Author Archives: Anthony Baker

Anthony Baker's avatar

About Anthony Baker

Husband, dad, pastor, artist, and musician. Time Magazine's Person of the Year in 2006 (no joke!). Loves coffee (big time), good movies, and sarcastic humor. Holds a Doctorate in Ministry. Most importantly, a servant of the Lord Jesus Christ. All glory belongs to Him! Matthew 5:16

Bug Spray Warning!

A Reasonable Idea

There is a suggestion floating around the internet on places like Facebook, Twitter, etc. The suggestion is to get yourself a big can of wasp & hornet spray (a pesticide) for protection – not from bug, but from criminals.

wasp sprayYou see, it is getting more and more difficult for honest, law-abiding citizens to own and carry firearms. On the other hand, criminals are becoming anything but more friendly. Therefore, some are suggesting that using a can of wasp spray is a good alternative to a gun. Here’s an example from a post on Facebook…

[Wasp spray] can shoot up to twenty feet away and is a lot more accurate [than pepper spray], while with the pepper spray, they have to get too close to you and could overpower you. The wasp spray temporarily blinds an attacker until they get to the hospital for an antidote. [A church secretary] keeps a can on her desk in the office and it doesn’t attract attention from people like a can of pepper spray would. She also keeps one nearby at home for home protection.

A Legal Problem

Having an inexpensive form of self-defense sounds all fine and dandy, especially if you are the type who either cannot or won’t own a firearm. The only problem with using a can of bug spray is that it would be illegal. Yes, illegal.

Now, you may be asking yourself, “Why would I worry about using a can of bug spray on an attacker trying to harm me or take my life?” In a normal universe, it would seem perfectly acceptable to use anything at your disposal to defend your life, correct? Well, we don’t live in a world ruled by common sense, but by lawyers.

If you were casually walking through your house one day, and a burglar broke in and chased you through the garage, and you picked up the first thing handy, a can of bug spray, and shot him in the face, you might be OK. On the other hand, if you have a can sitting on your desk, or beside your bed, or in your purse, then you could get in real trouble.

bug sprayTake a look at the highlighted portion of the picture. There you will read the following: It is a violation of Federal law to use this product in a manner inconsistent with its labeling.” As any trained pest control technician would tell you, the label is the law.”

So, if you are ever forced to use your bug spray on an attacker, bear this in mind: a good defense attorney will have your skin for the premeditated illegal use of a potentially deadly substance. If your attacker is harmed in any way, don’t think for a moment that a sleazeball lawyer won’t take advantage of you “violating Federal law.” Your attacker may even get off without jail time, all because you hurt his feelings with anything but a double-barrel shotgun.

Law and Grace

When the law is all there is, legalists will seize any opportunity. There will always be someone willing to twist the law to his (or his client’s) own advantage.

Paul told Timothy, “we know that the law [is] good, if a man use it lawfully” (1 Timothy 1:8). Unfortunately, in this day and age, there are those who don’t always use the law for good, but for gain. Therefore, be careful.

Thank God for grace.

My advice…get a Glock or shotgun.

7 Comments

Filed under America, General Observations, legalism

Crossing the Line? Or, a Lesson In Legalism?

The Picture

Have you seen all the funny pictures people are creating with “face-swapping” apps on their smart phones? I’ve seen pics of dad’s with their babies, people with their pets, and even one with a person swapping her face with the nobs on her kitchen cabinets!

NOTE: If you haven’t yet seen a face-swapping picture, then you’re living a minute or two behind the times. Few people with smartphones (the owners of which make up the majority of the civilized world) have not seen a face-swapping picture.

Face-swapping with my daughter :-)

Face-swapping with my daughter 🙂

Therefore, when my daughter, Katie, wanted to try our her face-swapping app on her new Motorola smartphone, I thought it would be fun. And, I was correct! The result was hilarious!

Or, at least that’s what I thought.

The Critics Speak

Katie posted the picture she took of us to Snapchat. She also forwarded it to several friends and relatives. I, on the other hand, saved the picture on my cellphone and posted it to Facebook. I wanted to share a little humor.

One of the things that made this picture funny was how perfectly it swapped the faces – it almost looks natural. But the other thing that made it funny for me was the sad irony of if all – the current bathroom battles. My original, off-the-cuff tongue-in-cheek comment was that we were “either getting ready for the new bathroom laws, or my daughter had grown a beard in college.”

Evidently, my sense of humor and the picture (either one, or the other, or both) was a little too much for some. The critical comments began.

Facebook friend: “Not very becoming of a pastor.”

So, I responded.

Me: You do realize that is a face-swapping app on my daughter’s phone, don’t you? It swapped our faces; I wasn’t dressed like a woman for real. That’s why it’s funny.

And the friend replied.

Facebook friend: “As men of God, I believe there’s certain line we are not to cross. What if someone see this and decide to be in courage to take it a step further. We should shun the very appearance of evil. And yes I do know”

That’s when I decided to respond with a blog post.

Lines

Where are the lines a pastor should not cross? Who has drawn them? Who determines where they should be drawn, how far they should extend, and how bold the marking?

For most of my life I lived in fear of what others thought about my spirituality. My life was burdened by others who were drawing the lines for me. They were the ones I feared would see me if I went to a movie or a restaurant that sold alcohol. They were the ones who would call me “liberal” if I didn’t do exactly as they prescribed. And because of others, I drew lines for others, too.

I was a full-blown legalist afraid of what other legalists thought. And, I’m still recovering.

But where are the lines? Are there no universal lines which none should cross, especially pastors? Of course! There are the lines of lust, adultery, envy, and bitterness. There are the lines that separate us from unethical financial dealings; misuse of power; and most importantly, doctrinal error. But when it comes to personal choices, self-management, and my family – in my particular context – it is the job of the Holy Spirit to convict me (draw lines), not my fellow brother or sister in Christ.

Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand. – Romans 14:4

But What of the Weaker?

But as soon as I quote Romans 14:4, there are going to be those who quickly point out several other verses in the same chapter.

  • Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumbling block or an occasion to fall in [his] brother’s way. – Romans 14:13
  • But if thy brother be grieved with [thy] meat, now walkest thou not charitably. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died. – Romans 14:15
  • Let not then your good be evil spoken of: – Romans 14:16
  • Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another. – Romans 14:19

The context of Romans 14 is that of one taking his liberty too far, to the point of doing more harm than good. Because of grace, it really didn’t matter whether a believer celebrated a certain day or ate meat offered to a non-existent false god. However, it did matter if one did these things in the presence of someone struggling with theses issues, someone of little faith.

Paul said that he would rather us never eat meat again, to throw away all our liberties, if by enjoying our freedom it caused another one to sin (14:21). He said: “You may believe there’s nothing wrong with what you are doing, but keep it between yourself and God. Blessed are those who don’t feel guilty for doing something they have decided is right” (Romans 14:22 NLT).

That being said, I believe there is great liberty in Grace, but many times I refrain from exercising my freedoms in order to avoid “offending” one of weaker faith. Why? Because if that person, not fully convinced that what I was doing was acceptable, decided to go against his own convictions and imitate me (the one he might possibly look up to and admire), then I’d be causing that person to sin (14:23).

But You Can’t Please Everybody!

Now, with all of the above in mind, we must also consider something else – you can’t please everybody! Don’t even try!

If I lived every moment in fear of those who might find fault in every little thing I do, I’d go crazy! As a matter of fact, that kind of life will KILL you – it killed my father!

Look, there are people who won’t attend our church because on Sunday mornings I still wear a tie when I preach, while others get offended when I don’t wear a tie on Sunday and Wednesday evenings. Some people think I’m too liberal because I will go to a movie, eat at a restaurant that sells beer, and play darts. Yet, others think I’m too much of a “fundamentalist” because I dislike high school proms and condemn sin from the pulpit.

If all I did was try to please people, I’d never succeed.

The One I want to please is my Heavenly Father. As I seek to please Him and bring glory and honor to His name, I take note of the things I say and do, because I want my life to be a reflection of my Father’s heart. The last thing I want to do is offend anyone, especially God.

But folks, you’ve seriously got to take into consideration one more thing…CONTEXT.

My Context

Food, drink, clothing, style of music, dancing, etc., … in all of these areas CONTEXT will make or break you. Regarding the picture of my daughter and me, the context is thus…

  • technology is changing faster than we can keep track
  • Smartphones are the #1 tools of communication in the world
  • Most people with smartphones have seen face-swapping apps
  • Fathers do crazy things with their daughters – if they are good fathers and not deadbeat dads
  • I try to be a good father, not a deadbeat lowlife who never has fun with his children, and most people who know me know that.
  • I have a sense of humor, which is one reason all elementary children want ME to be their school bus driver
  • I have thousands of followers and subscribers to three blogs and social media, not to mention church members, family, and friends who know I can be very serious at times, goofy at other times
  • Over the last several years I’ve written multiple-hundreds of thousands of words, published audio and video, and plastered Facebook and Twitter with my thoughts and commentary.

If all it would take is one picture, one made in fun by someone who is well-known as a conservative, “right-wing” evangelical Southern Baptist pastor, to push somebody into acting out their transgender/transexual desires, then that person was too far gone to begin with; he/she/undecided would have flipped the switch with or without my stupid picture.

Final Point Long In Coming

Friends (including the one who left the above comment), give me a break. Lighten up a little. This world is most certainly going to hell in a handbasket, and the witch carrying Toto has gone from a bicycle to a crotch rocket (motorcycle). If we can’t find a moment or two to laugh at the insanity of it all we’ll all dehydrate from the tears of sorrow.

So, I’m sorry if the above picture offended you, but I’m not taking it back. My family is more important to me than the 0.00005% of individuals who might get their panties in a wad because they saw me look un-pastoral in a stupid picture with my little girl.

I’m choosing to live in grace; life’s too short to be legalistic.

13 Comments

Filed under legalism, Parenting

The Real Problem with the Problem of Evil

One of the most common reasons for denying the existence of God is the problem of evil in the world. Just ask any group of atheists to give their top ten reasons for unbelief and surely one will claim as number one, “If there is a God, then why is there so much evil in the world?” For many, this is the pièce de résistance of rebuttals. How could a good God be real and allow all the suffering in the world to continue unabated – assuming He is even good? The eighteenth century philosopher, David Hume described the problem this way in Dialouges concerning Natural Religion, 1779:

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? then he is impotent. Is he able, but not willing? then is he malevolent. Is he both able and willing? whence then is evil?” (Stackhouse 1998, 11)

So, the “problem of evil,” and its source, has been an issue of philosophical debate for centuries.  The existence of evil in the world, along with unanswered questions, has even become evidence enough for some to even embrace atheism.  Therefore, because so many philosophers and theologians have tried for ages to reconcile the existence of God with the existence of evil, I dare say that nothing I write will be new.  But, if anyone were to challenge my belief in God, along with my faith in Jesus Christ, with the argument that the problem of evil constitutes proof God does not exist, then I would possibly respond with arguments based on the following thought: without the existence of God, there should be no evil to be a problem, and that’s the real problem with “the Problem of Evil’

What exactly is “evil?” Now, that may sound like an absurd kind of question to ask, but if the existence of evil is the evidence that is supposed to expose my faith as a fraud, at best, or even a lie, then what is it?  Is it something tangible? Is it metaphysical? Is ittheoretical? What is it, exactly? Does it have any particular form? How can it be distinguished from what is called good? On what do the atheists and agnostics base their definition of this thing called “evil?” Amazingly, the answers are not all the same, nor in some cases even grounded in reality. However, it is imperative to understand that we must define this God-killer, because its definition will determine our conclusions and help to clarify our assumptions. When C. S. Lewis was an atheist, for example, his “argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust.” (Lewis 1989) There he had it, or so he thought. God could not exist because so much evil exists. But how did he arrive at “this idea of just and unjust?” Lewis said, “A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line.” (Lewis 1989) “Tell me,” I would say, “what is evil, and how do you recognize it when you see it?

To start, evil must be understood to be an adjective. Evil is a description of something that is not good. Evil is not a thing. The word “evil” only describes the thing, the thought, and the action. Technically, “evil” does not exist, only what it describes. Some people say that they cannot believe in God because why or how could a good God, if He was perfect, create evil? They think of evil as something that must have not existed until God made it. But evil “isn’t a kind of molecule or a virus…infecting or affecting everything it encounters.  There was no time when God said, ‘Let there be evil,’ and there was evil.” (Stackhouse 1998)  As John G. Stackhouse put it, “evil becomes a noun only in the abstract.” Additionally, in his book Can God Be Trusted, Stackhouse says of evil:

“An action can be evil, or an event can be evil, or a quality can be evil, or a being can be evil. And we can lump all these particular evils together in our minds and come up with a category ‘evil.’ We can even go on to discuss it as if it were a particular thing, so long as we do not forget that we are always dealing with a category or group of particular evil things, not a thing itself.” (Stackhouse 1998, 31)

So then, if evil is a description, how is it that we come to use the adjective, or as Lewis put it, the “crooked line,” without first having some idea of what is a “straight” one?  Defining what is good is as important as defining evil. To know what is evil, we must first have some assumption as to what is not evil. The crazy thing is that if God does not exist, and man is nothing more than a collection of random matter, both good and evil are purely relative – their existence is based purely on one’s perspective.  So, in other words, the one who says that there is no God, based on the existence of evil, is literally basing his belief on pure opinion, not on anything objective; therefore, in order to bring an accusation against the goodness of God, one must have a base line. What is the standard by which we determine what is good and what is evil?

Some use Man as the baseline. They compare God to the standard set by what is thought to be good behavior in this world. They rationalize that if God is real, at least according to monotheistic dogma, He must be all-powerful, perfectly good, and the supreme example of love, kindness, and providential care. Because it is preached that God is a better Father than earthly fathers, Mark Twain took it upon himself to write:

The best minds will tell you that when a man has begotten a child he is morally bound to tenderly care for it…[yet], God’s treatment of his earthly children, every day and every night, is the exact opposite of that, yet those minds warmly justify those crimes…when he commits them.” (Tonie Doe Media 2007)

So then, according to Twain, God could not exist because if He did, He would act consistent with our understanding of what a good and loving earthly father would do.  In other words, if God cannot, in all His perfection, behave better toward His children than the most common man, His credentials are therefore revoked, and He must cease to exist.  However, this is so illogical. Who are we to say that God, if He is perfect, and we are imperfect, ever treats His children poorly? Do the protesting cries of a toddler who has had poison taken from his grasp carry more weight than the decision of the earthly father to take it away? How, then, are we to automatically assume that the infantile tendencies of finite man are wiser than the infinitely Mature?  Using Man as a baseline for what is good and evil is pure arrogance.

In reality, the problem of evil is really a problem for the atheist. He, who denies the existence of a Creator and accepts only the realities of evil in the world, essentially has nothing about which to complain.  Everything should be just fine and dandy, but it’s not.  The atheist knows that evil things happen to good people, as well as bad.  He sees the hurt, feels the pain, and begs for justice. The reality of evil in the world causes men to cry out for justice; for things to be made right. This is a problem, though, because knowing that a crooked line is not straight hints at the fact that a Line-drawer exists.

Of course, there are others who take a different approach. They claim that God does not exist except in the evil intentions of his followers to control others through guilt. They claim that God is just a fabrication of priests to keep mankind from behaving “naturally.” They say that nature is good, and if anything, God is evil for trying to get man to behave contrary to the very way he was created to behave. One guru said, “It seems that for those who worship God, the opposite to God is not that which is ‘evil,’ but that which is natural.” He said of animals, comparing them to men, “They don’t worship God, they don’t go to church, they don’t have any theology.  They don’t have any feeling of guilt, they are simply natural.” (Osho 2009)  In other words, if there is evil in the world, it is because our belief in God has inflicted it.

But for the majority of the hurting world, pain is real, loss is real, and evil is manifested daily.  Many see the things that happen to innocent people, especially children, and wonder, “If there is a loving God, why doesn’t he do anything about this?”  These people, many of which hold on to hope as long as they can, finally succumb to their doubts and conclude that the only way to explain away the pain is to admit that it is just part of life, part of the natural world, part of what makes us human; alone, in our quest to make life easier, free of pain, free from evil; alone, without God. These are the ones, I believe, that lure more away from the faith than any Darwinist.  They are the ones who have seen evil face-to-face and cannot fathom a God who would allow it to continue.  And because their experiences are so painful and tragic, the devout are left speechless and without explanation. Ellie Wiesel is a good example.

Wiesel was a teenager when he saw his family murdered in the Nazi death camps.  But it was only after witnessing one particular act of horror – the slow, hanging death of a young boy – that he turned away from his faith in God. In the book Night, his Nobel prize-winning autobiography, Wiesel said he heard a man behind him ask, “Where is God now?” As he stood there, being forced to stare into a pitiful, wide-eyed, swollen face of a dying child, a voice within replied, “Where is He? Here He is – He is hanging here on the gallows…” (Wiesel 1982) Because there was no justification, even in the big scheme of things, Ellie Wiesel’s God died with the executed boy.  But as sad as it is, without God, who can say what happened to that boy was any worst than the slaughter of an animal?  Are we not all just animals – some more evolved than others?

To me, the problem of evil is not a problem for the believer, but for the non-believer.  Aside from the theological arguments about the character of God, without God, to turn Hume’s question around, “whence then is evil?” Without God, evil is relative to one’s desires and personal pleasure.  Does it really even matter whether or not God could do anything about evil in the world when the whole question is moot if He didn’t exist?  With God, evil is defined as that which is against His law, that which stands opposed to His standards, and that which describes all who take pleasure in such rebellion. Without God, evil is just a matter of opinion. That is the real problem of evil.


Works Cited

Lewis, C. S. “Atheism.” In The Quotable Lewis, by C. S. Lewis, 59. Wheaton: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc., 1989.

Osho. The God Conspiracy: the path from superstition to superconsciousness. New York: Osho Media International, 2009.

Stackhouse, John G. Can God Be Trusted. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Tonie Doe Media. In The Atheist’s Bible, 129. New York: Harper Collins, 2007.

Wiesel, Ellie. Night. New York: Bantam Books, 1982.

41 Comments

Filed under Apologetics, Culture Wars, Faith, General Observations, Life/Death, Struggles and Trials

The Humble God Brings Revival

On June 15, 2011, I preached a short message from Isaiah 57:15 entitled, “Three R’s and Revival.”

Later, I read through the chapter again on my iPhone, this time in the NET version:

“For this is what the high and exalted one says, the one who rules forever, whose name is holy: “I dwell in an exalted and holy place, but also with the discouraged and humiliated, in order to cheer up the humiliated and to encourage the discouraged.” – Isaiah 57:15 NET

My eyes filled up with tears! The Holy One is not too good to sit down with the humiliated and discouraged! Hallelujah!

News Flash! God is humble!

Of course He is! Just look at what He did! Jesus became flesh (John 1:14) and walked in our shoes. He allowed Himself to be humiliated and beaten, even crucified, although He had every reason to look down on us, being God (Phil. 2:6-7). The “High and Lofty One” became the “meek and lowly” (Matt. 11:29).

There is no pride in God!


The Three R’s

“For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones.” – Isaiah 57:15 KJV

There are three “R’s” that I see in Isaiah 57:15… Reign, Realm, and Residence.

  1. I see the first one in the words “high and lofty.”
  2. The second one I see is found in the words “inhabiteth eternity.”
  3. The third “R” is located in the words “I dwell,”and “with him also.”

1. Reign

Earlier, in chapter 6, Isaiah said he “saw also the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up…” The “high and lofty” One is none other than a King. And not just any king, this is the King of Kings and Lord of Lords, Jesus Christ. The same description is found in Revelation 4. In verse 2, John saw a throne “set in heaven, and [one] sat on the throne.” Who was the One that sat on the the throne? Evidently the same Person who was seen by Isaiah, because in both accounts the angels were crying out “Holy, holy, holy...”

God is not a man-made idol or idea formed in the human mind – He is “high and lofty.” He is “exalted” above every other creature, whether in heaven or in earth. “Thine, O LORD, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty: for all that is in the heaven and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O LORD, and thou art exalted as head above all” (1 Chronicles 29:11 KJV).

Because He is king, there remains only two options with regards to His reign: you are either His subject, or you are His enemy. God does not operate like earthly kings and nations. We have allies; but not God. His kingdom demands total loyalty (every knee shall bow). Serving another king is not a good thing at all, for it will only result in His judgment. No king is greater than He. To serve another is to live in rebellion.

2. Realm

God is the One that “inhabiteth (inhabits) eternity.” This is His realm. His influence reaches not only across all known and unknown areas of the universe, but across time immortal!

It was said that at one time the sun never set on the British realm. All over the world there were colonies under the control of the throne of England. But even more impressive than that, God’s realm isn’t limited to the present rising and setting of the sun, it is in ETERNITY.

It is important to note something here. I am not opposed to reading different translations, but a good example of when a new translation misses the mark is changing the word “inhabiteth” to “rules/lives forever.” Of course it is true that God lives and rules forever; however, there is more to it than that. The word “inhabit” touches upon His eternally sovereign omnipresence. God/Jesus is not just king over the here and now, or the future, but over the past, present, and future at the same time! He inhabits eternity! There is nothing in the realm of time, no matter where it is, that is out of His scope of authority.

Stop and think about this, folks. Think about the practical application of the above statement. Let’s just say you need $100 tomorrow to pay a bill. Or, it could be $1 million, a billion – doesn’t matter. You could go to an earthly king and ask for help, but the king would be limited to the time frame in which you needed the money, the amount that he had, and the limitations of his realm. Not God.

I have seen money come in for a need that was desperate. God provided what was needed. But, when you look at the sequence of events, God started answering that prayer long before it was ever prayed – decades before! God is not limited by time, space, or anything. His realm covers it all. When George Mueller prayed for milk (for his orphanage), do you not think that God had already put in place the neccessary sequence of events to make that milk wagon drop a wheel? It is not even out of line to think that He went back to when the tree was planted that provided the wood for the wagon.

3. Residence

God not only lives in the “holy place,” but He dwells with lowly man. His name is Emmanuel – God with us. But notice this, He only dwells with the humble, the contrite, the broken-hearted, the cast down, the weary, the needy (“God resisteth the proud, but giveth grace unto the humble.” – James 4:6). Even though He could choose to stay in His high and holy place, far above the heavens (as most men would do, given the opportunity), He makes His bed right on the floor with the lowliest, shivering beggar.

Of all people, God should be the one who looks down His nose at us. He is the “lofty” One upon the throne. We are the helpless sinners. How ironic is it that the only ones who will not open the door of their hearts are the prideful? Pride closes the door to the King.

and Revival

He said “I dwell” in order “to revive.” It is the presence of the God who cares; the God who understands where we are; the God who makes His home with the “discouraged” and the “humiliated” that brings revival. Oh, to live without hope, without compassion, without a tender touch from a caring hand, brings death. But to have a King step down from His lofty position in the heavenlies, from the eternal, to a lowly place in time – that revives the heart.

The gulf that separated me from Christ, my Lord 
It was so vast, the crossing I could never ford 
From where I was to His domain, it seemed so far 
I cried “Dear Lord, I cannot come to where You are” 

CHORUS 
He came to me, He came to me 
When I could not come to where He was, He came to me 
That’s why He died on Calvary 
When I could not come to where He was, He came to me 

He Came to Me – by Squire Parsons

Don’t let pride shut the door to your heart when the King of Kings seeks to dwell with you.

Leave a comment

Filed under God, Preaching, salvation, translations, worship

The Witness of a Mother’s Love

The invisible things of God from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the love of a mother…therefore, we are without excuse.

Marie Baker. My Mother :-)

Marie Baker. My Mother 🙂

Listen to “The Mother’s Day Song” (by Anthony Baker)

Leave a comment

Filed under current events, God, Relationships and Family

Cherry On Top

Have you ever felt like your were invited to dinner for reasons you weren’t quite expecting?

vbs ice cream head

How would you caption this picture?

7 Comments

Filed under Food, Humor, Life Lessons

7 Words that Distinguish Our Founding Fathers from Modern Americans

“We hold these truths to be self-evident…” – Founding Fathers (Declaration of Independence)

If there were ever any words that are so antithetical to today’s culture, these stand out above them all.

Believe it or not, the founding fathers of the United States of America firmly held to the belief that there are absolutes, that there are transcendent truths, truths by which we are to judge between right and wrong.

They not only believed that there are “truths,” but they believed that these truths are “self-evident.” In other words, they believed that these transcendent truths, rooted in the nature of God, were not hard to find, but were plain for all to see should they only open their eyes. Hence the term self-evident.

Today’s culture has totally rebelled against the concepts of truth and anything that is self-evident. The truth is that God created male and female (Gen. 1:27; Mark 10:6), and what is self-evident are their differences. Yet, modern Americans cannot bring themselves to admit what is obvious, no matter how self-evident.

Not long ago a man named Joseph Backholm went to the University of Washington and claimed to be a 6′ 5″ Chinese female. Not one single college student dared challenge his claims, even though the self-evident truth was that he was a caucasian male.

People wonder how long America will survive. My contention is that it can’t survive much longer. How can it when the very foundational truth on which our liberties are grounded has been reduced to shifting sand?

“We hold no truth, and nothing is self-evident; all is relative to self-identification.” – Modern Americans

2 Comments

Filed under America, Culture Wars

Girl Logic 101

A Pedagogical Surmise

As most of you are aware, I drive a school bus, and on my school bus there are several young girls who love to make fun of their male counterparts. With regularity they repeat a little rhyme which is suppose to show that girls are not only smarter, but inherently more capable of seeking an education.

They claim: Girls go to college to get more knowledge. Boys go to Jupiter to get more stupider.

jupiter

Jupiter. Credit: HubbleSite.org

If that is so, then the following points are in order:

1. Don’t you think that it takes a little more knowledge to go to Jupiter than to college? One requires the use of a multi-billion-dollar space ship; the other your daddy’s car.

2. In order to have acquired the technical skills to travel to Jupiter, the boys must have already attended a fine engineering college or university, maybe even grad school? Then they must have been able to pass the extremely demanding requirements to be accepted into the space program. And what is it you’re studying in college?

3. If the boys now have the ability to travel to where NASA has yet to plan, and if the girls have yet to finish college, there is evidently a MASSIVE learning gap between the two. Therefore, should they get “stupider” while on Jupiter, and yet still (by implication) have the ability to navigate a return trip to earth, then they still will have retained a cognitive advantage over Buffy and Bambi, the bantering sorority sisters.

4. “Stupider” is not a word. Therefore, ladies, I would suggest you enroll in some remedial English classes before you dive into the full-blown college stuff. Knowledge is power!

So, girls, what’s your point?

Leave a comment

Filed under General Observations, Humor, politics

Don’t We Want the REAL Definition? {the truth of who a woman is}

I am not a woman, and I never will be. That is why you will never see me do at least two different things.

First, you will never see me walk into a woman’s bathroom or locker room – my gender orientation is not “fluid.”

Second, because I am not a woman, you will never see me write anything like what I’m reposting from Robin L. Lewis. The following is just a wonderfully inspiring  – and biblical – look at the true definition of womanhood.  Please take the time to read it and let her know what you think.


Have you ever looked up a word to find that the real definition was quite different than what you had believed it to be?  How did that change your understanding of the sentence or the verse?…

Source: Don’t We Want the REAL Definition? {the truth of who a woman is}

2 Comments

Filed under America, Guest Posts, Marriage, ministry, self-worth

Shined Shoes

Several years ago (three, to be exact) a reader named Anne gave me a suggestion that got me to thinking. She said,

“More writing having to do with legalism, and the recovery process would be greatly appreciated!”

Then, I wrote the following post and saved it as a “draft.” I don’t know why I never published it, but I’m going to do so right now – 3 years late.


Thank you, Anne, for the call to refocus.

So, in an effort to encourage more debate on legalism, I am going to share a story with you. It is a story I heard from a really neat guy I met yesterday. His name – Dr. Shine.

Dr. Shine

Yesterday, I went on a service call in downtown Chattanooga (a client had questions regarding his credit card service). While waiting for the business owner to show up, I stood outside on the sidewalk under a shade tree, right next door to a shoe repair shop.

Dr. Shine (I don’t know his real name), who was also standing outside, was greeting people as they walked by. It didn’t take long for me to strike up a conversation, and before long I was invited into his shop to have my shoes shined. “C’mon in,” he said, as he led me to his specially built chair. “Jus step on up dare, and I’ll fix you right up.”

The great doctor did a great job shining my shoes, even though they hadn’t been polished much since I bought them. As he was buffing away I looked down and said, “Good-looking shoes make a difference, don’t they?”

That’s when he told me about a lawyer.

The Story

Dr. Shine told me that twice a week an attorney comes into his shop, climbs up into his chair, and pays to have his shoes shined. “Five hundred dollar suites don’t mean nothin’ if your shoes look bad,” the doctor said. “People notice.”

Evidently what happened is this lawyer had dared go to court all dressed up, but his shoes must have looked bad. According to Dr. Shine, the judge in the courtroom said, “The next time you want to bring your a** in my courtroom, you’d better shine your shoes!”

The lawyer has had polished shoes ever since.

What about Church?

Why is it that people will show the utmost respect for a judge in an earthly court, but so little for the holiness of God?

After talking with Dr. Shine, the shoeshine man, I thought about how many times I’ve seen people dress up for a court appearance, but dress down for church.

We talk “grace” and all, but what about respect? We talk about “entering into His presence,” but do we really mean it?

Clothing has nothing to do with one’s spirituality, so don’t misunderstand me. However, here’s something to think about: How would your shoes look if you were literally about to enter into the Courtroom of the Judge of all the Universe?

I’d shine my shoes.

3 Comments

Filed under legalism, Life Lessons