Prayer For Byron
April 29, 2009
This is Chris, an occasional poster on TNKZ. I’m writing for Byron. He has suffered chemical burns in both eyes and asks for your prayer, as well as your understanding, that it will be at least a couple of days before he can post or reply.
The good news is that there should be no lasting damage to his eyes. He is in some pain, though, and would appreciate your prayer for the lessening of the pain and for a speedy recovery.
And by the way, there will be no film at 11:00…. 
UPDATE: OK, I can see well enough to explain, briefly; I was staying in someone’s home (homeschool speech tournament), and having forgotten my contact lens case, I borrowed one of his. It apparently had some nasty lens-cleaning chemicals in it–I have never put such chemicals in my lens case–and when I put my contacts in yesterday morning, over a period of several hours, the chemicals did their devilish best. Didn’t hurt at first, or even for several hours, but got me pretty good. I am much better this AM; full recovery ought to take a week or so. I’m 20/40 in left eye; 20/80 in right, as of this AM at doctor’s office. Also, pain is very minimal now; it was pretty intense last evening. Won’t be on computer much more for a couple days, I don’t expect, but I can at least do this much and explain.
First Church of the Buff and the Beautiful?
April 25, 2009
Have you seen Susan Boyle, the ugly British woman with the beautiful voice? iMonk wants to know if there’s a place in our evangelical churches for ugly people.
Jesus does, too.
Awesome, timely post.
What I Said to my Buddy…
April 24, 2009
A long-time buddy of mine, whom I haven’t seen in many years, came out on his blog supporting the idea of “gay marriage” in the state of Iowa (where he lives). He listed a number of reasons; I’ve decided to simply give my responses to him (and if those responses spark discussion/disagreement here, so be it). Suffice it to say that the in-the-hip-pocket-of-the-homosexual-lobby media won’t raise these aspects of the debate, instead mindlessly trumpeting the shallow “reasoning” of the “intellectual elites”. Without further ado, I wrote:
Dude,
This is an involved subject with many issues to consider. I’m going to give you a few things to think about, without going into much detail, and then come back and elaborate on them. Basically, you’ve given the standard media rationale for permitting “gay marriage”; I’ve heard this reasoning time and again. Dare I suggest that it is fundamentally flawed at a number of points? So let me suggest a few, ask you to “think outside the (media-constructed) box”, and think about why the following things I submit are true (and if you can’t figure it out, think deeper, dude!). At any rate, I’ll be back when time permits to elaborate. Ready?
1. The issue of “gay marriage” has nothing to do with “equal rights”. Nothing. Zilch. Zip. Zero. Nada. This is because
2. Homosexual Americans have always had equal rights with other Americans when it comes to marriage, no more, and no less (you don’t hear that from the media, do ya?). The truth is that for every American, there are some people who a given individual can be married to, and some they cannot, and it’s equal for everybody. Currently. Without “gay marriage”. In fact, “gay marriage” extends a special right to homosexuals. And I can prove it. Easily.
3. To reduce the concept of marriage to a matter of gaining extra “rights”, anyway, is to badly misconstrue the meaning of marriage in the first place. This is what I hear from a lot of folks: “homosexuals” need “gay marriage” in order to have certain rights. But that’s not what marriage is all about…people who go into marriage primarily to obtain “rights” are seriously misguided.
4. Some of what you say you were taught is indeed incorrect–but it is not the Bible that is to blame at all, but rather the (perhaps well-meaning) misrepresentations/extensions of Scripture. The Bible doesn’t teach, for instance, that all temptations come from the same source; i.e., I fully believe (along with you), that there are some people who are, for lack of a better term, “born” with homosexual tendencies/temptations.
5. The logical leap you’ve made, though, is that having a certain desire (in this case, homosexual temptation) justifies behavior in keeping with those desires. This is true neither for homosexuals nor for heterosexuals. Having homosexual attraction, I agree, is not a “choice” with some people (and the Bible doesn’t indicate that it is). Engaging in homosexual behavior, on the other hand, is ALWAYS a choice.
6. The evidence you cite to support your belief that “homosexuals were born that way” isn’t nearly as strong as you believe it to be; rather, that’s a useful fallacy that has been repeated so long that it has become “accepted truth” (repeat a lie long enough, and people will start to believe it). A close friend of mine is a researcher on this very subject, and the results of studies that have been done do not paint NEARLY so black-and-white a picture as the media presents and as you have come to believe.
7. For the Christian, it’s one thing–and perfectly valid–to say, “some of what I was taught was wrong” (because that’s true for all of us, I daresay; I can point to things I was taught that aren’t true either). It’s a different thing–and I hope you aren’t saying this–to say, “the Bible is wrong”. I submit that a Christian is on shaky ground to take that position.
8. The old adage is, “before you knock down a fence, you ought to take care to find out why it was put there in the first place.” Our current rush to legitimize “gay marriage” demonstrates essentially zero concern to ask, “why was the ‘fence’ put there in the first place?” And there are plenty of good reasons.
9. I do hope that all supporters of “gay marriage” understand that
A. The redefinition of marriage (and that’s the issue, not “rights”) cheapens the marriages of every heterosexual couple (and that’s not hard to prove, either).
B. In states where “gay marriage” becomes legal, there is now no logical impediment to polygamy (which has a fuller historical pedigree than “gay marriage”), group marriage, even incestuous marriage (I could be wrong on that last point, but not the first two). Iowa can find no rational, logical, consistent reason to deny a marriage license to a man wanting to marry three wives now.
I hope my comments aren’t “un-pretty”; I make them with a smile on my face and love in my heart. But I think that on this subject, a lot of folks aren’t thinking NEARLY deeply-enough. At any rate, that’s an opening salvo; I can back up every statement I make with logic and cogent reasoning. Might I suggest that any readers consider how/why those arguments, many of which aren’t even being heard in this critical national debate, are true. More later!!!
Try and Read This Without Tearing Up…
April 23, 2009
“Katie Kirkpatrick, 21, held off cancer to celebrate the happiest day of her life. Katie had chased cancer, once only to have it return-to clog her lungs and grab hold of her heart. Breathing was difficult now, she had to use oxygen. The pain in her back was so intense it broke through the morphine that was supposed to act as a shield. Her organs were shutting down but it would not stop her from marrying Nick Godwin, 23, who was in love with Katie since 11th grade.”
Ya Ever Wonder about This, Christian?
April 22, 2009
Yeah, me too. Big-time. And I’ve been on a couple…
What About the “Canaanite Genocide”?
April 22, 2009
How does one answer the charge that God sanctioned genocide among the Canaanite peoples? Phil Johnson makes some great points in Truth and Apologetics. There is an answer, a Biblical answer, the right answer, and the only answer necessary; while we “speak the truth in love”, it’s not up to us to defend God or to satisfy every concern of an unbeliever.
This phrase comes from the 1978 "Jonestown massacre" in which most members of the Peoples Temple cult, blindly following their leader Jim Jones, committed suicide by drinking cyanide-laced Kool-Aid.
Osborne: A Contrarian's Guide to Knowing God
Schlossberg: Idols For Destruction
