Cultural Marxism’s Long March Through Geekdom

Apparently in the upcoming “Falcon and the Winter Soldier” Disney show, Marvel movie history will be changed, making a black man the first Captain America, before Steve Rogers. And that’s what Cultural Marxism does. Even in the world of fiction, it tries to claim the place of historical primacy. You take an existing fictional world, and write a work within that world that is a prequel, making somebody who isn’t a white heterosexual male the first hero of that world. If you tried to do that with Black Panther there would be riots. The point is that claiming a mythology is to claim the culture and society in which that mythology plays a significant role. You take away what inspires and defines that culture and its people, in order to demoralize its people and tear them apart. It is one part of the long march through the institutions. From a Marxist perspective, it is an act of war.

The Boy Scouts, And The Judgment of God

Decades of child abuse in the Boy Scouts eventually led to complete gender confusion, and now, lawsuits leading to bankruptcy. Leviticus 18 and Romans 1. It’s how sin and the judgment of God work. Whether or not the rest of the country will have to go through the same thing has yet to be fully seen, though to a large degree we are already. The leadership of San Francisco can’t connect the dots between their decades of rampant sodomy, the drug addiction, the failing government policies, and the homelessness. But the connection is there anyway.

It’s Idolatry. I’d Recognize It Anywhere.

You know how to tell if you’ve made an idol out of something? Just ask somebody who doesn’t think you should enjoy that thing, or who doesn’t like where you stand on that particular thing. They’ll be sure you’ve made an idol out of it. And I’m pretty sure that’s a solid, reliable judgment. I’ve found this works both with people you only know through social media and people you know casually in everyday life. The key, though, is that they have to think they know you better than they do. It helps if they think they’re especially good at reading other people’s hearts, too. And Charismatics that think they’re prophets? Always 100% accurate on this.

It really helps if they’ve found a website that will pay them money to write an article about it. Or, actually, the sense of power and glory that comes from it will do it. 


If their party is out of power and they hate the guy your party has in office? Trust me, you’re an idolater. Anybody could see that.

Nancy Pelosi’s Father Hunger

Pelosi and Trump haven’t spoken for months, since he called her “a third-rate politician”. That’s one part of why she tore up the SOTU address last night. But she went into the event willing to go through with the formalities of the address in a way respectful of Trump, even though all his words and actions, and those in particular, have been grinding away inside her since then.



It might seem strange, but Trump, in his behavior as president, and even to Pelosi, is Dad. What she wants most of all, even in the midst of all the other garbage of Washington, is Dad’s approval. But not only is he not giving it, he’s been giving harsh criticism of her. And he’s doing it because he’s serious about the business at hand. Sure, his ego is in play. It always is. But despite what some think, he really is in the business of making American lives better. He recognized the mess we were in, and as opposed to most politicians, he wasn’t going to be about playing games. His goal was going to be about fixing the problems. If there’s one thing he hates, it’s the games of the Swamp that are always about benefitting themselves and doing no real good.

So Dad stepped in when he became president, made his authority known, and has been acting on it.



Pelosi is many things, but she is first of all a woman. She has already been frustrated repeatedly on many fronts by him. But she still approaches Washington like a game, one where she can fight Dad and insult him, she hopes, and still be approved of by him. But he’s not having it.



Not only is he not giving her any sort of relationship, or communication, or approval. To bring the whole thing to a head, he shamed her in front of all of her peers, and in fact, the whole world, when he refused to shake her hand. And she took it personally. So she was determined from that moment on to find a way to get back at him.

So as crazy as it might sound, the whole thing is about a woman with a serious case of father hunger. It isn’t first of all about politics for her. She’s a woman, and it’s about relationship and approval.

There Is No “Homophobia”

Sometimes it’s good to state basic truths that people don’t know or have forgotten.

“Homophobe” is a term invented by the Left to attack Christians who don’t support their sodomy. And like all such Leftist terms, it doesn’t really describe the views of the person it’s used to criticize. It isn’t about “phobe” or fear, but not supporting the sin of homosexuality.

There is no “homophobia”. For the sodomites, it’s all about controlling language, to control the narrative, to control people, society, and culture. It’s to live without responsibility or the judgment they deserve, and to win others over to their evil.

Since we’re at the point where formerly conservative denominations can’t even get the simple stuff right anymore, it looks like we’re going to have to do more of this.

The Suffering of Job in its Redemptive Context

A friend asked whether God was just playing a sick and twisted game with Job, all for a bet, as a friend of his claims. The following is an attempt at setting Job in its larger Scriptural and redemptive context in response.



********************

Usually when a person writes something like that they’ve got some pain of their own they’re dealing with that’s led them to write that. So to some degree you have to know what they’re dealing with to really sympathize with them. And that’s an important part of a full-orbed response - though, not knowing your relationship with this person, that might or might not be your role to play in this person’s life. The New Testament response to suffering is that Christ took on human flesh and so God knows and sympathizes with us in our suffering, all while having a purpose in it all. And we’re commanded to weep with those who weep, identifying with them in their suffering just as He identified with us in His incarnation, suffering, and death. And He points us to the reality that for those in Christ their suffering is not pointless, but serves toward their sanctification and preparation for eternal life, their being conformed to Christ’s image, the fulfillment of that for which they, we, were created. Part of that is for God’s glory, even before the angels and demons, which we see an element of in Job. But I think it’s a crass and inaccurate reading of it to try to boil it down to some bet. What was at stake was God’s redemptive plan in history and whether or not His working of salvation in the lives of His people was or would be efficacious as He planned. Is God really able to pull this off? If He isn’t, then He isn’t really God after all. Is Job, as an example of the people God created and is professing to be able to save, actually able to be saved? Is this faith these people supposedly have in You, by Your working, real? Is God really God? Or will somebody who really believes jump ship when the boat gets a little rocky? It’s the same thing as when God said He was going to kill all of Israel after the golden calf incident and Moses interceded and asked Him, “Okay, say you kill every Israelite. What will the nations say? They’ll say that you weren’t able to do what you said.” Suffering is a necessary part of the plan, and has to exist to make evident real faith, to show that God is as great and glorious as He claims. 

Now God does rebuke Job eventually, because he needed a reminder of how little of the picture he saw and how limited his understanding was. But one could easily spin that out as meaning that God lacked compassion for him. Scripture makes it clear the opposite is true, though, and that God does have compassion on us in our suffering. But sometimes though the most compassionate thing He can do is make us close our mouths. And every once in awhile we need a reminder that our lives are bigger than us and involve matters of cosmic importance. If we have a right perspective, one of faith, that should enoble us, and confirm that we have more value than we even know.

Michelle Williams and MeToo

With all the ungodliness in the MeToo movement is mixed in the real hurt of women, both from what they’ve had done to them, and what they’ve done to themselves. Behind Michelle Williams’ speech is pain. She’s trying to convince herself as much as she’s trying to convince everybody else.

 The MeToo movement tends, though, to be all about what women have had done to them, and has served to excuse the actions of women themselves, as if they weren’t volitional beings at all. As long as you can blame somebody else, you never have to take the blame or the responsibility for your own actions.

 Aside from all the things Ricky Gervais mentioned involving the guilt of Hollywood, there is one thing that unites the majority of women in that room last night - most of them have voluntarily killed their own children to further their career.

The Daniel Fast vs. the Goglia Diet

The Daniel Fast might be fine temporarily for weight loss purposes, but long-term it’s a bad idea, given that it doesn’t allow any meat. This is an important layout of what healthy eating is, though. The Goglia diet is on point. What I didn’t know, though, was this: “Lastly, water is very important in this diet and you should drink 1/2 oz to 1 oz of water per each lb you weigh daily.” For most Americans we drink far more of anything else but water.

The whole point of Daniel’s diet in Daniel 1 was that he and his friends were refusing to eat meat offered to idols, the same issue that Paul talked about in 1 Corinthians. It was ceremonial and had to do with holiness and faithfulness in worship to Yahweh alone. It had nothing to do with biology per se.

https://hackspirit.com/chris-pratt-diet-phil-goglia-vs-daniel-fast-which-one-is-more-effective/

The Sick and the Bereaved

Dad died January 6th of ‘85, Mom died January 4th three years ago. My brother-in-law died today. And I’ve heard of other deaths the past few days. Over time you see it’s an unavoidable truth that death and serious illness cluster around Christmas. Mom was in the hospital due to strokes during December twice.

I think one of the biggest blights on American Christianity is our neglect of the sick, the elderly, the shut-in, and the bereaved. When you have a loved one die, people come around for a few days. And then the silence of the house is deafening. Nobody checks up on you.

Ministry to people in nursing homes and assisted living facilities does pick up during Christmas, thank the Lord. Carolers visit, children’s groups fix goody bags and deliver them to residents. Visitation from family members increases during that time as well. But then things die down right after again. You get some pick up for Easter Sunday. And some for Mothers’ Day. But some folks are largely forgotten. Some family members neglect their loved ones altogether, holding on to old grudges. 

You have those who devote regular time to ministry to these folks. You have folks who do church services weekly, or occasional music ministry, in assisted living facilities. I know of ministers who visit former church members. But there tend to be way too many gaps. The sorrow of being forgotten by those we have devoted so much of our lives to is as big a killer as anything. It’s especially true at Christmas, when everybody wants to be gathered with loved ones around hearth and home, whether or not they can.

Understand that that handshake you give to that little old lady at church might be the only physical contact she has with another person all week. But if your life is busy, it would never occur to you.

Most of us at some point have people in our lives that fit into one of those categories. Everybody has to decide for himself what his role in remedying the problem is. But it is a problem, there’s no doubt.

The Narcissistic Parent vs. the Godly Parent

Don’t flatter your children; but the heart of the problem is in the parent trying to find hope and acceptance from their child rather than from God.

A child can sense his parent’s insecurity, and will feel the weight of being expected to bear more than should be expected of him. This is where the violation of boundaries comes in. Not respecting God, the parent won’t respect the child either and will begin to try control the child when he doesn’t live up to their wishes. Then discipline for the sake of the parent’s insecurities will come in, something entirely different from right, godly discipline, discipline for the sake of the child and for the glory of God.

The only solution is in the parent beginning to look to God, for hope, for acceptance, for their needs to be met - for the parent to do what is necessary to repair their relationship with the Lord. Only then will the relationship with the child begin to go down the right path.

“The fear of man is a snare, but those who trust in the LORD will find safety.”

I Am For Peace

Some people still addressing impeachment. Others calling for a moratorium during Christmas. It’s always a bit odd that such calls usually come from those who take a less-than-conservative viewpoint, when the more conservative man has come out with a strong response they didn’t expect or don’t like. 

But the fact that the conservative usually rolls over and plays dead, desiring peace, is always the problem, isn’t it? That’s how the culture drifts gradually away from the truth. That’s exactly how we got here. The conservative doesn’t want to obsess over politics; he wants to live his life with his family and mind his own business. It’s the Left that takes the long walk through the institutions while the conservative is at his kid’s ball game cheering him on.

These are the realities that led us here.

Post whatever you want. It’s your Facebook page, after all.

The Evangelical Elites and the Real World

The elites certainly have their accomplishments. Scholarship is important. A lot of the ministries do good work (though we’ve seen in the past how some in those ministries make enough money to make us question our giving to them). The media serves a purpose.

But they aren’t as well known as they think they are. And there’s no small measure of self-importance among them.

In my background, the letters before and after your name could count against you as much as they could count for you. Most people don’t care about your master’s or your doctorate.

The best men I’ve ever known were those who would make time for you during your spiritual crisis on a Saturday morning; who would drive three towns over to meet you for lunch when you just started coming to their worship services; who would visit people in the hospital who didn’t go to their church, while their own churches neglected them. The man worthy of respect is the one who will sit with your loved one when he has tubes coming out of him and is nearing the end.

Nobody in the real world cares about your Twitter game.

The “Evangelical Elites”

“You won’t get rid of abortion through legislation,“ we’re told by Evangelical “leaders” who oppose the President.

The failure there, though, isn’t in the legislation. It’s in the Church and her leaders.

The so-called elites, even in Evangelicalism, are piling on the President in the wake of the impeachment. Even those on social media who at best gave mere hints in the past that they disapproved of him have decided that this is a good time to become more vocal.

They should be paying more attention the main point of Trump’s presidency: he was elected because of their failure. And if there’s one group that should be the most silent and humble in repentance right now, it’s the elites in the Church.

The President, meanwhile, is doing his job. He has been appointing conservative judges by the boatloads to fix the Leftist activist courts that have held us captive for so long. And he has been defunding PP. Would I like to see more from him? Of course. The administration shouldn’t be in any way supporting more immigration or the sodomite community. But no one expected Donald Trump to have the moral standards of a conservative believer, and I’m not surprised he hasn’t done enough in those areas. What he has accomplished is way beyond anyone’s expectations, and far beyond any of his faux conservative predecessors, who promised big and did little.

Fewer babies are dying, and our money isn’t going towards it. It’s hard to respect those who turn their noses up at that.

Withholding the Articles of Impeachment

Why withhold the articles of impeachment? For many reasons, mostly about psychological warfare. To distract, for one thing. To distract the president and the Republicans and to keep them from being as efficient elsewhere. It was obviously an act of spite. And the point of pulling everything together and withholding the articles over Christmas was to ruin the President’s Christmas. Just think of the amount of hate in that simple act alone, not just toward him, but toward his family. They can’t kill the President, or even waterboard him. But their whole aim has been to torture him, literally, and, knowing he will be obsessed over the articles and his lack of control, this was the best torture they had at their disposal. 

It really should be no surprise. It’s the same as they do to the unborn.

Profanity, the Language of War

Listening to cover songs on the YouTube. I’m struck by how many ballads use the F-word like it’s just any other word. It never occurs to the writers or performers that it might not fit with the emotions a ballad is meant to conjure, or the message it’s meant to communicate.

Profanity is the language of war. But not everything in life is supposed to be war.

The commonly shared meme, “What should not be heard by little ears should not be spoken by big mouths”, while well intentioned, is poorly thought out. There are all sorts of things adults should talk about that kids shouldn’t hear. Still, it was a better time when certain things were only said in private or at best whispered when said in public. The evaporation of a reverence for God and a sense of the holiness of God from worship and culture has accompanied a loss of reverence for and holiness in God’s image bearers, by His image bearers. And the crassness that follows us everywhere is a result.

We desperately need a return to modesty. But modesty that does not start with a holy God at its center misses the point and is doomed to fail.

Regular profanity is one thing when it’s among those who have to live their lives in the harsher realities of a sinful world - those in the military or police officers, for instance. But they endure those things so they won’t follow most people into their normal daily lives, so that a culture of peace can be the regular experience of the majority living in a stable society. When profanity becomes the norm everywhere, it’s a sign that peace and stability no longer exist, either man with God, or man with man. It tells you that the battle is everywhere now, and nobody really is safe. Love or warfare - when our language of the two becomes indistinguishable, then the two themselves are indistinguishable as well.

The Sinking of Skywalker

Star Wars spoilers

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

Reviewers, largely hard Leftists, are trashing the film. It apparently has lots of throwbacks to please older fans, and undoes many controversial things from the last film, though they also claim it’s largely lacking interesting arcs and dialogue. But the gay kiss is there, at the end of the film. My own theory is that they have intentionally made this a bad film. Being Leftists themselves, they’re angry at the older fans for not supporting their agendas. There’s obviously some Trump Derangement Syndrome there as part of this too. And the gay kiss is there as a final middle finger to those fans.

So they knew they had lost the fans completely, and there was no getting them back. And even on the Left, there was constant pressure on social media to force Disney to make one pair or another from the films into couples - Rey and Kylo, but also those pushing for a gay pairing of Finn and Poe. That “shipping” went so far as to lead to online harassment from fans on the Left. All around, it’s been a mess - though one, I would say, created by the Left. Disney/Lucasfilm knew they couldn’t win. So they took a dive.

System Overload

No country has the obligation to take every so-called refugee when the intent by parties within and without that country is to overwhelm and overturn its system and culture. And that’s what is happening. To paint it as a simple matter of refugees is a misrepresentation of what we’ve been facing. In many ways it’s already too late. And more than likely the result will be the fragmentation of the United States into smaller separate countries. What was once a largely Christian culture will be destroyed along with it, and believers will have to work like never before to simply worship and live before God in freedom. What was once a place where the Gospel was shared freely will be no more.

How many are aware that among the people called “refugees” that includes those that come here because they aren’t allowed to be practicing homosexuals or transgender in their home countries? Organizations like the U.N. advertise this quite openly on their social media. The refugee situation is far more convoluted that some seem to understand.

The Mixed Multitude

Gen. 50 - And when the days of weeping for him were past, Joseph spoke to the household of Pharaoh, saying, “If now I have found favor in your eyes, please speak in the ears of Pharaoh, saying,  ‘My father made me swear, saying, “I am about to die: in my tomb that I hewed out for myself in the land of Canaan, there shall you bury me.” Now therefore, let me please go up and bury my father. Then I will return.’”  And Pharaoh answered, “Go up, and bury your father, as he made you swear.”

Exodus 5 - Afterward Moses and Aaron went and said to Pharaoh, “Thus says the Lord, the God of Israel, ‘Let my people go, that they may hold a feast to me in the wilderness.’” 2 But Pharaoh said, “Who is the Lord, that I should obey his voice and let Israel go? I do not know the Lord, and moreover, I will not let Israel go.”

A fairly obvious contrast between Pharaohs, when you put them side by side, echoing what we’re told in Ex. 1: “Now there arose a new king over Egypt, who did not know Joseph.” Both “goings out” were announced as being for occasional purposes, the first a funeral, the second a feast to Yahweh.

Genesis 50 - 7 So Joseph went up to bury his father. With him went up all the servants of Pharaoh, the elders of his household, and all the elders of the land of Egypt, 8 as well as all the household of Joseph, his brothers, and his father's household. Only their children, their flocks, and their herds were left in the land of Goshen. 9 And there went up with him both chariots and horsemen. It was a very great company.

Exodus 12 - 37 And the people of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides women and children. 38 A mixed multitude also went up with them, and very much livestock, both flocks and herds. 

In both cases a mixed body of those who were children of Abraham and those who weren’t went out to participate alongside of Israel. By “mixed multitude”, we’re told that it wasn’t only Israelites who went with Israel when they left Egypt, but others who were living in the land, probably including Egyptians and those from other places who were living in Egypt but neither Egyptian nor Hebrew. 

Any semblance of a “racially pure” Hebrew people disappeared fairly early in Israel’s history. Even Joseph married a daughter of an Egyptian. The covenant was kept and passed from generation to generation, from fathers to their sons. But while the covenant with God was familial, it was never racial. Israel was always “mixed”, however one might try to define that.

At that point the contrast that supposedly exists between Israel and the Church falls apart. Israel was never a racially pure entity in such a way that distinguishes it from the New Covenant body we call the Church. Isaiah stresses over several chapters that the Good News is that Yahweh’s covenant body Israel would spread the corners of her tent so that the Gentile nations could come in and join eternally with her in covenant with Yahweh, so that all peoples of the earth could be a part of Israel.

3 

Let not the foreigner who has joined himself to the Lord say,

    “The Lord will surely separate me from his people”;

and let not the eunuch say,

    “Behold, I am a dry tree.”

4 

For thus says the Lord:

“To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths,

    who choose the things that please me

    and hold fast my covenant,

5 

I will give in my house and within my walls

    a monument and a name

    better than sons and daughters;

I will give them an everlasting name

    that shall not be cut off.

6 

“And the foreigners who join themselves to the Lord,

    to minister to him, to love the name of the Lord,

    and to be his servants,

everyone who keeps the Sabbath and does not profane it,

    and holds fast my covenant—

7 

these I will bring to my holy mountain,

    and make them joyful in my house of prayer;

their burnt offerings and their sacrifices

    will be accepted on my altar;

for my house shall be called a house of prayer

    for all peoples.”

8 

The Lord God,

    who gathers the outcasts of Israel, declares,

“I will gather yet others to him

    besides those already gathered.” (Isaiah 56)

And, as Paul says, Jew and Gentile have been made one in Christ. What already existed has merely been amplified in the New Covenant, as the people of God were detached from any earthly national body known as Israel to become a new, trans-national creation. What remains is a people and a kingdom whose King is physically seated and ruling in Heaven over all creation. There is no “Replacement Theology”. The Church is Israel.

Holder’s Op-Ed

Every op-ed by somebody like Holder is strategic. When he crawls out from under his rock to write something like this, you know something’s up. In one sense, this is the best opportunity to overturn the culture the Communists, including some of Obama’s former administration, have ever had. But at the same time, they know Barr has their number. They’re terrified.

I suspect, too, that the Dems won’t resist finding some way of going after Barr the way they have Trump, and, having found their impeachment efforts to be a failure, will proceed after him in a more determined way shortly.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/eric-holder-william-barr-is-unfit-to-be-attorney-general/2019/12/11/99882092-1c55-11ea-87f7-f2e91143c60d_story.html

The Suckers We Are

Greta Thunberg was a nobody, so far as the United States was concerned, a few months back. No one here had heard of her. But she was being lifted up in Europe and pushed forward as somebody that should be paid attention to. The international organizations were all behind her, grooming her, and using her for their propaganda in Europe. You could see it in all their media, all while we were still oblivious. And over the past three months, she’s become somebody well known here also, for no substantial reason whatsoever. She has accomplished nothing worth our paying attention to.

And yet this is how we get suckered. Every time. We’d do better to simply ignore people like this. The problem, of course, is getting everybody on board with that plan. It’s impossible.

Across the Wastelands

Day two: searching the wastelands. I’ve survived thus far on the few morsels and scraps of food I’ve been able to turn up. The results have been poor so far, with little hope in conditions changing. I’ve run across the remains of a few fellow stragglers, many days long expired, laying in their tattered tents, or huddled beneath the sparse branches of nearly dead trees. The scenes have been gruesome, too gruesome to describe. I am nauseous even now as I remember them. 

But in the midst of it all I ran across one man not quite gone. He simply called himself The Follower. It had been so long since anyone had called him anything else that he couldn’t even remember his real name. But there was no time for details beyond that, as he was almost gone. I sat with him, telling him of all I had seen, trying to distract him from the pain until he was dead.

He said he had heard rumors of signs of hope in the West, the direction I had already been going. These were his last words before his breath left him. I hope he is right.

I had neither the tools nor the strength to bury him, so I left him where he lay, regretfully. I can only pray the rumors he heard were true. I travel on.

Batman V Superman: a Biblical Epic

I just learned that the Kryptonite spear that Batman used in Batman v Superman was supposed to be a reference to the spear used to pierce Jesus’ side. It finally occurred to me recently, after several watchings, that Zack Snyder intended this film - probably including the three Justice League films he intended to follow it - to be his version of a Biblical epic, a la “The Greatest Story Ever Told”. The themes of the lack of faith Superman was surrounded by, and the internal struggle that Superman dealt with throughout the film as he felt the weight of people’s doubts and his responsibilities, were intended to reflect that. Compare this to the doubt Jesus was surrounded by, even in “Greatest Story” - from Herod, from his disciples, and so on. If you watch the Crucifixion scene in “Greatest Story” and put it side by side with the end battle and death scene in BVS, you see the color palette is the same, as is other imagery, such as the presence of crosses in BVS. The film failed in some ways, and some folks didn’t like the heavy-handed allusions, but the brilliance of it has to be acknowledged. The goal never was to make something along the lines of an Avengers film, but something weightier.

The Air’s Thinner At the Top

Elitist: “I don’t understand why these people voted for Trump. Don’t they trust us?

{pays $120 thousand for fruit taped to wall}

I mean, it makes no sense.”

The Impeachment Racket

Today Putin of Russia and Zelensky of Ukraine are meeting in an attempt to end their conflict.

So if you’re keeping score, according to the Dems, President Trump was in cahoots with Russia and Ukraine, but the relationship with Ukraine was in favor of Russia somehow, even though Ukraine and Russia hate each other and have been in conflict for years.

That’s a bit like saying cheating on your wife will improve your relationship with your wife. And if anyone’s confused about this (the Dems), there’s no universe in which that works out well for anybody.

And the U.S. pull back from Syria was in favor of Russia, we’re told, instead of being about the amount of money and resources we’ve expended to our own detriment in our international meddling for decades, or about the degree to which our own people have suffered for it, and about the need of other countries to take care of their own responsibilities, which we’ve been talking about forever, and which has been the President’s constant drumbeat. And it can’t possibly be about the fact that Syria has been about regime change for the socialist globalist order, which always ends up with minority communities devastated, including Christian communities, about which the conversation was going long before Trump was president.

And Al Green today is telling us that President Trump needs to be impeached because something-something-slavery.

If your head’s spinning, then you’re reacting correctly.

Stephen Amell’s Retirement

Stephen: This is a...serious...situation.

His wife: We’re just out of milk. I’ll pick some up after lunch. And you can stop whispering all the time, honey. You aren’t on the show anymore. You’re at home. Why don’t you take off the hoodie and go watch some tv?

Stephen: {looks around} Can we have the room please? Felicity and I need to talk for a minute. Alone.

His wife: We’re the only ones here, Stephen. Okay, we’re going to get you some therapy.

Libertarians and Conservatives Debate Your “Freedoms”

The current debate between Libertarians and Conservatives on Twitter is whether or not p@rnography should be made illegal. Let’s take a second to appreciate the fact that we’re in such a place culturally and politically that we believe that’s a conversation worth having, which suggests it may actually be something we could see happen. Wherever we land on it, the biggest obstacle in in the spiritual realm. If clarity of the Gospel and holiness of life are not present in individuals, families, and churches, trying to make laws is a vain endeavor.

Those who think this question shouldn’t even be considered hold a fundamental misunderstanding as to what a healthy society and culture looks like. The greatness of our society is not determined by the extent of our individuality/independence, any more than it is determined by our collective diversity, however each of those is defined. The greatness of our society is determined by our conformity to that which is good, true, and beautiful, as defined according to transcendent standards, that is, the person and character of the Triune God, revealed through His Creation and His Word.

That Doesn’t Follow

“Conservatives obviously don’t really care about the unborn, because they don’t care about the rights of women, immigrants, and LGBTQ people.” 

That’s what’s called a Non Sequitur, which is a logical fallacy. Aside from any other errors that might be in the above statement, it doesn’t follow that just because you don’t care about one person that then you must not really care about another person. A man can love his wife dearly and not particularly care for his annoying co-worker.

Then we can move on to the question of whether or not the supposed “rights” assumed in the above statement really are rights.

Greed Run Amuck

Trump’s administration is rolling back regulations at a rapid pace, which has been one the best things about it. But there has also been an element of guilt on the part of manufacturers in the failing quality of products over the past few decades. Things that were once made to quality in the U.S. lost that quality when they began to be made overseas (clothing is a great example). Beyond that, products are being made by the companies who make them to not last. It is greed that is out of control. Plastic parts replace metal parts. And the one who suffers is the common man, who would just like to get his money’s worth out of what he buys.

https://fee.org/articles/how-government-wrecked-the-gas-can/

Man is Born for Trouble

Had a yearly physical with the doctor yesterday. He said he was two years out from losing his mother; one year out, almost to the day, of losing his daughter to a drug overdose; and he was going to have to put down his 12 year old dog after leaving work last night. We encounter innumerable people on any given day, but rarely know all they’re dealing with. “Everybody hurts,” as REM told us. Or, maybe better, “Man is born for trouble as the sparks fly upward” (Job 5:7). If you are living a life that has been relatively free of death or other major struggles, you are unusual in this world. But the trouble will eventually find you. And when it does, you won’t be ready for it, as much as you might think you will. There is an ease to it for those who are in Christ, that is true. We know it has a purpose and a final destination, and that gives comfort. It was decreed and ordered by your loving Father for His glory and your eternal good. But as much as Christ really felt the nails, so will you. It is in holding the sympathy and promises of God before you as you go through it that you maintain hope, grow in faith, and, even in the darkness, find joy.

The Problem of Coddling?

Is overnurturing the problem with people today? Is it softness in general, and a result, as is often suggested, of “participation trophies”?

The attitude of the parent(s) doing the overnurturing or undernurturing is the key. A child knows when the parent is insecure and then either is controlling and violates boundaries, or takes the route of neglect or harshness, also the result of insecurity on the part of the parent. In either case the parent isn’t trusting in God, but worships other things, which leads to the wrong attitudes and actions. When the parent doesn’t trust God, the child is being trained to not trust God, which leads to the child not living in obedience to God when he or she gets older. That’s why when a parent or other authority figure reacts to softness with cruel harshness the latter is just as destructive. There’s a failure of the parent to reflect accurately on the humanity of that child (as made in the image of God) and all it entails, too - that they’re worthy of respect, able and responsible to handle their own lives, and so on.

Adding too...the nurture of the parent who isn’t trusting in God, as much as that parent might give to the child and be nurturing, ends up not being truly nurturing, because the parent is doing it for themselves, selfishly, to prove to people they’re a good parent, to impress others, to find their security in the acceptance of themselves by the child rather than Christ, etc.

Run, Barry, Run

Things the Fastest Man Alive can’t outrun, according to the CW Flash show:

Ice blasts
Energy blasts
Flame throwers
Atomic blast shockwaves
Arrows
At least half the other speedsters on the show
The future
His destiny
Twue Wuv
The personal descent into self-pity and loathing
The series writers’ bizarre agendas
Probably a paper airplane, if the kid making the airplane gets the creases on it really tight

Black Widow, pt. 2

We already know it’s going to have its share of feminist tropes, such as the women tearing down the men verbally. I think they’re setting up a Russia-U.S. alliance, with the Thunderbolts as the new (Dark) Avengers being spearheaded by Thunderbolt Ross, who will either here or later become the Red Hulk. So you’ll get heavy-handed Trump administration analogies here and in later films. This is basically Marvel’s “The Handmaid’s Tale”, Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s “Herland” inverted. Anti-Feminist dystopian USSR/Russia in union with patriarchal America. They’d probably bring in Hydra Cap from the comics, the version of Steve Rogers that has always been a Nazi, but I expect that’s something Kevin Feige would say no to.

Black Widow

The trailer looks great. But the director made it obvious early on that she was interested in pushing a feminist agenda through the film. The fact that they did make Red Guardian fat for the film, and had another character point it out in the trailer, is a tip-off for what direction this movie is going in. Women tearing down men to make themselves feel or look better is the classic feminist trope. And with the Russia setting as part of this, expect the movie to be overflowing with analogies to our current administration. Cultural Marxism as an epidemic carries on.

The Mandalorian

Lone Ranger Mandalorian and Yoda Cub is excellent so far. It’s definitely the best thing Disney has done with Star Wars, and probably the best thing since the original trilogy. We’ve had years in which the female and the effeminate have increasingly run all things sci-fi and fantasy, and we finally get something now that’s more representative the masculinity of Western Culture. The sparsity of dialogue fits the genre(s), though you can’t help but think that Disney knows it’s walking a tightrope with Star Wars right now, that they’ve alienated most of their male fans, and the less that is said in the show, the less likely they are to say something Leftist and foolish, something that will cost them more money in the end. You can’t help but watch the show with some skepticism though, looking for the worn out Commie shoe to drop. I’m expecting the Yoda cub to be a girl and waiting for the first transgender droid that identifies as a Wookie to show up.

Barry Allen, For the Life of the World

The Flash tv show has been infected with SJWism since season 1, with it getting progressively worse throughout. They’re attempting to redeem themselves a bit this season though, setting up Barry Allen as the Christ-figure to lay himself down for the life of the world in the coming Crisis. Having found himself to be unable to choose otherwise and the only one able to carry out the saving work, his friends take different attitudes in the face of his impending departure. Cisco, his best friend to his right, plays the role of both Judas and John, betraying Barry, but for the purpose of trying to save him. The inevitability of death has been the key theme of the season, which includes a villain trying to cure himself of cancer who also manages to create zombies in the process - the undead, clear symbols of the resurrection. The show writers manage to work in some George Romero references in the process. Then there’s the new version of time- and dimension- traveling H. Wells, this time an adventurer a la Indiana Jones, giving us a “Raiders” and “Last Crusade” reference. 

They also treat us with the Last Supper tableau featured below.

Now if they can get away from the Cultural Marxism that infests the show otherwise, they’ll be good to go.

Sin, Suffering, and the Cross

As Reformed believers, we’re good at holding on to the fact that sin is sin. Just because a person is reacting sinfully to a bad situation doesn’t mean their sin isn’t sin, nor does it excuse them.

But it still remains a fact - and one we seem to want to ignore often - that people often speak from a place of pain. Again, that doesn’t justify any sin on their part. But the pain is still there for them. The truth is we often run to pointing out their sin and hang exclusively on that because we find their pain to be an inconvenience we don’t want to deal with.

A reactionary response to a therapeutic culture is wrong when it denies the reality of suffering, suffering which our Lord Himself affirmed in His own suffering on the cross.

Circumcision and Baptism in Col. 2

In the debate on the connection between circumcision and baptism, you get all the debate on what connection there is, if any, between vss. 11 and 12 in Col. 2. But it seems to me that vs. 13 seals the deal (pardon the pun): "And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses...". To be uncircumcised is to be dead. You need to be circumcised (vs. 11), you need to put off your flesh by being buried (vs. 12), so then you can be raised from the dead with Christ. OT circumcision => NT baptism.

Paul, inspired by the Holy Spirit, is a good writer. He isn't spinning out random, unconnected thoughts or doctrines. We might have a hard time following his flow of thought at times, but that there is a flow is apparent.

God's Not Dead

Today everyone is abuzz about the movie "Noah". But I'm still thinking about "God's Not Dead", which I saw a week ago. Here are a few belated thoughts.

I kind of knew what to expect going into the film. There's always this hope, when going to see a Christian movie, that this one will be the one to pleasantly surprise you with a good script, good acting, no melodrama, no Christian cliches, etc. "God's Not Dead" isn't that film. It follows all the predictability of the typical Christian movie.

The acting was largely stilted and lacking depth. Kevin Sorbo is a good actor, and handled his parts well. But the rest of the acting ranged between stiff and melodramatic, and sometimes both at the same time. There were a few other highlights, other than with Sorbo, but it was largely pretty bad. But one can't entirely blame the cast. No doubt the directing and the script were partially to blame.

The script came across as several interconnected scenes from a Jack Chick tract (I'm not the first to point out the Chick tract connection). Sure, the scenes somewhat reflected reality. But they were too distantly related to anything real to be more than cartoonish. While the movie was loosely based on college court cases defending Christian freedom, have you ever known a college professor who would give a student three classes to defend the existence of God? Or a student, in a 100-level class, smart enough to do it successfully? Or how about an atheist professor who in a moment of anger would openly admit, before his whole class, to hating God because he believed God had let him down? The crowning jewel of silliness came after the student's last defense, when all the students one by one stood up and proclaimed "God's not dead". What world would this ever happen in? No, God isn't dead, praise His Name. But He deserves better than this.

I will leave the apologetics to the apologists to deal with, if they care to bother. I will note that the apologetics followed a largely Evangelical line. Two things to point out is the critique of the Big Bang, and the appeal to free will. My guess is that most of the audience is like me, in that the apologetics portions went by too fast and in too scattered a way to be of any help. But I have a feeling that learning the apologetics wasn't really the point. Christian movies, I've figured out, tend to serve as a sort of pep rally, or cheerleading session. The purpose is to get Christians pumped up about Christiany sorts of things, whether they are rooted in Scripture or not. If you're looking for any substance in a movie like this, your expectations are wrong.

There were a couple of bright spots. The young lady coming to grips with her cancer was moving, if overdone. The scene near the end of the movie, when the elderly woman with dementia began speaking truth out of the blue to her angry businessman son, was like something out of Flannery O'Connor. Quite good. But for every good scene like these, there were several more that were horrible.

I think the most appalling scene for me came at the end of the movie. Here, we see the atheist professor, struggling with his atheism, and running to a Newsboys concert to find his girlfriend (or wife?). Only in a Christian film. He gets struck by a car, and has the weirdest, most unrealistic conversation with a pastor, as his life slips away. The professor dies, and we are immediately taken to the concert, where Willie Robertson, via video, somewhat mocks the professor, who we've just watched die. How the heck this could have gotten past the final edit, without it being seen how distasteful the whole thing was, is beyond me. Then we are taken back to the street where the accident happened, and we see the pastor with his missionary friend, rejoicing that the professor, having accepted Jesus into his heart, is now in heaven. But is this realistic? Where is the mourning and sorrow in the face of death and suffering? The coldness and shallowness of the whole thing was disturbing.

A similar scene, right before this, is worth mentioning. The young lady with cancer, who is a reporter, barges in on the Newsboys before their concert, in an effort to cause them to doubt their faith. And again, the lack of emotional depth in the way the woman's sickness is dealt with is shocking.

One can take these scenes, and the whole film, into consideration, and reasonably wonder if this is really a reflection how the Christian community views suffering, death, life, and salvation. If so, then it would explain why the world doesn't look to us in their troubles. We really are out of touch with reality. And making movies like this helps none at all.

"Son of God" - A Movie Review

I went to see "Son of God" on Friday, because if you're going to run your mouth, you might as well know what you're talking about.  Here are a few brief thoughts.  (There will probably be spoilers.  Yes, spoilers - and you thought you knew the story.)

Cinematographically, I thought it was well done overall.  There were a few places that were hard to take seriously in that regard.  Jesus floating over the water on the Sea of Galilee made it look like they ran out of money when time came for the finishing touches.

Acting was mixed.  It's hard to get any Christian film without bad acting or overacting, and there was both here.  You hate to criticize anything so sacred as a portrayal of the sufferings and crucifixion of Christ, especially when going to a film like this is an act of serious devotion for so many people.  But I honestly had a hard time with the way some of the crucifixion scene was done acting-wise. 

The portrayal of Jesus was fairly effeminate.  Lines were often spoken in a breathy, non-offensive way, kind of like in a chick flick.  If we're looking to inspire men to live great lives of masculinity, this isn't going to help.

One of the most comical scenes in the movie - unintentionally so - was when Jesus met Peter while he was fishing.  The line in the trailer, where Jesus tells Peter they were going to change the world, was just too much.  Immediately thereafter, the camera panned across Jesus and Peter in the boat, staring out at the sea, in "hero shot" fashion.  I think this was one of the points in the movie where I laughed out loud in the theater.  There were a couple of those "hero shots", and they were hilarious each time.

Slow motion shots were in abundance - make that over-abundance.  Again, I couldn't help laughing at them, and the over-seriousness in them.

Of course, there was no point in the film that you were supposed to be laughing.  Super-serious music dominated from beginning to end, non-stop, even in scenes where Jesus and his disciples were contentedly smiling, as the crowds flocked them.  "At least they're smiling some," I thought.  But the smiles were odd - obviously artificial, perhaps?  It's hard to put a finger on it.  But when paired with the weird, navel-gazing music, it was bizarre. 

Melancholy dominated the film.  For the crucifixion, that is necessary.  But was the whole life of Jesus at best calmly serene, and depressing at worst?  I hardly think so.  It would have helped to include Jesus first miracle at the wedding feast of Cana.  But with the fact that so many Fundamentalists still want to pretend Jesus didn't actually turn water into alcohol, I imagine that would be too controversial.

While we had plenty of actors who looked like they could be Jewish, Jesus didn't.  It would have been nice if we could have broken the American tradition of non-Jewish Jesuses.

There was plenty of crying at weird spots.  We meet John on Patmos at the beginning and end of the film.  In both occasions his eyes are watered up.  But why?  Is all that Jesus ever does is makes people cry?  Again, this has more to do with American sentimentalism than Biblical Christianity - more chick flick than Bible.  There are other places where people fall apart rather strangely.  Then the one place where one would expect to see Jesus bawling, the tomb of Lazarus, he doesn't.  Just bizarre.

The whole connection with chick flicks makes sense, when you learn that the actor chosen to play Jesus, Diogo Morgado, has a background in modeling and Portuguese telenovelas.  The equivalent to casting him would have been casting a Victoria Secret model to play the Virgin Mary (with apologies to Roma Downey).  What it points out is that a large portion of Evangelicalism has a warped sense of spirituality, and this is one place where it's screaming.

The events in the life of Jesus that they chose to portray were odd.  I haven't entirely been able to put together what all they were trying to convey.  Was it at least partially random?  I couldn't tell.  One ideology that seemed very clear, though, was one of pacifism or non-violence.  It was constant in the passages of Scripture that were quoted by Jesus and others, as well as the scenes portrayed.  Even when we come to the overturning of the tables of the moneychangers, Jesus does it in the most non-violent atonement way possible.  The whip of cords is also noticeably absent.  This Jesus wouldn't hurt a fly.  Some of those ninja moves done by the angels in Sodom in "The Bible" miniseries would have been welcome here.

When the crowds start calling Jesus "Messiah" he reacts with a pained look on his face.  This apparently suggests to him the notion of political revolution, which involves violence.  This Jesus wants nothing to do with that.  Apparently the idea that he is the Messiah is going too far.  Try making that fit with the Bible.

There were interesting contrasts throughout - Judas going to the authorities, set in contrast with Nicodemus going to Jesus, both betraying their loyalties in a sense.  The feasting of Pilate in a luxurious palace set in contrast with the homeless Jesus and his disciples around a campfire.  From a filmmaking perspective, they were well done.

One of the odder inclusions was that of Mary Magdalene in just about every scene the apostles appear in.  When no one else but Jesus and the disciples were there, Mary was strangely there as well, almost seeming to suggest her as a disciple.  Interestingly enough, her face isn't shown at the last supper.  And yet she appears as soon as they leave the upper room, in such a way as to suggest she was there all along.

There was the inclusion of Veronica, wiping the face of Jesus as he fell on the way to Golgotha.  I imagine we wouldn't want to offend the Catholics by leaving out something the Bible doesn't mention and which probably didn't happen.

Jesus reading in the synagogue from Isaiah and pronouncing his ministry, which actually took place at the beginning of his ministry, doesn't occur until much later in the movie.  Another odd choice.

The whole upper room scene was strange.  Early in the feast, Jesus seems to lapse into a sort of vision.  He sees himself being betrayed by Judas, and being crucified.  He gets a startled look on his face, as though he didn't know before that it was coming.  Then, when he begins to tell the disciples that that was to be his last meal with them, they all begin to weep.  But in the Bible, Jesus had been warning them all the way that this was coming.  The theological problems, along with the failure to be faithful to Scripture, are huge.

Again, when Jesus, outside the room, hears Peter say he won't betray him, Jesus has another vision, this time of Peter's betrayal, and it takes him by surprise.  This Jesus apparently gets lots of mystical revelations on the fly.

After the crucifixion, the two Sunday gatherings of the apostles are compressed into one meeting.  This is again a failure of faithfulness to the text of Scripture.

I could probably say more, but this has already gone on quite long.  It should be fairly obvious what I think of the film.  I don't want to be misunderstood - if any person were to come to Christ through this film, I would be thrilled.  But God uses all sorts of things to bring people to Himself, and just because he uses a thing, doesn't mean that the thing itself is good.  And insofar as the film seeks to glorify God, and is trying to rightly portray the life of Christ, I am thankful.  But I also think the film fails miserably in a number of respects.  And in the process, it displays a faulty spirituality, playing into the already existing weaknesses of the Evangelical church.  We need art and entertainment that will counter such a faulty spirituality, not that which will encourage it.

Holidays and Loneliness

I've read a number of people lamenting how many stores and restaurants are going to be open on Thanksgiving Day.  And while I understand the concern, it raises questions in my mind.  Every church and community has people who are single, widows, widowers, or who for some other reason have no family to spend the holidays with.  Are the people who are complaining about stores and restaurants being open reaching out to those people and opening their homes to them?  Or are they hovelling up with their families and refusing to make room for people who don't share their last name?

I realize their are plenty of people who want to be with their families, but are put in a position such that they have to work if they want to keep their jobs.  And that's a horrible thing.  But there are plenty of people who want to work.  The holidays are hard enough for them as it is.  By working, it helps them forget how alone they are.  There are people for whom the only conversation they will have on Thanksgiving will be with the waitress or the cashier.  If you want to know more about such people, you can check out the previous years' holiday suicide statistics.

So yes, it would be nice if the stores and restaurants were all closed on Thanksgiving Day.  But it would also be nice if there was no one alone that day.  Do you befriend people like that?  Do you open your home to them?  If not, then I'm not sure you have any right to tell them how or how not to spend the day.

Charles Hodge on the Limbus Patrum

Interesting thoughts from Charles Hodge's Systematic Theology (Volume III) on the Limbus Patrum, from some study I was doing on the subject recently. He tries hard to distance himself from it. But the things which he does allow for were surprising to me:

"The dead in the Old Testament are always spoken of as going to their fathers, as descending into 'Sheol,' i.e., into the invisible state, which the Greeks called Hades. Sheol is represeated as the general receptacle or abode of departed spirits, who were there in a state of consciousness; some in a state of misery, others in a state of happiness. In all these points the pagan idea of Hades corresponds to the Scriptural idea of Sheol. All souls went into Hades, some dwelling in Tartarus, others in Elysium. That the Hebrews regarded the souls of the dead as retaining their consciousness and activity is obvious from the practice of necromancy, and is confirmed by the fact of the appearance of Samuel to Saul, as recorded in 1 Samuel xxviii. The representation given in Isaiah xiv. of the descent of the King of Babylon, when all the dead rose to meet and to reproach him, takes for granted and authenticates the popular belief in the continued conscious existence of departed spirits." (pg. 717)

"Men may doubt and differ as to what Christ did during the three days of his sojourn in the invisible world. They may differ as to who the spirits in prison were to whom he preached, or, rather, made proclamation (ἐκήρυξεν); whether they were the antediluvians; or, the souls of the people of God detained in Sheol; or, the mass of the dead of all antecedent generations and of all nations, which is the favorite hypothesis of modern interpreters. They may differ also as to what the proclamation was which Christ made to those imprisoned spirits; whether it was the gospel; or his own triumph; or deliverance from Sheol; or the coming judgment. However these subordinate questions may be decided, all that remains certain is that Christ, after his death upon the cross, entered the invisible world, and there, in some way, made proclamation of what He had done on earth. All this is very far from teaching the doctrine of a 'Limbus Patrum,' as taught by the Jews, the Fathers, or the Romanists." (pg. 737)

Biblical Songs of Judgment

We see in the Old Testament a number of songs calling for and rejoicing in God's vindication of His people against their enemies - the Song of Moses, the Song of Deborah and Barak, the Psalms.  In these songs, God's people cursed the wicked and called for their judgment.  Many would say, dismissively, "but that's the Old Testament."  And yet when we get to the Book of the Revelation, we find in ch. 18 a song rejoicing in the judgment of Babylon the Great.  We see, in other words, a pattern of what type of worship music God recommends for us, songs of judgment as much as songs of rejoicing in the goodness of God (and the two overlap).  We say we are Biblical Christians.  Why don't we follow Scripture in this?

The Lord's Prayer in the Wilderness

I admire the young man who quoted the Lord's Prayer during his speech as valedictorian at his high school graduation.  We need more people, young and old, with that kind of boldness.  But we see acts like this every few weeks, celebrate them, and then pick up and carry on with our lives, without asking any deeper questions.  How rare is an act like this?  (Very rare.)  Why is it so rare?  We're celebrating it because it's an odd thing in the public schools.  Why is it odd?  It's odd because a pagan worldview runs the school system.  Here's one kid who made it through with his faith intact.  How many more don't?  We then send our kids to state-run colleges, where a pagan worldview governs everything, and even more kids who grow up in church lose their faith.  Why do we keep letting pagans do the educating?  Why do we keep sending kids to government schools?  For proms, sports teams, the "school experience", whatever that entails?  But isn't the purpose of school to educate a person?  And isn't it so often the case that what dictates our decisions in this, as in other areas of life, is our fear of looking weird to others?  "The fear of man lays a snare, but whoever trusts in the Lord is safe" (Prov. 29:25).  We define our faith by our feelings and experience, rather than by the truth of Scripture - "you ask me how I know he lives - he lives within my heart".  It is no wonder then that what is most important to us otherwise is experience and feelings, not the content of what is taught in the classroom.  If we want to make a change in our communities and in our world, more foundational issues have to be dealt with.  Otherwise, we will keep doing little more than throwing a bucket of water on a raging wildfire, which is what acts like this largely amount to, admirable though they be.