Teavangelicals: Taking Back America

July 11, 2012 1 Comment

David Brody’s new book The Teavangelicals: the Inside Story of how Conservative Evangelicals and the Tea Party are Taking Back America describes the high degree of support between conservative evangelicals and Tea Party groups. In fact, Mr. Brody states that Tea Party organizations are made up of about 60% conservative evangelicals.

The shared goals between libertarian fiscal conservatives and conservative evangelicals make sense to me. While liberal nanny state programs seem to help the poor on the surface, welfare actually has a dis-incentivizing effect, hurting the poor in the long run. Making citizens dependent on government only overburdens the economy. These fiscal policies are not moral. Our nation is being overwhelmed by debt and obligations which our economy cannot supply. We’ve taken on trillions of dollars in unfunded liabilities from  promises politicians made but had no funding source. Of course, over 50 million taxpayers murdered in the name of women’s choice hasn’t helped matters much either.

So I’m thankful we seem to forming a kind of coalition. Some people feel strongly that we need conservative fiscal policy and smaller government to turn our country around. Others feel the same way while being concerned that the moral fabric of our society is frayed with the push for so-called same-sex marriage and the prolongation of the abortion killing fields.

The Republican National Committee’s campaign literature for Romney almost exclusively discusses fiscal issues. My wife and I wanted to find a group that has a broader conservative approach. I am supporting Romney now as the conservative candidate to beat Obama in November. At the same time, I want more air time from our side on the moral and religious battles our nation is facing.  One example of a group that spans this gap is The Faith and Freedom Coalition. In our home we’re contributing to this organization because they are pushing for socially conservative as well as fiscally conservative policies. You might want to check them out as well.

Related articles

Filed under Conservative Thinking, Culture War, Finances, Issues Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Traditional Marriage on the Ballot in Minnesota

July 3, 2012 Leave a comment

John Piper (theologian)

John Piper (theologian) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The people of Minnesota are voting on an amendment to their state constitution defining marriage as  “Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Minnesota.” Sound familiar California? We had a similar vote about four years ago. It passed, but an activist judge struck it down. Our battle is somewhere in the appeals stage. I hope your vote goes the way it has for every state where the people have had a chance to vote. In other words, I hope traditional marriage wins out.

A sermon by John Piper of Bethlehem Baptist in Minneapolis came to my attention this week. While he didn’t come outright in favor of the proposed marriage amendment, Dr. Piper preached a sermon directly on the Biblical basis for marriage and laid out a number of Biblical principles to help his flock think through this issue. I will include the main points of his sermon here because he sums up quite succinctly some of the best thinking on this battle of our culture war.

1. Marriage is created and defined by God in the Scriptures as the sexual and covenantal union of a man and a woman in life-long allegiance to each other alone, as husband and wife, with a view to displaying Christ’s covenant relationship to his blood-bought church.

2. There is no such thing as so-called same-sex marriage, and it would be wise not to call it that.

3. Same sex desires and same sex orientation are part of our broken and disordered sexuality owing to God’s subjection of the created order to futility because of man’s sin.

4. Therefore, same-sex intercourse, not same-sex desire is the focus of Paul’s condemnation when he threatens exclusion from the kingdom of God.

5. Therefore, it would contradict love and contradict the gospel of Jesus to approve homosexual practice, whether by silence, or by endorsing so-called same-sex marriage, or by affirming the Christian ordination of practicing homosexuals.

6. The good news of Jesus is that God saves heterosexual sinners and homosexual sinners who trust Jesus, by counting them righteous because of Christ, and by helping them through his Spirit to live lives pleasing to him in their disordered brokenness.

7. Deciding what actions will be made legal or illegal through civil law is a moral activity aiming at the public good and informed by the worldview of each participant.

8. Don’t press the organization of the church or her pastors into political activism. Pray that the church and her ministers would feed the flock of God with the word of God centered on the gospel of Christ crucified and risen. Expect from your shepherds not that they would rally you behind political candidates or legislative initiatives, but they would point you over and over again to God and to his word, and to the cross.

Main Points of Sermon, “‘Let Marriage be Held in Honor’ Thinking Biblically about So-called Same-sex Marriage”, John Piper, June 16, 2012.

Even though Dr. Piper says not press the church or her pastors into political activism, if more pastors would simply lay out the Biblical framework as he did, Christians would be much better informed in their values and voting. This is much closer to the Black Robed Regiment that David Barton talks about than what I hear on Sunday. If you have a chance to read or listen to the sermon, I recommend looking over point number 7 carefully. Dr. Piper puts the issue of codifying traditional marriage into very clear terms.

What do you think of John Piper’s stance? Are there other points he should cover?

Related articles

Filed under Conservative Thinking, Culture War, Issues Tagged with , , , , , , , , , , ,

ObamaCare Fumble

June 28, 2012 Leave a comment

English: Depiction of the House vote on H.R. 3...

English: Depiction of the House vote on H.R. 3590 (ObamaCare) on March 21, 2010, by congressional district. Democratic yea Democratic nay Republican nay No representative seated (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

It appears that we are not going to be rescued by 9 (or even 5) black robed justices on white chargers. In a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court upheld ObamaCare this morning. In fact I think it is absurd for us as Americans to wait on the decision of the Supreme Court justices on pins and needles as though they are going to restore the limited government intent of the Constitution. The recent appointments to the court by President Obama pretty much assure us that these justices will incrementally continue to advance a Leftist agenda in our nation.

It is time for us to pass an amendment to the constitution that limits the terms of these justices to something more reasonable for 1 person to have sway in our nation. I think 10 or 12 years is reasonable for any one person to have such great authority over our nation. Perhaps we could have some sort of reaffirmation vote on the justices so that those who do not rule according to the original intent of our Constitution could be removed from office. Click here for Newt Gingrich’s discussion of reigning in the judiciary.
I’ve added some helpful resources below to help us become better informed on healthcare reform, religious liberty, and ObamaCare in our nation. The following is taken from an email from the Manhattan Declaration:
The Alliance Defense Fund has created a page of resources to better understand the implications of Obamacare. Visit www.alliancedefensefund.org/obamacare.
 
The Becket Fund is partnering with Catholic and evangelical institutions suing the administration, including Belmont Abbey College and Colorado Christian University. Becket has created HHS Information Central with cases, maps, a timeline, and other resources.
 
The Colson Center has developed a page with regular updates on the religious liberty questions still in play.
As conservative Christians, let us not be discouraged. We need to stay in the game. This is one setback in a much longer contest. We need to let our voices be heard for our sakes and the next generation’s sake.
Related articles

Filed under Conservative Thinking, Culture War, Issues Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Supreme Court Ruling on ObamaCare

June 27, 2012 Leave a comment

English: The United States Supreme Court, the ...

English: The United States Supreme Court, the highest court in the United States, in 2010. Top row (left to right): Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Stephen G. Breyer, Associate Justice Samuel A. Alito, and Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Bottom row (left to right): Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy, and Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Whether the Supreme Court rules favor of keeping Obamacare or strikes it down, we need to take action on a couple of important issues.

First, we must carefully examine and plan health care policies in light of scriptural principles. One of those bedrock principles must be the sanctity of human life. Recent examples of pro-choice advocates refusing to condemn sex selective abortion highlight the need to draw a clear line of demarcation for life. Religious liberty is another necessary anchor. Forcing people to violate their consciences because of a healthcare plan is unconscionable.
Second, no matter how the justices rule on ObamaCare we need to begin to push back the amount of power that has been given over to our Supreme Court and the federal judicial system. We should put forth an amendment to the Constitution limiting the term of Supreme Court justices to 12 years. The practice that Supreme Court justices be appointed (not elected!) and then serve for 30 or 40 years completely molding the face of America in their image has allowed some to push a radical leftist agenda. This is not what our founding fathers intended. If you look at the abuses listed in the Declaration of Independence you can see that the rulings of one person or one small untouchable group of people was not the plan for our country. Our court system has become an opportunity for tyranny or as some would call it an oligarchy. We need to take back our country and set our course again by the biblical principles under which we started.
What do you think? Has Supreme Court power overgrown its intended boundaries? Would you prefer term limits, or reaffirmation votes?
Related articles

Filed under Conservative Thinking, Culture War, Issues Tagged with , , , , , , ,

Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy – Eric Metaxas

June 20, 2012 1 Comment

I finished the biography by Eric Metaxas on Dietrich Bonhoeffer  recently. It was very well written, and I had many moments for reflection and connection throughout. I’ve not been a big reader of biographies, but I found this treatment of the young German theologian inspiring and instructive. I’ll share a few insights here which I hope might whet your appetite to read it for yourself.

Bonhoeffer worked to shine light on what Hitler was doing by communicating to his allies in London specifically Bishop George Bell and a number of other ecumenical leaders. He bravely took a stand against the German Christian “church” which was being raised up as a pagan religion or replacement for true Christianity, attempting to expunge any connection to its Jewish roots. When Hitler ordered the Night of the Long Knives in June of 1934, Nazi hit squads went through and murdered anywhere from 400-1,000 people. After this people who disagreed with National Socialism or Hitler began to fear for their lives. If you spoke up against Hitler or his policies you could very well end up dead. Through all this Bonhoeffer remained steadfast in his stand against the pollution of the church and the pull of the German Christian movement to paganism, anti-Christian, and anti-Jewish sentiment as well as the fusing of the church with the state.

Hitler never spoke against the church as he rose to power. He was very politically astute to know that would not do. However, once he was fully in control of Germany he moved to break down the church and rebuild it in his own image. He supported the group called the German Christians who warped orthodox theology to make Jesus out as anti-semitic and basically return Germany to its pagan roots. Hitler himself despised Christian teaching and preferred the coarse power of the ancient germanic  pagan religions coupled with Darwinian naturalism. Within his inner circle, Goering and Himmler cultivated occult practices among the SS and incorporated them into the Nazi death camps.

Bonhoeffer attempted to rally groups of churches both within and without Germany to speak out against what the “German Christians” were doing. However, Nazis used control of information and communications to divide their enemies. This made different churches who had been allied with Bonhoeffer to split away. The Nazi divisive tactic whittled down and essentially liquefied their opposition. This has some connection with our current political battle. If churches and the righteous cannot unite against our common enemy of godlessness and immorality, no one will stand. If we divide our forces and become fractured and diffused, we will lose.

More than anything I am struck by Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s unyielding commitment to the rational pursuit of the conclusions of his faith. He did not back down from thinking things through to their logical conclusion, then taking action as necessary. I pray that we American Christians would do the same.

Have you read this stirring biography? What were your reactions?

Related articles

Filed under Culture War, History, Media Reviews Tagged with , , , , ,

How Should We Then Live? Francis Schaeffer

June 14, 2012 Leave a comment

link to Book on Amazon

How Should We Then Live?


Francis Schaeffer’s book How Should We Then Live? This is one of the modern classics of Christian thought. Schaeffer follows the development of Western thought and our various worldviews from the time of Roman civilization to modern times. He frames this development in the attempt of philosophers to explain our world starting with either absolutes or particulars. He gives dozens of examples of the various philosophic schools of thought playing out in art, music, and architecture.

The Reformation in Northern Europe found freedom for creation under the Bible and in its balance of universals and particulars found true freedom. The Renaissance in Southern Europe adopted the humanistic view with particulars only, and therefore had no basis for transcendent growth. As humanism began to infiltrate into the scientific thinking and philosophy of the 1700s and 1800s and on into today, people were faced with the problem of drawing absolute principles starting with particulars. This turned out to be impossible. Trying to come up with a unified, cohesive philosophy of life starting with human experience takes people nowhere.

As he closes the book, Schaeffer lists several pressures that are facing societies today which could push them to accept authoritarian rule instead of chaos. These pressures include: economic breakdown, war or serious threat of war, the chaos of violence including terrorism, the radical redistribution of the wealth of the world, a shortage of food or other natural resources in the world. As these pressures mount people will feel more compelled to give up freedom so that they can have some measure of peace and order. And as the Christian worldview base evaporates from societies in the West, people will have no basis to argue or think otherwise. A modern example played out in Germany when the people cried out for order from the economic collapse of the Weimar Republic and gave Hitler dictatorial power in their country. Not long after as the Germans rose in power under this dictatorship, Chamberlain signed over Czechoslovakia eventually losing most of Europe in World War II. They were hoping for “peace in our time.” What is the proper response? Do we succumb to the breakdown of society and imposed order, or do we as Christians affirm the Christian base that provided the freedoms upon which our nation was originally founded? This can only happen if individual people discover that Christian base in their own lives and then act to influence the consensus. “Such Christians do not need to be a majority in order for this influence on society to occur.” Christians were not in the majority when they changed the entire Western civilization.

Related articles

Filed under Culture War, Education, History, Media Reviews Tagged with , , , , , , , , ,

Wisconsin Residents say YES to Scott Walker

June 6, 2012 Leave a comment

Wisconsin Welcome Sign

Wisconsin Welcome Sign (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I am excited about the outcome of the recall election in Wisconsin. I assume that many of you watched in disgust as the liberal state senators tried to stop the state senate from moving toward right to work policies and away from entrenched unionism. Tonight’s win for Walker shows that Wisconsin voters have firmly said that they are happy with these reforms and the changes they are bringing in their lives.

In my other posts on the negative aspects of compulsory unionism (see below) I talked about how voluntary associations will produce better results for workers. It seems as though voters in Wisconsin want government to curtail the power of the compulsory unions. These unions who are basically not accountable to anyone.

My Earlier Posts:  Power Grab     Voluntary Association    Collective Bargaining Needs Balance

I recommend that California voters consider voting yes on the Stop Special Interest Money Now bill (which unions are calling the Corporate Power Grab Initiative). Maybe we can move the ball toward a higher degree of freedom for individual workers in California. Lower costs and less of liberal union meddling in our state politics sounds refreshing. Please consider the numbers on the political contribution watchdog site that I linked to in this post. Again, I would like to open some discussion about the pros and cons about this bill as I invited in my earlier post. What evidence is there that supports the CTA’s assertions about the bill? Does the bill cover the necessary bases and not just create more trouble?

Related articles

Filed under Culture War, Education, Issues, Union Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

160 Million Missing Women

June 5, 2012 1 Comment

English: Geographical depiction of East Asia, ...

English: Geographical depiction of East Asia, in an orthographic projection. ‪(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Legalized abortion accounts for millions of women missing across East Asia. These cultures have a strong preference for male children. When they discover the sex of their unborn baby girl, many have an abortion. The ratio of males to females in China is something like 150 males to 100 females. Are you having a boy or an abortion? Once again, abortion, though heralded by the left as an important civil right for women, is contributing to dire effects on women’s lives… putting them in the ultimate position of powerlessness: being murdered in the womb.

It has also been shown that the low numbers of women from these East Asian Nations contribute to a higher incidence of human trafficking. Kidnapped young women are usually headed for the sex trade or forced marriages.
If you’d like to learn more about this, go to Eric Metaxas’ BreakPoint segment.
To me this seems like a real war on women. How do you take it?
Related articles

Filed under Culture War, Issues Tagged with , , , , ,

11 More Furlough Days?

May 31, 2012 Leave a comment

Tax

Tax (Photo credit: 401K)

Regarding upcoming cuts in pay for our school district. The adage ‘hope for the best, plan for the worst’ is a good strategy to employ in this situation. If your current financial situation is one of living paycheck to paycheck, it would be best to get on a strict budget right now. The 4 furlough days cut about 2% of our income away this past year. That probably hurt some, but was small enough to overlook in many cases. With the prospect of another 11 furlough days next year, we had better have a plan. 11+4=15 furlough days total. That is about 8.3% of our salaries. While we aren’t supposed to need that unless the governor’s tax initiative doesn’t pass, I recommend that each of us exercise the self-discipline to live on 8.3% less from the beginning of the school year. Set aside the overage in an emergency fund. If you can, set up your budget this way by cutting back on lifestyle or selling an item on which you are now making payments. You are going to be in much better shape for the cuts next year. If the cuts don’t happen you’ll have a nice little emergency fund all ready to go. However, if the cuts do go into place you won’t be caught off guard. You can go into them with confidence—knowing you are ready. Dave Ramsey’s Financial Peace University can help you with this.

For more particulars on our district’s situation, see the slideshow here. My apologies. Some of the shots are a little fuzzier than others.

Whether the tax initiative passes or not, decline is on the horizon for California. Our state business climate is very poor because of regulation and taxes. Private sector businesses fund the public sector. If the private sector leaves the state, school district funding will only get worse. And guess what, our governor’s little tax initiative is one more example of making government bigger, and as a result, our business climate worse. If you would like to read more on how this works visit my post about Politics as Easy as Pie. Overall, I cannot in good conscience vote yes for the governor’s tax initiative.

Related articles

Filed under Education, Finances, Issues Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

The Jefferson Lies

May 29, 2012 1 Comment

Jefferson bible

Jefferson bible (Photo credit: naypinya)

Thomas Jefferson has been upheld as a leading founding father who was liberal and secular, advocated the strict separation of church and state, questioned the Bible, wrote his own version of the Bible, slept with his slave and fathered illegitimate children. David Barton’s new book The Jefferson Lies brings these reports about Jefferson to the table and examines them in light of Jefferson’s own writings and historical evidence. The results are eye-opening. I would like to share a brief description of these here in my blog if you would like a more detailed description I recommend purchasing the book The Jefferson Lies. You can also catch Barton’s discussion of his new book on WallBuilders Live! from the second week of May (2012).

I remember I was a teenager at church camp the first time I heard that Thomas Jefferson had created his own version of the Bible by cutting out certain parts of Scripture. This has been a little gnawing factoid in the back of my mind for three decades. Are these reports true? What did he cut out? How can Jefferson be a Christian or even have a respect for the Bible if he would cut out part of the Scripture? This kind of concern has put Jefferson in the place of the most secular founding father. But let’s look at the facts.

Jefferson created two works which are both referred to as “the Jefferson Bible”, one in 1804, the other in 1820. The first work in 1804 Jefferson created in response to a suggestion from a missionary that said in order to evangelize the Native American tribes a short work embodying the key teachings of the Gospel should be assembled. This work would be much more likely to be read by someone who is interested in the Christian faith but not ready to work their way through a 2 1/2 inch thick book. Jefferson took two copies of the Bible and went through the four Gospels Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John and cut and pasted together a chronological version of Jesus’ life. He took the accounts from all four Gospels and put them in timeline order and eliminated accounts that were told more than once by the different gospel narratives. Jefferson called this work An Abridgment of the Life and Teachings of Jesus Christ. He did not call it the Jefferson Bible. He created it solely as a tool for sharing Christian teachings with Native American tribes. While some Christians might object to abridging the Scriptures, we cannot say that this was an act of offense against scriptural teaching. Rather it affirms that Jefferson believed the life and teachings of Jesus Christ to be worthy of spreading in teaching to others. This can also be supported by the fact that Jefferson on a number of occasions contributed money toward Bible societies: groups whose purpose and mission was to distribute copies of the Bible, the full Bible.
The 1820 work of Thomas Jefferson often referred to as the Jefferson Bible is actually the more common of the two. This collection of passages from the Bible distills the moral teachings of Jesus Christ into one short work that Jefferson put together based on his belief that of all the moral teachings through the centuries, the morals of Jesus Christ where the highest, best, and most likely to bring about a peaceful and prosperous society when properly adhered to. If only we would learn this lesson today.
All told, this way of treating the Bible is quite a bit different than what I was led to believe about Jefferson. I’m still inclined to believe that he was one of the more secular founding fathers. However, he seems to have had a great deal more respect for scripture than many Christians do today.
I’ll try to follow up on some of the other points about Jefferson in later posts. In regard to the Jefferson “Bible”: When did you first hear about it/them and what effect did it have on your opinion of Thomas Jefferson?

Filed under Conservative Thinking, Culture War, History Tagged with , , , , , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →