:3 -  They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that does good.

Keep in mind, you're not good enough to get to Heaven on your own. No matter what you do, you're just not "good" enough.

2. Romans 3:23 - For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.

You're under a penalty and will always fall short of being good enough for God on your own.

3. Romans 5:12 -  Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.

It's because of Adams' rebellion and act against God that we're under this hereditary condition of death and sin. It can't be "cured" by ones' own effort.

4. Romans 5:8 -  But God commends his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

God, however, loves us and provides a way out from under this crushing penalty. His son, Jesus is the only one who can make the payment we ourselves can't.

5. Romans 6:23 - For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Our sinful condition can only result in eternal separation from God. But through Jesus Christ, eternal life can be gained.

6. Romans 10:13 - For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

Here's where it starts. He is waiting for you.

7. 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.

He's calling you (And has probably for quite some time. You just won't bother to hear it.). All that's needed is for you to let him enter your life and take over.

8. Romans 10:9 and 10 -  That if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and shall believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved.
                                   -  For with the heart man believes to righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made to salvation.

If you believe from within that He rose from the dead, so will you one day. If you tell others that He runs your life as well, you are destined for Heaven (Providing, of course, that He actually IS in charge of your life!).

9. John 3:16 -  For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

That last verse pretty much settles that!

Movies are fine but as they say, "It's not like the book". Read the book first.

Just sayin' ...

Wikipedia article on Son of God film here.

Wikipedia article on Mel Gibsons' The Passion of the Christ film here.


Go to Jays' Tee Vee blog main page here.

Just Shaddup Already!

I don't think this guy is with the Westboro bunch. This photo did not
appear with this articles' original posting on Aardvarks' Plumbline blog.

Just Shaddup Already!

by

Weatherly Hardy


It has been observed that the Dread Dormomoo * and I have never had a trivial conversation. This is an offshoot of one of our palavers.

In the multitude of words sin is not lacking, But he who restrains his lips is wise. Proverbs 10:19

Social networks like Facebook and Twitter provide anyone with a household logic the means to Make A Statement, to Let It Be Known. It's like a blog without commitment, only obsession (One more scroll, and I'll go to bed....). The Need to Say leads ineluctably to the Need To Have Summat To Say., thus many will speak their mind (or what passes for it) on any topic at hand; the Outrage du Jour, because everyone deserves my opinion, and I'll bust like Alderaan if I don't state it. This makes for endless bloviation, a verbal spittle sprayed on the front rows.

The outrage du jour, then, is the trendy fixation of the moment, driven by talk radio, Drudge, the front page, whatever is whipping up froth  about whatever topic is George, is the thing right now; social media driven by media, which sees what is trending in social media and reports it, a hamster-wheel of inconsequentiae. And people read, and hear, and rage, and talk, because that is what we are good at, and it makes us feel like we have Done Something by our self expression, when all we have done is express our opinion, an opinion that no-one really needed.

Christians, bless our hearts, are the chiefest of sinners, at least the (politically) active ones. An Issue is put forth, support for some dire practise, or an opinion by a left-leaning person, or a right-leaning one, or an upstanding middle-of-the-road one. Well, I have to respond! I must fix it! I must state my opinion! I MUST SUCCEED!

Um, no.

For the last forty years, the churches have been led by the nose to do what they have not been assigned to do, to be what scripturally they patently are not! Between the Falwell and Robertson followers, trying to vote in the Kingdom of God, backing God's Own Party, and the vocal-oids of today who MUST weigh in on any issue, whether it impacts the church directly or not, we politically savvy (maybe) believers have managed to inoculate the culture-at-large against the Faith Once Delivered.

I have a son who is characterised by the fact that he always stops speaking one sentence too late. Our society has nurtured the same for itself, and that (especially) means Christians. The recent Phil Robertson unpleasantness is somewhat of an example, though he was answering direct questions in an interview (a disadvantage conservative Christians have, usually being taught to answer questions as asked, a little thing called honesty and candor). I see time after time Christian politicos, professionals, and just plain folks being goaded into making...unwise...statements and professions on the public stage, the effect of which is to swerve the conversation away from the (often cogent) point being made to one that is sure to cause embarrassment and facepalming on a grand scale.

To all brethren, as well as to persons of good will, I offer some advice:

Just because it is in your mind, does not mean it must come out of your mouth. Just because it is a tenet of your beliefs, or a closely-held opinion based upon your beliefs, you are not called upon to blurt it to the world. The Gospel is what we as Christians are to teach to the world, not derivative opinions. Neither Jesus nor Paul waggled the finger of Condemnation at the sinners, the hoi-polloi. (At self-righteous religious types, on the other hand....) They warned people against sin, certainly, but did not condemn. Paul, seeing all of the idols in Athens, did not take opportunity on Areopagus to condemn all of Athens to perdition, but rather used it as an opportunity to identify their "unknown god" as being the Messiah Jesus (even quoting one of their own poets). Therefore, we do not have leave to do other than present the good news of Jesus' life, teaching, death, burial, resurrection, and ascension to the Father's right hand. We may not punch someone's ticket for hell, we may only warn of consequence.

Churches are not called to rebut the New York Times, nor Newsweek. They certainly should not take their preaching points therefrom. You cannot play a defensive game and gain ground. Likewise, individual Christians on social media like Facebook, or in a position to speak to the mainstream media, please bear in mind that they Do Not Like You, nor do they wish to Be Your Pal. This goes doubly if you are a theologically conservative believer, because of a dirty little secret:

They think that you are Westboro, and will handle everything you say to make you look like it. They will ask questions designed to embarrass you, the church, and all believers by making you look like a This-ist, or a That-o-phobe. Let me be REALLY clear:

They think Christian=Westboro, and will dig and probe until they find a dull shade of brown that resembles Westboro, and then they will crucify you and your reputation, because you were stupid enough to think that they want to be your Friend, or that what they REALLY want is The Truth.

Don't be stupid, or naive. Jesus said "Be wise as serpents, yet harmless as doves.". If your hobby-horse (or teir detour question) is not something that Jesus (or even Paul) would have spoken publicly of, dummy up. Shut yer gob. Talk about the issue at hand, and when they try to lead you away into Controversyville with questions about your opinion about "Y" lifestyle, or "Z" ethnic issue, or any hot-button issue apart from what your business is actually about, refuse to talk about it, as it is not germane to your issue. Do NOT be fooled into thinking it is a chance to witness, or to present some truth of the Kingdom, because it isn't. It is a chance to further inoculate the culture against the Gospel of Christ by allowing yourself to be painted as a bigot, or other such postmodern evil.

In the multitude of words sin is not lacking, But he who restrains his lips is wise. Proverbs 10:19

Here endeth the lesson.

xxxxx

* The "Dread Dormomoo" Mr. Hardy is referring too is Mrs. Hardy. They seem to be Dr. Strange fans.


Original post at Aardvarks' Plumbline here.

Aardvarks' Plumbline blog main page here.


Go to Jays' Tee Vee blog main page here.

At the Track

At the Track ...

by

Weatherly Hardy


There are two main time-tracks understood in the world. One derives from a Creator, the other from naturalistic process. This distinction is necessary, because on the one hand, a Creator has built meaning and purpose into His creation, whereas any meaning or purpose in, say, an evolutionary track, must be invented ultimately by any sapience wot comes along. The created sapience owes fealty to the Creator, and obedience, and even love; one need show no sense of gratitude or appreciation, or affection for the impersonal forces driving the evolutionary track.

It is significant that Charles Darwin, he who popularised TENS (the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection) was a lapsed Unitarian/Anglican. (A note: Bishop Usher's 6000-year age of the earth need not apply. The issue is a non-starter, Biblically speaking.) It is important to understand the VAST difference between the two tracks. The Creation provides a framework for understanding cosmology, as well as our own place in the Universe. It establishes an order and purpose for humankind. It especially establishes family, the much touted foundation of society. The silly notion of male and female producing offspring as a family is showcased here. Adam and Eve. Other rhyming names need not.... The Creation Model sets up men and women as families, and defines marriage based upon the Creator's commands and covenants. "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh." (Gen. 2:24)

From place names to ancient peoples, the Bible has been proven time and again to be accurate. That is a fair reason to consider its other claims as being so, as well. So what's the point? Marriage is not some sociological accident in antiquity, but derives from a covenant-making God's instruction. With this model, there is coherence, and the growth of mankind through history. There is purpose for the Genesis-model family, beyond (but including) the satisfying of sexual desire. The very structure of society grows from this beginning, and without it, there is no coherent society. Indeed, we are told by Paul: "For this reason I bow my knees to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, 15 from whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named..." (Eph. 3)  The world has it backwards. We did not name God "Father" because we wanted a "sky Daddy" to love us. Our families, rather, are named from His Fatherhood.

This is why Marriage=Man+Woman is important, and should be inviolate. Certainly, same-sex couples can adopt, or have surrogates, or in vitro fertilization, and may be loving parents, but it is not according to Hoyle, and is not the foundation provided in the Creation model. The sterile man and wife we-want-it-all marriages are as faulty. (This is no Quiverfull screed ... but fruitfulness IS the norm, not the exception in the Biblical model.)

The problem now is that Government in its mercy has taken over the role of arbiter of What Is Correct. Much as I dislike using the term, from the beginning, marriage has been the purview of religion; it is covenant-based (which is why adultery was punished so severely: death ends a covenant; this includes killing the breaker of a covenant.) Now it is the stuff of bureaucrats and lawyers. Requiring a state license is as legitimate to the purpose of marriage as collecting a tax on the communion elements every Sunday morning. With its oversight, the beneficent State grants privileges and allowances with the marriage license. Those not so entitled are jealous, and want the same benefits as man-and-wife, but they do not fit the model, the original pattern. What to do? Make everyone see it their way, and see how unFAIR it all is. Had marriage remained the realm of the church (now), this would be far less of a problem, but the bottom line is, if we change the definition, we can all pretend we are all equivalent, and it will be FAIR.

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less."

The naturalist, TENS model offers no such coherence. Whether it is quanta bumping into one another, or whole societies, it is all the accident of Brownian motion writ large: no plan, no purpose, beyond what we Humpty Dumpty for ourselves, and then the definitions don't matter anyway (and no, I do not think I am caricaturing the model). The anyone marrying anyone is not a matter of slippery slopes; it is a matter if it doesn't matter. We are the rule-makers, and we are the deities of dreams.

I wish that I could be more clear in my expression of this. I am still working it out, but despite the various sideroads branching off, there is either the covenant history track, or the accident of nature track. The choice of which model you follow determines your understanding of the Universe, meaning and purpose. Marriage is only one part of it, but if we get that part wrong, the future suffers, as will we.


Copyright © 3/26/2013 Weatherly Hardy


Mr. Hardys' Aardvarks' Plumbline blog main page here.

Aardvark Tees (Movie/TV/anime/cartoon & other related shirts,) here.

Go to Jays' Tee Vee blog main page here.

Casting Call, NOT QUITE!

Casting Call, NOT QUITE!

Was in the local hobby shop talking to the proprietor about my disatisfaction with The Whisperer In Darkness (To be addressed in a later blog post!) when he mentioned something that piqued my interest.

There was going to be a casting call at the very place in about less than an hour. A small horror film was in the making & they were looking for actors. As it was an open call & being a frustrated actor, I decided to attend. After a stop at a local fast food joint, I went back.

The call was already in session, & I was told he was already talking to a couple of rather attractive young ladies. Going to the back, I leaned in a corner & listened as the fellow explained some of the plot/storyline to the two.

Seems there was an incest/pregnancy subplot though nothing "overt" was to be shown. OK. He then said the film would involve a group of "religious" people who killed off dysfunctional families as what's "broken" stays "broken". That's when I left.

Even though I heard VERY little, I figured "religious" meant "Christian". Hollywood Christian. Meaning a bunch of violent low-grades spouting out of context verse & acting worse than the "heathen" they profess to be against. I may be wrong about what he meant by religious but I doubt it would be Kirk Cameron material.

Yes, I knew this was to be a "horror" film. I knew it would not be the kind you would show to your congregation. If it was to be a simple little fright flick (AND if I might be what they were looking for.) I wouldn't mind being in it.  But ... At the same time there's more than enough anti-Christian films out there giving a false impression of the Lord & believers. Of course many so-called followers & other Westboro Baptist types have been NO help at all in fostering such an image for others to pick up on.

What would Jesus do in regard to people broken by abuse of any kind? Including the abusers? I doubt he would advocate killing them. The fact the world in general & people in particlar are broken (Romans 5:12) is why he gave of himself, paying the penalty of the sinful state the world & individuals are in (Romans 6:23 & 5:8).

Hmmm ... why not a "horror" film based on John 8:3-11, wherin the "good" vigilanties are forced into examining themselves? Or a "political thriller" following the storyline of  2nd Samuel Chapts. 11 to 19: A Godly man in high position goes wrong, is forgiven, but must still pay the penalty(s) & unintended consequences. You get the idea. By the way, look up the above passages.

I guess I should be heartened by the fact that the technology to "bypass" Hollywood is more than in the reach of those of limited means. A shame so many feel the need to emulate Tinsletown. There's so much good material out there (A lot not even in the Bible.) that could be used to uplift/promote good.


How Do We Get to Heaven? here.

What Will Heaven Be Like? here.

God & Science web site here.

On the Rapture, Third Impact, Armageddon & All That here.

Go to Jays' Tee Vee blog main page here.

A Reflection On the 4th of July: If You Say So ...



A bit dated, but I like it. Credit: Retorillo

A Reflection On the 4th of July: If You Say So ...


Was going to post the above illustration sooner but the recent storms in Ohio "broke the internet". On reflection of the origins of our country, a not too recent "incident" was brought to mind. At a dinner I attended, someone made a faux sophisticated comment on the Bible, referring to it as a "product of a male dominated agrarian society". The bitter, childless, post-menepausal crone to be seemed quite proud of how we've come a long way from such a situation. Farmers (The male ones of course.) can be soooo backward, what with their actions based on practicality & cause & effect n' all. She said this, by the way, while eating.

Male dominated agrarian society ... hmmm. Seems we came quite close to that a few scant hours ago with the power knocked out. As of this writing some areas in Ohio are still without power.

How easy it is to overlook the fact that physically/mentally we are no different than those primitive hunter/gatherers of a few thousand years ago. Our gimmicks, gadgets, & fanciful ideologies seem to obscure that. I wonder how it would be if the electricity didn't come back for say, at least a month over a nationwide area. That "male dominated agrarian society" might not seem so archaic. It would be right here. Or at least the mid 19th century.

One could only imagine how these feminists & "lovely thought" types would handle such a situation. No doubt they'd be seeking some of that male domination. Not only to be protected from some of the other "testosterone afflicted" but also from some of those feminoid frankenstiens they helped create.

As for modern "humanity" (Can't say man. That would be sexist.) having cast off the shackles of the Bible & male domination ... Well, as it says in God's word: Jesus, the same, yesterday, today & forever (Hebrews 13:8). The same can be said for mankind ... Just sayin'.

Reborn On the Fourth of July here.

Go to Main Page here.