Mon, Jan 23rd - 7:51AM

Christian Research Institute Endorses Tattoos

Seems even this venerable organization has fallen to the spirit of the age.

Though the article is not on-line, the author was interviewed by Todd Wilken of Issues Etc..

As usual, the author was spouting how the true Christian does not judge by appearance since God looks on the heart. But doesn't the true Christian realize the outside is a reflection of what's on the inside?

Actually, if these people weren’t so wrapped up in appearances, why are they in such a rush to look like every other slob on the streets today? Even those that got them in the military know doubt did so as a result of peer pressure and often regret having done so later in life often after coming to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ.

But unlike previous generations or those with some class about them who later felt a godly sense of shame and exhibited repentance over what they had done, those getting them nowadays in light of our theraputic Winfreyite culture have to tell everyone about and expect all those hearing about it to offer up a hearty round of applause or be prepared to face the ubiquitious charges of prejudice and closemindedness (they'd probably even work in allegations of racism and homophobia if they could).

If the church does not get a hold of this nonsense, eventually you won't be able to join a church unless you are willing to get a tattoo since you won't be deemed devoted enough to the whims of the group just as many Purpose Driven Churches toss the old folks to the curb who don't go along with the heathen jungle music known as "contemporary worship choruses".

Already the rhythms of the savage permeate our sanctuaries. How much longer until some pastor ascends the lectern (note I did not say "pulpit" as many churches have already removed these in these postmodern times) dressed only in a loincloth or with a bamboo stick pierced through their privates and a disk extending their bottom lips, claiming they are dressed this way in solidarity with the unreached people groups and that those pastors adorned in more traditional forms of clerical raiment obviously don’t care so much about the poor.

Christians enamored with such vandalism against the body will dismiss the entire matter as an issue of culture. Then if that's the case, why do the rest of us have to change to suit these grubby libertines?

Copyright 2006 by Frederick Meekins

Sat, Jan 14th - 10:27PM

Secularists Once Again Call For The Suppression Of Knowledge

Since the 1920’s or thereabouts, secularists have invoked the imagery of the Scopes Monkey Trial as evidence that conservative Evangelicals are bent on suppressing knowledge in the realms of science and literature.

Most following the news are no doubt aware of the ongoing angst on the part of unbelievers and Modernists regarding the propriety of introducing Intelligent Design into the Biology classroom since in their eyes suggesting anything but the materialist hypothesis (itself a faith-based assumption) diminishes the rigor of so-called scientific education. Instead, they suggest such ideas should be considered as part of the Social Studies or Humanities curriculum.

Yet such gestures of enlightened magnanimous compromise are little more than a canard. For when it becomes time to examine the metaphysical issues within what liberals previously promoted as the appropriate venue for such a discussion, they then cry Separation of Church and State. Thus, what they really want is a monopoly on the perspective taught across all of public education.

As could be expected, Americans United For The Separation Of Church And State has demanded that the State of Florida alter an essay contest that encourages students to submit their reaction to The Lion, The Witch, & The Wardrobe by C.S. Lewis. The Humanist front group contends some students might be offended by a work that has often been interpreted as a Christian allegory. The agitators suggest alternative titles should be made available for students to select from.

One wonders if the Lynnites would be as prompt about coming to the defense of students that did not want to read Harry Potter or other works of literature even more salacious in their content. Interesting when it comes to the boy wizard the important thing is that Miss Rowling gets the kids to read; shouldn’t this be the same attitude towards Professor Lewis among those that insist we have nothing to fear from books?

No doubt had the White Witch been the hero of the story rather than the villain, those sympathetic to Wicca and the Dark Arts would have no problem with the novel. The thing about contemporary liberals is not so much that they oppose spirituality in the classroom but rather merely traditional forms of it.

Neither do these liberals support the principles of individual mental autonomy to the extent that they claim. Where were they when the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals essentially ruled parents have no constitutional right to protect their elementary-age children from perverts masquerading as educators asking these little ones all kinds of questions even an adult would be embarrassed to answer and to which no agent of the government has a right to know their answers.

These sensitive liberals whine students not wanting to read the book do not have an alternative to choose from if they still want to participate in the contest. Any other time these advocates of radical tolerance and inclusion insist that in a pluralistic society the upstanding member of the community has an obligation to subject oneself to ideas one might otherwise find objectionable.

So if students have to be subjected to putting condoms on cucumbers for their own good, then how are they going to be harmed by a novel about a talking lion? Makes you wonder what they are so afraid of.

All the fuss causes the critically minded to speculate if it’s for the sake of the children or rather about something else the hypertolerant malcontents themselves do not want to confront. A child not belonging to the Christian faith is not going to necessarily pick up on any Christian motifs Lewis might have incorporated into the text.

To pick up on any parallels, one would already have to be familiar with Christian doctrine. Thus to be offended by Aslan as a perceived Christ-figure is to have a problem with an intellect more formidable than even that of C.S. Lewis, namely God Himself.

Adherents of absolutist relativism will contend it is not the place of educators to convert students to any particular set of religious ideas. Funny, public educators don’t mind using the persuasive powers of the classroom as to influence the choices pupils make regarding viewpoints on issues such as homosexuality, abortion, and the origins of the universe. If no set of ideas is better than any other and parents are usually seen as being too stupid to decide what is in the best interests of their children, what’s the big deal if a child switches to Christianity if all paths to God or whatever else you happen to see as the supreme universal truth or lack there of really are equal?

In Lewis’ novel, it is revealed that the White Witch has placed a curse on the Land Of Narnia so it is always winter but never Christmas. With the lust of liberals to remove all vestiges of Christianity from Western culture, my guess is that they hate this book because Lewis just hit too close to home.

Copyright 2005 by Frederick Meekins