MENU

Politics
Category

On September 23, 2014 By In Politics

The Image of God Recommends Them To You

Guest post by Mark Nenadov

“When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.” (Leviticus 19:33-34, ESV)

In his 1867 speech in Boston, Frederick Douglass said:

“If we would reach a degree of civilization higher and grander than any yet attained, we should welcome to our ample continent all nations, kindreds, tongues and peoples…The outspread wings of the American eagle are broad enough to shelter all who are likely to come.”

Christians don’t speak with one clear voice on immigration policy. Our exegesis, political theory, experiences, prejudices, vocations, and economic situations seem to guarantee that. And that is OK.

At a bare minimum, though, I believe Christians should share something of Douglass’ optimism. It ought to be grounded not so much in trust of human nature as trust in God’s sovereignty and His graciousness to the nations in Jesus Christ. We North Americans have an “ample continent” which can welcome many “outsiders” and we will have no claim on being “exceptional” if we don’t make our place welcoming. In theologically conservative circles there are sadly few who possess such optimism. The shrill voice of the “nativist alarmist” is raised in every generation. And it is ugly.

I have no desire to tell you how to vote or what concrete policy positions to support. I’m just sharing thoughts which will hopefully help you think “Christianly” in this area. Before proceeding, let me tell you something about myself. It doesn’t make me any less or more of an authority on this matter, but perhaps it will interest you. I’m a first generation Canadian, the son of immigrants from the former Yugoslavia. My dad left his country illegally because it was about to arrest him for his religious principles.

1. Don’t forget your past (or your status)

In my mind, at the root of the problematic thinking on immigration that is so prevalent among theologically conservative Christians is a basic forgetfulness.

First, there is forgetfulness about our indebtedness to (and dependence on) God’s gracious disposition in our direction. That’s when pride and a sour nationalism creeps in.

Second, there is a forgetfulness of the basic dignity which is tied to the fact that humans are made in the image of God.

Third, it is easy for us to forget how tenuous our “nativist” identity is. Even if your family was here “going way back”, you might be surprised to learn how marginal and “outsider” your roots really are. It’s often not hard to find a “break” in a “nativist” pedigree.

Fourth, it is easy to forget how non-mainstream and marginal our religious or cultural affiliation really is. For example, as a Baptist, I must always remember how Baptists were once been regarded as outsiders. In the early 19th century, several states imposed “dissenter” taxes on Baptist ministers. Baptists also couldn’t hold public offices at times. And that’s just the situation in North America. Baptists often did not fare very well in Europe, either. Historical research is a great antidote against ignorant and boastful nativism.

2. Beware of sensationalistic statistics and slogans

I was once researching old newspapers from my town here in Ontario, Canada, and I found a political ad from the 1920s. It said: “Canada is for Canadians…stop the alarming tide of immigration.” With a touch of humour, the competing politician observed that the majority of immigrants were actually from the British Isles. While I am sure some things have gotten worse since the 1920s, I’m glad for progress in this area. Canadian politicians do not feel free to be so overtly xenophobic today. Though, I must say when I survey North American political discourse, I’m still amazed at how free politicians still feel to play the “nativist” card!

Let’s dig into U.S. history a bit. In 1845, the U.S. Nativist Party spoke of a troubling “onslaught” of Irish Catholics — 1.7 million Irish Catholic immigrants who “crowded the shores of the United States.” Similar anecdotes could be shared regarding fears of Jewish, Italian, Japanese, Chinese, Mexican, or German immigrants. Of course, such “concerning” statistics seem laughable today. Especially in light of how many millions upon millions of people have immigrated to North American since then. However, we would do well to recognize the extent to which we are confronted with thinly veiled messages which, while perhaps a bit more sophisticated, convey the same spirit. In each generation, the alarmists know how to dress up statistics and platitudes to spread fear and xenophobia.

Of course, it is not wrong to use immigration statistics. In fact, they can be genuinely alarming in that they call out serious logistical, policy-making, or humanitarian challenges. However, they should never propel us to hatred or “tight-fistedness.” We need to keep up a healthy optimism. God created a glorious world and He is in control. He didn’t create a zero-sum world. The world is full of God’s wondrous works. Don’t let fear-mongers fool you into wasting your time with foolishness which leads to slavish fears.

3. Beware of common but false assumptions

Not everything that is popularly repeated is true. Nor is everything that is intuitive. Nor is everything that aligns with our anecdotal experiences. Here are two common but false assumptions about immigration:

A. “Immigration is bad for the economy”
On the contrary, economists generally believe that immigration leads to increases in productivity and growth for all parties in the economy. For more information on this, review Building a Wall around the Welfare State, Instead of the Country. 60% of the top 25 technology companies have been founded or co-founded by first or second generation immigrants. Who knows what other amazing developments will come at the hands of immigrants in the future!

B. “Muslims are taking over the West and are not assimilating”
This is a pervasive myth, and one with a certain amount of plausibility. However, Doug Sanders’ work has shown that many of these “popular assumptions” are either inaccurate or exaggerated. Though I reject the Islamic religion and its truth claims and hate the “political correctness” that shuns the critique of religious beliefs, I must say that many of the commonly held fears about Muslim immigration are based more upon anecdotal evidence than any sort of trustworthy analysis. Muslim birthrates are rapidly falling. Doug Sanders suggests that even if the immigration rates stay constant, Europe is unlikely to surpass a 10% Muslim population. And while Muslim immigrants often initially have differing views than their host countries, their opinions tend to converge with those of their new neighbours. Generation by generation, they’re assimilating quicker than many assume. Sanders also notes that about 40% of American Muslims have University degrees–about twice as many as the overall national average.

Whatever we might make of Sanders’ findings, I believe Christians ought to have an evangelical optimism about Muslim immigration. Many Muslims who can’t (safely) hear the gospel in their homelands, through immigration, now have an opportunity to hear the gospel. If North American Christians will take it to them, that is. Personally, it is disturbing that some are so consumed by a Muslim “threat” that they seem unable to even rejoice in (let alone participate in) this gospel opportunity. For instance, a PCA minister recently claimed that mass conversion of Muslims is “not Biblically doable” (his article, in Charisma News, has been subsequently taken down).

We would do well to remember the prayer of the RCA minister Samuel Zwemer:

“Father, the hour has come; glorify thy Son in the Muslim world, and fulfill through him the prayer of Abraham thy friend, ‘O, that Ishmael might live before thee.’ For Jesus’ sake. Amen.”

Some final thoughts

Whether or not you agree with everything I’ve said here, I hope that this article will help you think through these issues.

Let us remember that God’s people, in many seasons of history, have been and are pilgrims and strangers, and so our treatment of others should reflect sensitivity to those in the same situation.

We need to do some serious thinking on the immigration issue on a level that is more basic than merely that of a policy discussion. No matter what policies we may wish to support, we Christians must proceed under the Lordship of Christ. Why should we be concerned about the immigrant? As John Calvin said, it is “the image of God, which recommends him to you” (Institutes, 3.7.6).

Read more

On August 27, 2014 By In Politics

Palestine ≠ Terrorism

On July 8th, Israel launched Operation Protective Edge, a military response to rockets fired from the Gaza Strip by Hamas. The operation is currently in its 50th day. If you watch the news, you’ve heard about the strikes back and forth between Israel and Hamas. You’ve heard about the deaths of civilians and the destruction of property on both sides. You’ve heard many condemn Israel as being disproportionate in its use of force; you’ve heard many defend Israel for its use of force. Whatever the case, emotions are high and battle lines have been drawn.

In America, especially in Christian circles, it seems that the lines are drawn rather simplistically. Dennis Prager summarizes the conflict between Israel and Palestine as “one side wants the other side dead.” The glaring problem with such a statement is that there are more than two sides involved. When we think of the conflict as “Israel vs. Palestine” without distinguishing the Palestinian Authority from Hamas, or the West Bank from Gaza, we’ve accepted a false narrative. Prager uses general terms such as “Palestinians,” “Palestinian people,” or “Palestinian leadership” when describing the side that wants to kill the other. This causes his audience to see no distinction; they are left to assume that all Palestinians are thirsty for Israeli blood. Some clarifications are in order.  (more…)

Read more

On August 13, 2014 By In Politics, Scribblings

How Christians in America Can Help Christians in Iraq

Pastor George Grant, Parish Presbyterian Church, recently posted this kurdish proverb:

“A thousand friends are too few; one enemy is one too many.”

DR. GEORGE GRANT IN KURDISTAN

As the hostile situation in the Middle East continues to escalate, our Christian brothers and sisters are being killed for taking the name of our Lord. Each day we read reports of violent deaths, beheadings, and the desolation of Christian communities throughout Iraq. In the northern region of Kurdistan, home to the Kurdish people, our Christians brothers and sisters have become refugees sheltering in besieged villages and towns.

Kurdistan, very nearly the last sanctuary for Christians in the Muslim Middle East, is now under siege by the Ji’hadi terrorist forces of ISIS. Tens of thousands of refugees from the rest of Iraq and Syria are now threatened–along with the dynamic Kurdish Christian communities.

1656150_10204318760040003_3176411518485372594_n

The Nuun Fund has been established to speed urgently needed gifts to our friends at the Classical School of the Medes in the cities of Erbil, Dohuk, and Sulaymaniyah. Thanks to the work of the Nuun Fund relief supplies are starting to make their way to our brothers and sisters and the refugees they are caring for in Kurdistan.

Will you be a friend to the Christians in Iraq? Will you commit to prayer and to giving? Click here to give today!

Hear this plea from Pastor George Grant,

There are now more than a million refugees crowding into the schools, churches, and streets of Kurdistan. Having fled from the terror of ISIS, most have nothing more than the clothes on their backs. Please pray. And, give if you can: https://www.crowdrise.com/nuunfund

<>продвижение а в поисковых системах стоимость

Read more

On August 5, 2014 By In Politics, Theology

Kevin DeYoung Wants You to Know that Theonomy is Evil

KuyperProfileOn the plus side for the two-kingdom approach… A bulwark against theonomy and reconstructionism

via Two Kingdom Theology and Neo-Kuyperians | TGC.

Joel McDurmon is right about the context of that statement:

Interestingly, this is the only solid conclusion DeYoung comes to. The rest is cloudy and unsure, bifurcated and bipolar. He writes, “I don’t like the ‘third rail’ folks who are always positioning themselves as the sane alternative between two extremes, but I have to admit that there are elements of both approaches–two kingdom theology and neo-Kuyperianism–that seem biblical and elements that seem dangerous.”

So let me just summarize DeYoung’s actual communication. It isn’t about neo-Kuyperianism. It isn’t about two-kingdoms. It is against God’s law. He wants you to know that ministers in good standing (in complete opposition to the actual statements in the Westminster Confession, if anyone cares) will be permitted all sorts of intellectual hobbies to root around in one or the other viewpoints. But theonomists are outside the pale. In fact, opposing theonomy doesn’t require an exegetical reason (or, for that matter, any church court ruling). You as a reader need to be taught what you must do, how you must conform, to be acceptable to DeYoung and his cool friends.

Reject Theonomy! Not with an argument. Not with an ecclesiastical verdict. But with prejudice. All other viewpoints can be measured by their utility in rejecting theonomy.

There is nothing else to learn from DeYoung’s piece. It is one piece of dogmatism nestled in a pile of mush. Notice that, as there is no argument, the hope seems to be that the reader will, in the midst of all the other verbiage, simply swallow the dogma without evidence or argument.

(Cross-posted)<>раскрутка а в твери

Read more

On July 3, 2014 By In Politics

The Top Five Forgotten Founders

By Contributing Scholar, Dr. Thomas Kidd

When Americans speak of the “Founding Fathers,” they usually have a group of about six men in mind: George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, James Madison, and John Adams, for sure, and maybe Alexander Hamilton or Samuel Adams. These Founders are endlessly fascinating, but if all we do is focus on this short list, we get a skewed view of the Revolution.

I recently contributed an essay on Patrick Henry to Mark David Hall and Gary Gregg’sAmerica’s Forgotten Founders (now in its 2nd edition, from ISI Books), which introduces readers to some of the lesser-known Founding Fathers. As I also discuss in my biography, Patrick Henry: First Among Patriots,  Henry is probably one the best known of those forgotten Founders, but he is not quite in the top tier of those we remember. Perhaps Henry has lost some fame because of his bitter political rivalry with Madison and Jefferson in the 1780s, which culminated in Henry’s opposition to the Constitution. Some Americans have a hard time understanding how the great Patriot Henry could have become an Antifederalist.

In any case, in honor of the Fourth of July, here’s my personal list of the top five forgotten Founding Fathers, leaders I wish more Americans knew. Since I’ve already discussed him, I’ll leave Henry off, even though he’s my personal favorite. Anyone who participated in politics or the military during the Revolution could be on the list.

John Witherspoon: a Scots Presbyterian minister, president of Princeton, and teacher of James Madison, Witherspoon was elected to serve in the Continental Congress, and signed the Declaration of Independence (the only clergyman to do so). The best book on Witherspoon is Jeffry Morrison, John Witherspoon and the Founding of the American Republic.

Lemuel Haynes: born in Connecticut to a white mother and black father, Haynes worked as an indentured servant prior to enlisting in theMassachusetts militia, and then the Continental Army. Haynes also experienced evangelical conversion and came under the tutelage of local Calvinist pastors. Shortly after the Declaration of Independence, Haynes wrote “Liberty Further Extended,” possibly the most powerful argument against slavery from the Revolutionary era. In the 1780s, Haynes began a thirty year pastoral career in Vermont, and was likely the first African American to pastor a largely white congregation. The standard biography of Haynes is John Saillant’sBlack Puritan, Black Republican: The Life and Thought of Lemuel Haynes.

Roger Sherman: another devout evangelical from Connecticut, Sherman was the only Patriot to sign all four of the great American founding documents: the Continental Association, the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, and the Constitution. Mark David Hall has a major new book on Sherman coming out this fall,Roger Sherman and the Creation of the American Republic.

David Avery: converted under George Whitefield’s preaching, Avery worked as a pastor in Vermont until the outbreak of the Revolution, when he became one of George Washington’s key chaplains. He prayed over American troops at the Battle of Bunker Hill, and crossed the Delaware with Washington on Christmas night of 1776. I discuss Avery at length in God of Liberty: A Religious History of the American Revolution.

John Zubly: the wildcard of the list, this Swiss Presbyterian pastor of Savannah, Georgia, became perhaps the most fascinating American Loyalist of the Revolution. Zubly led Georgia’s protests against British taxes, and represented the colony in the Second Continental Congress, but as a matter of principle, he balked at the prospect of violent revolution. He left the Congress, lost his church, and for a time hid out in South Carolina’s Black Swamp before becoming Georgia’s most active Loyalist writer. The standard introduction to Zubly and his writings is Randall Miller, ed., A Warm and Zealous Spirit: John J. Zubly and the American Revolution, A Selection of His Writings.

Who would you include on the list of Forgotten Founders? Happy Fourth of July!

You can now sign up to receive Thomas S. Kidd newsletter: sign up here.

Follow @ThomasSKidd, {Originally published at Patheos}<>barabash-designраскрутка продвижение ов харьков

Read more

On June 10, 2014 By In Politics

What Racism, Human Trafficking, and Abortion All Have in Common

Guest Post by Michael Graham

Racism, human trafficking, and abortion all share a common source to their evil – the fundamental denial of human dignity – more specifically the creator endowed dignity of being made in the image of God.  This is unilaterally accomplished by carving out groups of people (by ethnicity, gender, vulnerability, or age) who are classified as sub-human and therefore not treated as equal human beings.

Racism
Racism denies the image of God in a particular ethnicity, people group, or tribal affiliation.  It seeks to make the persons of such groups or affiliations lesser than your group or affiliation. In doing so it assails the inherent worth endowed by God.  There are several idols at work in racism – power, control, pride, and ironically likely both self-love and self-hatred.

Human Trafficking
Human trafficking denies the image of God in humanity by treating certain humans as not being human at all, but rather property.  All sense of dignity and worth must be deconstructed in order to justify the human as property.  There are several idols at work in human trafficking, most notably, greed, power, control, and lust.

Abortion
Abortion denies the image of God in those of a certain size, age, gestation, or relative level of “wantedness.”  The human is made to be sub-human because it is small, young, not yet viable, and has not travelled the magical 6″ journey down the birth canal that suddenly and mysteriously imbues it with life, human rights, and legal status.  Their are several idols at work here, most notably, lust, selfishness, comfort, and escape.

While perhaps difficult to personally engage heavily on all three fronts, I find it ironic that my own age demographic seem inclined to care about the first 2 of these 3 and not the third.  I don’t know if this is for reasons of ignorance, idolatry, apathy, or all of the above.  It will be interesting how history plays itself out on this particular issue… but I am willing to wager that our grand children will think of abortion with a similar disdain that our generation holds toward the Holocaust.

The Banality of Evil and Our Cultural Morass

I hope we would see ourselves as being more dignified than to cut up our children for the pursuit of the ideal body, the next ladder rung of the career, or the perfect orgasm.  I hope we would see ourselves as being more dignified than to allow persons to be treated as property for sex or for unpaid work for the pursuit of cheaper goods, uncommitted and intimacy-less sex (rape).  I hope we would see ourselves as being more dignified than to allow other ethnicities to be treated as less worthwhile, less valuable, and sub-human for the pursuit of feeling good about one’s own tribe at the expense of another tribe.

There is a certain banality to evil that lulls us into going along and getting along. It was the same banality that anesthetized the very bright German people into the wholesale slaughter of persons categorized as sub-human.

What we want is what we worship and what we worship controls us.  This is true if we are pagans, atheists, agnostics, or Christians. We are all slaves to our wants.  Those wants drive our ideas… And ideas have consequences… Often dire ones.

What the heart loves, the will chooses, the mind justifies – Thomas Cranmer

Michael blogs at Modern Pensées.<>анализ продвижения ов

Read more

On June 4, 2014 By In Culture, Politics

Gay Marriage, Civil Disobedience, and the Christian Future

“Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.” George Orwell, 1984

Jack Phillips is a Christian baker in Lakewood, Colorado. In 2012 Jack Phillips refused to make a wedding cake for a gay couple. This couple then reported him to to Civil Rights Commission. A lawsuit followed. The judge ruled against Jack Phillips. The Civil Rights Commission has now come back with its ruling, which consists of three parts.

First, Jack Phillips must change his store policies immediately and begin make wedding cakes for gay couples.

Second, his entire staff must attend training on Colorado’s anti-discrimination laws and agree to abide by them.

Third, for the next two years he must submit quarterly reports to show that he has not discriminated against customers based on their sexual orientation.

Jack Phillips might appeal the decision, but it is hard to see how anything will change.

Here are few quotes.

The Commission chairwoman, “You can have your beliefs, but you can’t hurt people at the same time.”

The ACLU attorney, “Religious freedom is undoubtedly an important American value, but so is the right to be treated equally under the law free from discrimination…Everyone is free to believe what they want, but businesses like Masterpiece Cakeshop cannot treat some customers differently than others based on who they are as people.”

The judge, “At first blush, it may seem reasonable that a private business should be able to refuse service to anyone it chooses. This view, however, fails to take into account the cost to society and the hurt caused to persons who are denied service simply because of who they are.”

Let the tearing begin.

1984

So how should we live in this country where the rejection of God’s created order is law? How should we live when those in power want to reshape our minds in ways contrary to Scripture? Here are a few thoughts in no particular order.

First, we are past the live and let live stage (if one ever existed).  The sodomites are not saying, “We will live this way and you live that way and we can coexist.” They are demanding that we publicly accept their sins. Anyone who believes that we can all just get along will soon wake up to find their position overrun.

Second, they will come for our children. How long before the State demands that home schooled children and children in Christian schools get “sensitivity training?” If they can make a business owner train his employees why not a principle his students and teachers? Why not a parent their children?

Third, Christians in all walks of life should expect more traps. Think of Daniel 6. Pastors should expect homosexuals to visit their congregations to see if they are preaching against homosexuality. Christian business owners should expect homosexuals to come in and see if they get turned away.  Christian politicians should expect homosexuals to try and out them in some way. I am not encouraging hand wringing, just open eyes.

Fourth, human sexuality, including male-female roles, marriage, procreation, female ministers, sodomy, abortion, divorce, rape, pedophilia, sexual abuse, transgender, etc.  is the battle line right now in America. There are other issues, but none as pressing as this one. Therefore this is where we must fight.  I am not saying this is all we talk about. And I understand that there are many ways we fight against this wave of immorality, such as love our wives, worship the living God, evangelize our neighbor, teach our children, live holy lives, and preach the Word. But let’s not miss the obvious: one way we must fight is by saying clearly and without apology what God’s Word teaches on these subjects.

Fifth, any pastor or public Christian leader who refuses to speak against these things is a coward.  Again, I am not saying this is all we to talk about or that we speak with malice . But our stance on sodomy, and issues related to it needs to be clear and public.  It our duty to stand in the line of fire, to preach the Word, and to rally God’s people around the truth. A pastor or public leader whose stance on the above issues is vague or unknown is not being a faithful shepherd.

Sixth, pastors and Christian leaders need to teach their people what godly civil disobedience looks like. There is a lot of freedom in how we resist the State’s growing power.  But the time for abstract theological discussion about civil disobedience is passing quickly. We must study God’s Word, meditate on it, pray through it, and study our fathers in the past to learn from them. Then we must teach our people the proper responses to the State. What can we do as Christians? Is there any place to take up arms?  (Maybe those debates about the Revolutionary War and the Civil War are not so arcane after all.) Should we march? Should we keep our businesses open even if there is the threat of police action? Should a Christian business owner reject a homosexual job applicant? What should we do if they come for our children?  What if they come for our guns? Should Christians accept government money in any situation? What should Christian schools do if they are commanded to teach that homosexuality is fine? How should Christian magistrates function? Should Christian soldiers get out or resist from within?  Pastors and churchmen should be leading the charge in answering these and other questions.

Seventh, Christians should expect to lose money, businesses, tax breaks, jobs, etc. for taking a stand against unbiblical sexual practices. The Church and her members need to be prepared for this. We should think long term in our financial dealings so that we can “have something to give him who has need.” (Ephesians 4:28)

Eighth, churches should pray for leaders in corporate worship. I Timothy 2 is clear on this point. Do we pray for our leaders? Do we pray for new, righteous leaders to rise up? Do we pray that God would cast down those who hate his Church? Do we pray for pagan leaders to repent and turn to Christ? Do we pray for that we may lead a quiet and peaceful life in all godliness (I Timothy 2:2)? Do we pray for our leaders by name?

Ninth, Christians need to be known as a peaceful people. Psalm 120:7 says, “I am for peace, but they are for war.” We should be the ones who long for peace. This does not mean we are quiet about everything. Nor does this mean we compromise the Gospel to be at “peace with all men” (Romans 12:18).  But it does mean we are careful about what battles we fight. Young people, of whom I am one, especially need to hear this.  We tend to think that every sin is worthy of fire bombing.  But we need to make sure we are hitting the big targets and not spending days chasing one lone enemy through the forest.

Tenth, we must not despair. Jesus sits on throne. We should act from faith, not fear.  We should not be anxious, worried, fretful, fearful, depressed, or discouraged. Our Lord told us this would happen. Our Lord told us to rejoice when we are persecuted.  The Church will march on. We have a job to do. Let us do it with joy in the Holy Spirit, faith in Christ, and dependence upon our Father. In the end, all will be well.<>наполнение а текстом

Read more

On May 31, 2014 By In Politics

Ten Years of Blogging!

Ten years ago I started this little known project called blogging. Before that I used Geocities. Not many of you have heard of Geocities. It was the 90’s webpage builder. Yahoo shut down Geocities’ U.S. service back in 2009. Now, it is just a distant memory. Back in 2004, as I was starting my time at RTS/Orlando, I deleted my Geocities page and started a blog using blogspot. In 2006,  I transferred all my data to a free wordpress account. In 2013, I bought my own domain, uribrito.com.

Today marks my ten year blogging anniversary!  No cake. No party. Just a reminder that I have been writing for a long time. When I started in 2004 few people knew about blogging. A small social networking service launched in February 2004 known as Facebook had only recently made its debut. And from what I remember, it was meant only for Harvard students at the time. Now, as of the 3rd of October 2013, there were 500 million people with a Facebook account. Much of today’s blogging has been replaced by Facebook status updates and links to other websites. I even heard someone recently tell me that they get all their major links to news reports from Facebook. Still, my perspective has been that blogging provides a valuable resource to express fuller thoughts and also the opportunity to be more precise in your argument and thought. a

I have posted almost 4,000 posts in these last ten years. Here are five lessons I have learned:

First, writing is hard. Sitting down to write something that is more than the mere fluff you get in most places can be rather challenging. This is one reason thousands and thousands of people have blog pages that have been untouched in years. Blogging demands perseverance.

Second, blogging can get you in trouble. In the height of my zealous years as a seminarian, I thrived in writing about controversial topics. Sometimes they were so controversial that it attracted the attention of well-known scholars who would chastise me for such foolishness. I took their critiques as validation of what I was saying. I should have listened to them, but instead I was more concerned with the number of hits my post had.

Third, the best writing I’ve done has been peer-reviewed. I do not consider myself a great writer, but I have lots of ideas. I am well-read and have two degrees in theology. All that is proof that I should have a few things to say that are at least appealing to some. But, though one may have good ideas to discuss, he needs to express those ideas is readable and grammatically accurate way. Nothing is more distressing to readers than sloppy writing. It hinders good ideas from being communicated powerfully and effectively. As a result, I have developed a two-step process for publishing pieces over 1,000 words. First, I edit and re-edit my work. Secondly, I send it to two friends who have some gifts in the art of writing. After they send me back their thoughts, only then do I publish my material. This has proven to be highly successful. As as result I have edited a book, written another, and have published articles in well-known Christian websites. In summary, writing is communal. b

Fourth, writing is public. One of the main reasons I write is for the sake of others. Everything I write is so that others may find interest or help in something I am engaged in. I find the idea of reading or writing for self-pleasure difficult to understand. Of course, like anything, most initial forays into writing need to be kept away from the reading public until they reach a level of maturation. But there is also great pleasure in allowing others to enter into my reading and writing journey. Blogging has allowed me to invite others into my life.

Finally, blogging can lead to humility. I know certain bloggers use their writing as platform for their arrogant rants and vitriol. In my case, even with all the help I have received, I still make remarkable mistakes in my writing. And I am quite aware of that. In my mind, my ideas come out harmoniously, but when others read them, they lack the coherence I thought they had. c Those who have left comments over the years have encouraged me greatly to improve my communication in writing. Instead of reacting as  if they have no sense of what they are talking about, I am always seeking to first consider my intentions for writing, how to better communicate my writing, and how to honor those who have taken the time to read my blog when there are millions more they could have been reading. So, thanks to all my readers. You are not many, but you have humbled me in many ways.

Here’s to another ten years!<>продвижение а юридической компании

  1. and it has that little feature called a “footnote”  (back)
  2. I have also applied this method to all my sermon writing  (back)
  3. see #4  (back)

Read more

On May 29, 2014 By In Politics

Patrick Henry, Homeschooler

By Contributing Scholar, Dr. Thomas Kidd

Patrick Henry, the greatest orator of the American Revolution, was homeschooled. Born in 1736 as the second of eleven children, he attended a small common school until he was 10. After that, his father took primary responsibility for his education. He read classics of Greek and Roman antiquity (sometimes in the original languages), ancient and modern history, and of course, the Bible. He also worked on his family’s farm, hunted, and learned to play the flute and the violin. As a young man, Henry taught himself law in order to pass the bar exam, and in 1765 he burst onto the national scene when, as a freshman legislator in Virginia, he penned the colony’s resolves against the Stamp Act and fulminated against the act on the floor of Virginia’s House of Burgesses.

His upbringing prepared him to become the “First among Patriots,” as the title of my new biography of Henry puts it. Henry’s experience wasn’t unique among the Founders, of course. George Washington and Ben Franklin also had little formal schooling. John Marshall, the future chief justice of the Supreme Court, was born in a log cabin in Virginia and had only a bit of education outside the home prior to his admission to the bar in 1780. Despite their lack of technical training, these American Patriots became part of the greatest assemblage of political talent the nation has ever known.

In the 18th century, American schooling like Henry’s was informal but purposeful. It was not designed to enhance a boy’s self-esteem, or even to train him for a vocation (Henry’s vocational training came in his daily chores on the farm). It was intended primarily to inculcate the wisdom and ethics one needed to function as a responsible citizen of his county and colony. From his parents’ tutoring, and from the great books of the British and Western traditions, Henry came to understand the importance of virtue, the fragility of liberty, and the bedrock principles of the Christian faith.

The Founders’ upbringings stand in stark contrast against those of many children today. Today, serious work for children is often deferred until the post-college years (if not longer). Public education, moreover, has largely lost its moral vision. Most people only agree today that schools should train students in “math and science” so America can remain “competitive.” But is America’s declining competitiveness mostly a matter of the failed transference of knowledge (which, admittedly, is also a problem in our schools)?

The Founding generation would suspect that, to the extent that America is in moral and economic decline, our problem is one of character and virtue. These were the primary issues that Henry’s kind of education addressed. As I wrote in an earlier review of Anthony Esolen’s brilliant Ten Ways to Destroy the Imagination of Your Child, even highly motivated parents today seem mostly concerned with their children’s “success,” often defined by getting high test scores and admission to elite colleges and universities (schools that then offer little more than a smorgasbord of nihilism to students). Why should we wonder at revelations such as the SAT cheating scandal that has recently rocked Long Island, New York’s Gold Coast? These students are simply doing what they are told; they are trying to achieve the new American dream of amoral achievement.

In today’s terms, Henry was actually not much of a success as a young man—his first farm failed, as did two shops he tried to open. But he wasn’t a man to move back in with his parents. So he began to read in the law, and there he found his calling. In 1775 he challenged Virginians to take defensive measures against the most powerful military on the face of the earth. In words framed by classical texts and the Bible, he thundered that “an appeal to arms and to the God of hosts, is all that is left us!” With this, he lifted his arms and proclaimed, Joshua-like, “I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!” It was the most dramatic moment of the American Revolution, and a role Henry’s upbringing had perfectly prepared him to perform.

Originally published at Patheos.<>drupal онлайн консультантреклама в контакте стоимость

Read more

On March 27, 2014 By In Politics

Doctor’s Orders

This is an excerpt from an article published by Biblical Medical Ethics, Inc

Defining the Christian Doctor

Maddox.Peru

“What does it mean to be a Christian doctor? It means first to be a Christian, striving to please God in every area of life. It means to exercise that in our calling, our vocation. We must serve God in serving our fellowman. We must serve our fellowman by listening to his complaints and ailments. We must serve by comforting him, teaching him about his illness, diagnosis and prognosis, and treatments; but most importantly, we serve by reminding him that there is no comfort outside of Christ. We advise, and counsel, and rebuke on occasion. We sometimes use drugs or other remedies, if they may benefit; but we use nothing without thankfulness to God, asking for his blessing in its use. We seek daily to see God’s hand in his world. We recognize that to ignore God’s hand is to deny him. We treat the patient as fallen, a sinner in need of redemption far more than he needs our medicine. We remember that the patient has responsibility for himself before God, that we cannot force others to pay for his care, nor can he. We remember that resources are limited, and that medicine is not the highest priority.” ~ Robert Maddox, MD a b

For more from Doctor Maddox on the topic of medical ethics, refer to his three-part lecture series from the 2012 AAPC Pastors’ Conference: American Idols, available from Auburn Avenue Media

Maddox.Peru3

Dr. Rob with Peru Mission in 2012

<>online mobiпоисковая оптимизация верстки

  1. Dr. Rob Maddox is a Ruling Elder in the CREC and a member of Auburn Avenue Presbyterian Church of Monroe, LA  (back)
  2. HT: to my friend Deacon Ed Lang, headmaster of Geneva Academy of Monroe, for pointing me to this excellent resource  (back)

Read more